India to award world's biggest warplane deal on merit

The Economic Times,India ^ | 29 Aug, 2007

[spetznaz]

Quite interesting. The two types that India will choose (for obvious reasons two) will be an (obvious) mix of West and East. For West it is almost assuredly the SuperBug (particularly if the package given to India is not bull$h!t, meaning that India would get a pretty good AESA radar, AMRAAMs, and the like .....no chance for the F-16 unless it has a warp drive), and for the East it is the MiG-35 (great airplane, even though people always assume it is the same as the Fulcrums Saddam used to have in his airforce ....which it is not). Those two will probably be the ones selected.

Although the point for debate is what the wild cards are? The Rafale would be a very good platform, as would the Typhoon (particularly later tranches). Problem is cost, the need to wait for upgrades in radar/engine etc, and the fact that the Rafale/Typhoon would basically be at the same tier (and higher once upgrades are through) than India's SU-30MKIs, and thus creating a 'hi-hi' setup instead of hi-lo.

The GRipen is a great plane, and it woud serve the 'lo' low function pretty well while at the same time being quite lethal. Furthermore its upgrades include the AESA upgrade, engine upgrades, and so forth in the Gripen NG. A serious plane that is affordable, packs a lethal punch against anything the Pakistanis may have, and has a lot of cutting edge technologies. It should be the best pick if India was truly serious about a 'lo' fighter with stuff hidden up its sleeves, and it would be the second choice pick if the SuperBug was not included. Although it may win ....who knows.

Thus for now it seems like it is the SB and the MiG35. It would be really shocking if they chose the Typhoon (although that would make the Chinese and Pakistanis cry bl@@dy murder), the Rafale is terrific (and they WOULD have chosen the Mirage-2000 had it not been withdrawn and replaced with the Rafale) but it will most probably not be chosen (although France is one of the best weapons suppliers in the world since they give up to date technology and do not cut you off if you do something that makes the UN go ga-ga), and the F-16 blew its chances the moment the first Viper touched down in Pakistan all those years ago (LM would have to sweeten the deal to the nth degree, which they are probably trying to do ....if I recall correctly one of the LM head honchos mentioned that India might participate in the F-35 JSF program that LM makes). Anyways, maybe LM will get the rights from the United Arab Emirates for the AESA radar used on the UAE Vipers, and a case could be made for the Viper based on the closeness between India and Israel and the great work Israel has done on upgrading their F-16s (the 'Soufa' version). Thus miracles can happen, and the Viper is one of the best 'lo' aircraft around.

Anyways, it will probably be the SuperBug and the MiG. The number of planes will definitely be more than 126. The Gripen would have made the best choice, but it will probably not be selected. Had the Mirage not been withdrawn it would have definitely won.

And anything could happen given the time considerations ....goodness, we may even see F-16s flying in Indian colors, or even Typhoons (although the Viper and Typhoon probabilities are less than those of Craig tapping his foot in a girl's lavatory .....)

BTW, what are your thoughts on the other contenders. Not on the SuperBug and/or MiG, but on the others. Can any of them beat out the SB/MiG combo (not just on merit, since the Typhoon and Rafale easily outclass them, but also considering other factors like politics, costs, integration, the fact that the SU-30MKI is already the 'hi' fighter, and so forth)? Thanks.

[Constantine XI Palaeologus]

“Save your rupees, Inda, buy a few Sturmoviks, Corsairs, Skyraiders, or Warthogs, upgrade the radar, comm, and processing on whatever you’re flying now, and pick up a few gross of RPV Predator types.”

Umm...what? Not only are some of those going to be far pricier than their usefulness (think what WWII vintage aircraft go for and the cost of maintenance), but none of those (even the Warthogs, a fine CAS aircraft if there ever was one) fulfill the roles India is looking at.

IIRC, India’s looking to replace their lightweight aircraft (think MiG-21) since their indigenous LCA fighter program is taking a long time to bear fruit. All of those aircraft you listed wouldn’t last long in a fight with any Pakistani or Chicom fighter.

India’s not looking at COIN aircraft if that’s what you’re thinking (I’m not sure what you’re thinking). Even if they were, the aircraft you listed are far from practical (except the A-10). Heck, even Eritrea’s air force would tear even 126 of any of those aircraft you listed to shreds.

[Constantine XI Palaeologus]

Agree about the Gripen. However, I just can’t help but think support would be far more difficult than either the U.S. or Russian offerings.

Nice write up on the F/A-18, although for reasons unknown I feel a sense of antipathy towards them. It’s kinda like how I don’t like the F-22. The F-16 Block 60 has AESA radar too and can fire the AMRAAM, I feel I should point out.

However, how do you think that the F/A-18 support will be in the future. With the switch to the F-35, the F/A-18 will be slowly (or not) phased out of the U.S. inventory. The F-18 hasn’t caught on as well in the export market either—though 7 countries ain’t bad). What happens to all those F-18s then? To my knowledge, only the U.S. deals with production of the F-18, so I’d have to imagine support would be reduced. With the F-16, the Turks and the Koreans actually have the capability to produce their own. I can see both of these countries as being eager to pick up support duties for other operators if Lockheed Martin becomes too involved with the F-35.

IMHO, the F-16, F/A-18, and MiG-35 are only good as short-term solutions near the end of their developmental life. But unless I’ve read things wrong, India isn’t looking at these to be their aircraft of the future, just a stopgap.

I do think that the Indians might want to pick up a U.S. aircraft as the new technology might help them in their attempts to get their LCA and MCA off the ground. I feel they’ve already had a good look at Russian goods, so buying more wouldn’t really help them move their industry along.

[Gengis Khan]

“don’t the MiG-29s have short legs?”

That has been corrected in the new Mig 35.

“IMHO, the better U.S. offering would be the F-16 Block 60.”

F-16 IMO has even shorter legs then F-18s or Mig 35s and its payload is far less then any of the planes in the race except for the Gripens. F-16s are old tech and suck big time, only good for the Pakis.

[Cringing Negativism Network]

It’s a big world.

[sukhoi-30mki]

The Mig-35 may turn out to be Old wine in a new bottle!!Sure it’s got 3-D thrust vectoring,but does it offer anything over the other competitors-it’s radar & most systems still exist only on paper & won’t enter Russian service anytime soon,if they ever do.To make matters worse,the Russians have been acting too pricey & truant
with India with cost escalations & delays in a number of programmes like the SU-30 & Admiral Gorshkov carrier.

The 2 main Eurojets are easily the newest aircraft in this competition & both were designed to counter the Flanker-that makes these aircraft attractive in themselves esp given that India’s neighbour to the North operates the 2nd largest fleet of Flankers.The delay in awarding this contract may actually work to the advantage of the Rafale/EF-2000 given that they won’t need hurry on development of new radars,it’s IR sensors or the Meteor missile.Don’t know how it panned out in reality,but the IAF was impressed with the Typhoon’s agility in a joint Indo-UK exercise last month.The Europeans being short of customers are also more likely to be flexible on transfer of technology.

An American system is almost certain if the Indo-US Nuclear deal goes through.

[Candor7]

The Super Hornet & the Gripen cannot be compared because the latter is roughly half the size of the former!!>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

If India seeks to have a decentralized deployment , as is customary in Sweden, the remotely deployable Gripen is a plus in its smallness. Canada is faced with similar strategy choices in defence of its North in the face of Russian expansionism. But Canada is beset by the political need to keep its military hardware cenbtralized in the SOuthern marches of Canada, a strategic blunder, that India should not repeat on the frontiers of Chinese expansionism, in Buthan, Sikkim and Nepal, originating in Tibet.

The Gripen STOL characteristics would make them forward deployable in the short mountain passes and mountain shelves in ways no other aircraft could imitate.

The f-18 does need an air arm of refuling support. I do not know the state of Indians ability there, but suspect it is weak , as is the AWACs function necessary for maximum effectiveness of the F-18.

My overall favorite is the Gripen, which has the potential to be a modern "Spitfire" should it come to the necessity of air superiority over the Himalayas or the Kyber Pass.

[Gengis Khan]

Firstly India will definitely not buy two different airframes. Having 2 different assembly lines is out of question. It would increase the price, create logistical hassles not to mention maintain and support infrastructure nightmare. IAF already operates the highest number of airframes in the world and has the highest number of air crashes. One thing IAF plans to do is to cut down on the number of airframes. The total number of aircrafts may well exceed 126 even as the LCA goes into production. IAF cant afford to have the Super Hornets + Mig 35s+ Sukhois+ LCAs + (older Migs, Jaguars and Mirages).

It could be Mig-35s, since its not only a good fighter, the IAF already operates the Mig 29, the Indian navy has recently brought the naval Mig 29K. Mig-35s seems very likely to win the race.

F-18s may win the race if it offers the most advanced version with latest weaponry. F-16s too may win the race. With the current Indo-US nuclear deal......... you never know. But I would really hate to see the F-16s in the IAF inventory unless its only a stop gap for future F-35s. Let alone the fact that F-16s would end up as easy targets for the new generation of Chinese fighters, even Paki F-16s would be able to match up with their vast experience at handling F-16s. Neither F-16s nor the F-18s have the range to cover the vast Chinese airspace. If IAF buys F-16s then India has already lost the war.

Personally I would love to see the Eurofighters in the IAF but thats not likely to happen. Also havent heard must about the Gripens or the Rafaels for a long time in the Indian press. I guess they are out of the race already. And anyways the LCA is the same category as the Gripens in terms of size, performance and characteristics. No point buying Gripens.

The best option for India and my personal favourite is the F-35. Thats whats IAF should aim for. Every else should only be a stop gap arrangement until the arrival of the F-35s.

[spetznaz]

In terms of sheer capability (once all the upgrades come through) the Rafale and the Typhoon are ahead of the pack, but wouldn’t a Typh/Rafale purchase basically bring in another airframe that is not just equal but better than the MKI? Instead of going for a ‘hi/lo’ mix they would have a ‘hi/hi+’ mix, with (say) the Typhoon being the hi+.

[sukhoi-30mki]

The new F-16 variants,which have conformal fuel tanks have a combat radius of over 700 miles,which is better than the Super Hornet & probably ahead of the Mig-35.The F-16’s single engine helps in that regard.

It has a payload of around 7 tonnes also would be same as the Super Hornet & be better than the Mig-35 for the same mission,given that the latter 2 have to carry external fuel tanks.The downside for the new F-16s is that it’s CFTs reduce it’s agility considerably.

[sukhoi-30mki]

Well the parameters of this competition changed considerably since this deal was first brought about in 1999 to buy 126 Mirages.So the talk of a junior pal for the SU-30 is just that-talk!!!

[Gengis Khan]

Gripen does not have the range to cover or penetrate deep into Chinese airspace. Thats the biggest draw back. Its weapon load is too small. Hardly enough to defend against waves of Chinese fighters that will come in large numbers. It makes little sense for IAF to buy the Gripens which is in the same category as the LCA and is very similar in size, payload and characteristics.

F-35 may also have STOL capability, and would greatly fit into Indian requirement.

[sukhoi-30mki]

India is buying aerial refuellers & will recieve the first of around 4 PHALCON AEW/C systems from Israel by the end of this year-While it’s mission systems are the best at the moment,the SuperHornet does’nt fit in any particular frame.As one US airforce official hawking the F-16 put it-”If India buys the Super Hornet-what is it replacing”???.

I don’t know how effective decentralised deployment is in India given that the IAF has not given it any deep thought.The problem is that unless you have a proper early warning capability,such deployments would be useless.Scores of Chinese aircraft would be over Sikhim or Bhutan in minutes & any aircraft would be better off deploying from airbases in Kashmir or Assam.

[Gengis Khan]

In contrast the Chinese Sukhois have superb combat radius (3000 - 45000 km) with 8 tons payload and CTFs dont reduce their agility that much.

[Gengis Khan]

In fact the maximum range of the Sukhois would be close to 7000 km.

[Candor7]

The Gripen is a very interesting machine. It is capable of remote deployment, while virtually every other fighter in India's competative bid competition requires large convential centralized support facilities. One would think that an emerging 3rd world nation would see that as a very important factor in the selection process:

****************************

"One interesting feature is the Gripen's ability to land on public highways, or even on adapted grass fields. Once on the ground, it can be refuelled and re-armed in ten minutes by a five man mobile ground crew operating out of a truck, then take off again and resume flying sorties."

***************************

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JAS_39_Gripen

********************************

Armament

1 × 27 mm Mauser BK-27 cannon

6 × AIM-9 Sidewinder (Swedish designation Rb-74) or IRIS-T (Swedish designation Rb-98)

4 × AIM-120 AMRAAM (Swedish designation Rb-99), BAe Skyflash (Swedish designation Rb-71 Skyflash), MICA or Meteor

AGM-65 Maverick (Swedish designation Rb-75), KEPD 350, or various other laser-guided bombs, rocket pods.

RBS-15 Mark 2 air-to-sea anti-ship missile

Bombkapsel 90 cluster bomb

***************************************

I also believe the Gripen would be the best machine for Canada's North, but then governments don't always select the best. Politics dictate the selection. In Britain, 1935, they were fortunate to have the Supermarine Spitfire designed and put into production. The role of politics was subsumed by the necessity of the moment, for excellence.

As the free world squares itself away for the showdown to come with totalitarian nations who have now achieved a rudimentary AXIS centered on Iran in the Persian Gulf, the necessity for similar excellence and flexibility again raises its head.

Each Grippen in effect has a fully operational "chase crew" housed in a single truck. One fuel tanker and 4 such trucks would be all that is necessary to set up a movable base on a 900 meter stretch of highway, or a frozen stretch of ice on a lake of similar length.

The Gripen is a fantastic aircraft, a strategists dream come true.

This picture shows a SAAB JAS39 Gripen landing on a rainy roadbase. Downwash is made evident by the foggy cloud above the runaway.

[spetznaz]

I hadn't heard about that. I always operated under the assumption that this was akin to a 'F-15/F-16'-esque hi-lo mix, not a 'F-15/F-14'-esque type of situation. In that case then the Typhoon et al might have a fighting chance, and as you said the longer the selection takes the better for Rafale/Typhoon (greater maturity of systems/tranches, plus a hgiher likelihood that the respective French/EU govs, respectively, may get more flexible on price). In which case the InAF would be getting truly superior airframes.

What do you think are the chances for the Rafale and the Typhoon, and more importantly how would they fit into InAF doctrine?

[JasonC]

F-18 has tiny short stubby legs compared to all the rest of them, in range terms. If one tries to get around this with refueling, it triples logistic and coordination issues.

The F-16 is a contender because of the advanced electronics it offers, but it is 30 years old and all the others beat it on one metric or another.

In sheer airframe specs, the MiG is superior hands down. But its electronics and support are subpar. Better than the competition India would face, but not in US or EU range. They try to patch that by subcontracting some of the ECM to Italy, but is a patch.

I expect them to buy the MiGs. Diplo-strategically they should buy the Eurofighter, but they have said that isn't their main concern.

[sukhoi-30mki]

The original plan-back in the late 90s was to go in for hi-lo mix with a planned fleet by 2020 consisting of the SU-30,the Mirage-20005 & the LCA with the remaining types being relegated backwards or retired.The problem was that the LCA got delayed,the upgrade programmes(Mig-21/27 & Mirage-2000) for various jets got delayed while the French got rigid on price negotiations.All this combined with the rapid improvement in Indo-US ties have led us to this situation.

I honestly don’t know what the chances are of any of these platforms barring the fact that an American jet will most probably be selected (provided the nuclear deal goes through).A 2way split is not desirable,but it may become unavoidable to speed up negotiations.Left to me,-I’d probably sign up for 120 Gripen-NGs or Eurofighters & get it over with!! Though the Russians will be peeved.The Eurofighter & Rafale are better equipped than the SU-30 to fly SEAD missions & stand-off precision strikes & if their radar/missile combo develops on time,they can also be used for cruise missile defense(don’t think that’s something the Russians think about a lot).The nuclear & maritime strike roles will ideally remain the preserve of the SU-30.

[Candor7]

Diplo-strategically they should buy the Eurofighter, but they have said that isn't their main concern.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

It will be interesting to see if India buys strictly on "merit."

It is the most political and caste like of all the democracies in the world, where family and class connections dictate purchases.

If the Brahamans have the caste Mig connections, then it will be a Mig purchase, regardless of "merit."

ut perhaps they will luck out, decide on a genuine defence strategy, and by a fighter that is the best fit.

The Mig is a poor fit. It is also a loss of future functional superiority over potential enemies who will have the Mig, and their suppliers will be able to play them off against each other, in terms of advanced upgrades and weapons upgrades.

Often its not the just the fighter that matters, but all the manipulation that comes with its future.

THe Iranians and Pakis have more future economic resources to trade with the Russians, and so that will put India at a futrure disadvantage in terms of superiority of its flight hardware, unless they plan to do their own evolution.

It will be interesting to see who wins this bid.