MMRCA 2.0 - Updates and Discussions

[_Anonymous_]

I think you misunderstood my point.

We do not expect the Americans to fight for us. Neither do we expect anyone else to fight for us. In the 1962 war, the Soviets sided with China. A part of history, that people tend to overlook. So, nothing we are not already aware of. In 1971, the Americans turned on us. Again, something the current generation tends to overlook.

We are not Ukraine, neither is China Russia.We do not fight with Chinese equipment. The Ukrainians fought with Russian equipment. The Ukrainian army is not battle hardened, the Indian Army is. The Ukrainian Army is incapable of taking the fight to the Chinese. We are capable of taking the fight to the Chinese.

There is a reason we are the second largest standing army in the world. The difference between the Russian and Ukrainian standing armies is 1:5 in Russia's favour. Between India and China its 1:1.5. Bring in paramilitary, we are bigger than them. Our paramiliary consists of the BSF, ITBP, Assam Rifles and the CRPF. Again, each of these forces is battle hardened.

The time for the Chinese was in the pre 2018 era to make any moves. Our borders with China were not re-enforced. Today, they are. Galwan was a serious mistake for them. Why? Because, India has the largest land border with them. A peaceful border, where sticks were carried by patrolling personnel on both sides. No weapons. They could have concentrated on the eastern hostile borders and the South China Sea. With one bad move, they have activated their longest border with the second largest standing army. And they nudged India to start exercising with Australia. Which we never did before.

One of the reason, why I have always preferred the Rafale over anything American or Euopean or Russian is purely from support perspective. We pay money, we get the support we need. We do not expect anyone to fight for us. Where will collaborate is in intelligence and surveillance, which in reality is what Quad is all about. Another 10 years, we will be even less dependent on the Russians.

Agree with all your points except USSR was neutral in 1962 in fact less than neutral, they supported India & issued a call for peace. IIRC ,they also shipped some arms & ammunition though it wasn't in any significant numbers.

Chinese demanded USSR terminate support to India which the latter didn't comply with infuriating the former which included training to Indian armed forces personnel as well as negotiations between India & USSR on further arms co operation including ToT in manufacturing which eventually culminated in the agreement for supply & mfg of the MiG-21s in 1965-66.


The split between China & Russia , which began with Krushchev inaugurating the de Stalinization campaign denouncing Stalinism which Mao perceived to be a threat to his personality cult devised as it was on the cult of Stalin template & consequently his regime in 1957 , along with other bone of contention issues would become complete in 1969 with the Ussuri river war.

 

[Ankit Kumar]

If the operating cost of the F15 exceeds that of the MKI then is it a false story that the MKI is a costly aircraft maintenance wise because of the Russian design philosophy?

Su30 operation cost is high compared to say that of Rafale or even F18. But it's no where close to that of F15E.

F15E operational cost is like 60-70% higher compared to SH. And availability is lower too.

 

[Ankit Kumar]

There is enough room for both mki & eagle with IAF. IAF definitely not going to upgrade all its mki fleets, the things they retire without upgradation must need a replacement with an aircraft in same category.

In the ideal scenario , somewhere by 2035 IAF will want 750 manned modern fighter jets. That will be approximately 40 squadrons.

200 (Tejas MK2/Mig29/M2000/Jaguar) , 120 Tejas MK1A, 250+ Su30MKI , 36 Rafales , 40 AMCA MK1 and 114 MMRCA.

Now the first 200. The aim is to replace 3 types of fighter jets with 1.
Tejas MK1A replaces Mig21/27 squadrons. These two will have certain level of common systems. But still will be different.

So here 2 types of fighter jets.

Then there is Su30, 3rd type. Then 36 Rafales for sure , 4th type. The AMCA MK1 5th type. And then 114 MMRCA (if we choose anything other than Rafale it's 6th type) . Logically we should try to keep the number to 5 types only.

Going for F15 class in MMRCA 2 will cost us much more in operational, maintenance and acquisition cost but the difference in capabilities , compared to that of say Rafale and SH will be very less.

Personally I don't see where a new type of aircraft will fit in.

 

[randomradio]

In the ideal scenario , somewhere by 2035 IAF will want 750 manned modern fighter jets. That will be approximately 40 squadrons.

200 (Tejas MK2/Mig29/M2000/Jaguar) , 120 Tejas MK1A, 250+ Su30MKI , 36 Rafales , 40 AMCA MK1 and 114 MMRCA.

Now the first 200. The aim is to replace 3 types of fighter jets with 1.
Tejas MK1A replaces Mig21/27 squadrons. These two will have certain level of common systems. But still will be different.

So here 2 types of fighter jets.

Then there is Su30, 3rd type. Then 36 Rafales for sure , 4th type. The AMCA MK1 5th type. And then 114 MMRCA (if we choose anything other than Rafale it's 6th type) . Logically we should try to keep the number to 5 types only.

Going for F15 class in MMRCA 2 will cost us much more in operational, maintenance and acquisition cost but the difference in capabilities , compared to that of say Rafale and SH will be very less.

Personally I don't see where a new type of aircraft will fit in.

This multiple types thing will become irrelevant by 2030-35 due to drones. We will need multiple types of both expensive and cheap single-role drones.

Anyway I'm more inclined to believe we will end up standardising on 4 manned aircraft, MKI, Rafale, LCA and AMCA, followed by as many as 10+ types of drones.

 

[Hydra]

2. If Rafale loses MRFA, it may stop at 36 even. Because it's obvious to focus on a jet that's better than the Rafale. Different story if such a jet exists in the tender.
3. Isn't pressure they will apply on us.

You know everything better than me. But, Rafale was selected because it was cheap among the last two fighter. It may or may not the best. If EF comes cheaper in price in mmrca2, then IAF will opt EF.

 

[randomradio]

You know everything better than me. But, Rafale was selected because it was cheap among the last two fighter. It may or may not the best. If EF comes cheaper in price in mmrca2, then IAF will opt EF.

Sure. But EF is expensive.

 

[Innominate]

You know everything better than me. But, Rafale was selected because it was cheap among the last two fighter. It may or may not the best.

Don't forget the bribes, ja?

 

[thinkingcap81]

I think you misunderstood my point.

We do not expect the Americans to fight for us. Neither do we expect anyone else to fight for us. In the 1962 war, the Soviets sided with China. A part of history, that people tend to overlook. So, nothing we are not already aware of. In 1971, the Americans turned on us. Again, something the current generation tends to overlook.

We are not Ukraine, neither is China Russia.We do not fight with Chinese equipment. The Ukrainians fought with Russian equipment. The Ukrainian army is not battle hardened, the Indian Army is. The Ukrainian Army is incapable of taking the fight to the Chinese. We are capable of taking the fight to the Chinese.

There is a reason we are the second largest standing army in the world. The difference between the Russian and Ukrainian standing armies is 1:5 in Russia's favour. Between India and China its 1:1.5. Bring in paramilitary, we are bigger than them. Our paramiliary consists of the BSF, ITBP, Assam Rifles and the CRPF. Again, each of these forces is battle hardened.

The time for the Chinese was in the pre 2018 era to make any moves. Our borders with China were not re-enforced. Today, they are. Galwan was a serious mistake for them. Why? Because, India has the largest land border with them. A peaceful border, where sticks were carried by patrolling personnel on both sides. No weapons. They could have concentrated on the eastern hostile borders and the South China Sea. With one bad move, they have activated their longest border with the second largest standing army. And they nudged India to start exercising with Australia. Which we never did before.

One of the reason, why I have always preferred the Rafale over anything American or Euopean or Russian is purely from support perspective. We pay money, we get the support we need. We do not expect anyone to fight for us. Where will collaborate is in intelligence and surveillance, which in reality is what Quad is all about. Another 10 years, we will be even less dependent on the Russians.

Capable of taking the fight at huge material losses to both sides. Its also about intelligence sharing and diplomatic support as we all know. We are nowhere there as of now. We need US help for the next 10-15 years till our economy talks for us.

 

[_Anonymous_]

Don't forget the bribes, ja?

The US never indulges in underhand practices.

Lockheed bribery scandals - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

This is what happens when you're homeschooled . In a trailer park.

 

[thinkingcap81]

I cannot imagine F-15 is costly to maintain Vs SU-30 MKI.......During original MMRCA, there were many reports (or messages in forums with links) on how F-18 is a maintenance nightmare and how much US-Navy folks hate it (from maintenance nightmare perspective) . But after Rafale / EF are down-selected, suddenly those news articles stopped appearing. It is like someone turning-off a tap.

Didn't know that.

I too want India to buy US weapons. However,
a) US governments can not be trusted. Imagine if democrat-administration is in white-house, when 370 is revoked. Not sure what the brain-dead Biden will do, when / if Uniform Civil Code is implemented in India. Hopefully, he will still retain some dim sense, so that Harris will not become #1 [God Forbid].
b) Modi govt will be careful to not to buy some kind of offensive weapons from USA, and "provoke" China. I think Modi govt will start with F-18, not with F-15 purchase [that is my thinking].

However, the military relationship between USA and India is inevitable......my 0.000002 cents.

Doesn't matter what we do as long as our economy is strong and we have good technological capabilities as well. If US can support Israel then India will eventually become much stronger than Israel.

As of now we are weak. So US wants to press the alignment advantage along with making us somewhat subservient so that this aspect becomes a part and parcel of our polity. This window will close in 10-15 years if we do well.

The Chinese will happily shoot down the F-15s. Even the USAF believes it's not meant to be used in a peer war, like against China. It's meant to patrol American skies or used as a bomb truck in a secondary role. Meaning it can't fight China.

Then neither can the MLU MKI.

 

[Hydra]

Sure. But EF is expensive.

In MMRCA tender documents it is, bit reality is Rafale was expensive. They just quoted unrealistic figures to secure the L1 position.

 

[Ankit Kumar]

In MMRCA tender documents it is, bit reality is Rafale was expensive. They just quoted unrealistic figures to secure the L1 position.

Upfront procurement costs among all options is highest for Eurofighter. This makes their contention weakest.

 

[Picdelamirand-oil]

In MMRCA tender documents it is, bit reality is Rafale was expensive. They just quoted unrealistic figures to secure the L1 position.

One of the problems is the price of the ISE, some say that other planes would not have had the same amount of ISE, but we must not forget that these 36 Rafales were bought in operational urgency to fulfill the need to carry the Indian nuclear weapon. That is why when Rahul asked for the details of the ISE price he was told that it was confidential. It's something that doesn't appear in the 13 upgrades that are usually listed, but it's quite expensive and quite time consuming, just look at the reaction of the Americans when the Germans asked if the Typhoon could be modified to carry the B-61.

Of course the Rafale can carry the French nuclear weapons and so there is less modification to do to support the EMP for example but there is necessarily an interface between a specifically Indian system and the Rafale's weapon system and the flight testing that goes with it.
So that's a price we've been forced to hide. .

 

[Sathya]

we (India) is still dependent on Russian veto on any resolution

b) @randomradio @vstol Jockey @_Anonymous_ + Others:
During Kargill, which is the "friendly" country (on whom India is depending for satellite images) that said that their satellites are running out of batteries, and hence can not give images of war-zone? was that Russia?

There were news about 2 countries wrt Satellite pictures.
One is Israel, who sold us a old picture at higher price ..
Other I forgot whom and what they did.

 

[_Anonymous_]

There were news about 2 countries wrt Satellite pictures.
One is Israel, who sold us a old picture at higher price ..
Other I forgot whom and what they did.

If I'm not mistaken US refused to sell us satellite imagery. We got it from France & Israel & both fleeced us which is how these things go in such emergencies . I'm not aware of any news where a nation specifically refused to sell us pictures claiming their batteries were being drained out .

 

[Bon Plan]

If EF comes cheaper in price in mmrca2, then IAF will opt EF.

Impossible I think.
The production rate of EF is lowered and it has now a costly AESA radar : how could it be cheaper ?
On the same time Rafale has now 2 air bases accomodated, some test benchs and tools for at least 2 more squad (and in case of more than 2 squads, saying 114 units, it needs po purchase at the end less of them), and is more and more selled. The price will be lowered.

In MMRCA tender documents it is, bit reality is Rafale was expensive. They just quoted unrealistic figures to secure the L1 position.

It has never been proved.
Only loosers speach.

 

[suryakiran]

Capable of taking the fight at huge material losses to both sides. Its also about intelligence sharing and diplomatic support as we all know. We are nowhere there as of now. We need US help for the next 10-15 years till our economy talks for us.

What kind of help? We need it for building up our capabilities. Unlike a NATO, where the protection comes from the US, what we need is logistical and tech support. Neither can be provided by US. Israel and France, maybe.

The deterrence of enforcing huge material loss, without going nuclear is what Galwan showed the Chinese. Why do you think, they are still talking?

So, let's start understanding where we need US inputs and where not. Like you say, intelligence and diplomatic support with logistical support, yes. Dependence for military logistics with the US, is asking for serious trouble.

 

[Manstrategist]

The India specific changes, 2 bases and all that prep is to automatically lower the final cost when the MRFA fighter will finally be decided and then the Rafale will be a clear winner as no one will be able to come even close.

 

[randomradio]

Then neither can the MLU MKI.

Of course. The MKI is gonna become irrelevant in a mano a mano China fight pretty soon. But it's only going to stick around for 20-25 years, whereas any new F-15 purchase will be useless for the next 60 years.

MRFA is meant for the China fight, there's no point in buying the MKI's cousins, Su-35 and F-15EX, when the Rafale and Typhoon are way ahead of the game.

 

[randomradio]

In MMRCA tender documents it is, bit reality is Rafale was expensive. They just quoted unrealistic figures to secure the L1 position.

The base price is cheaper. Customisation is not counted in this. Typhoon's customisation would have been even more expensive.

In the new tender, Airbus will have a chance to offer a better deal, if they can.