tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8726844009873922462.post3885553845110082232..comments2024-03-23T09:25:42.029-07:00Comments on Broadsword by Ajai Shukla - Strategy. Economics. Defence.: A visit to Gripen: Saab executives say "combat aircraft contest not over"Broadswordhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13076780076240598482noreply@blogger.comBlogger34125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8726844009873922462.post-24433008800024585492017-10-25T06:32:49.762-07:002017-10-25T06:32:49.762-07:00IAF wanted a twin engine aircraft . But Gripen was...IAF wanted a twin engine aircraft . But Gripen was single engine hence it was rejectedAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15040079214652969691noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8726844009873922462.post-18940789395952737102011-12-17T10:31:57.196-08:002011-12-17T10:31:57.196-08:00Gripen in the IAF will KILL the Tejas Mk.2. The IA...<b>Gripen in the IAF will KILL the Tejas Mk.2. The IAF must never commit the blunder of importing Gripens....On the other hand, ADA must market the Tejas as a viable and cheaper alternative to Gripen all across the world.............Let Tejas be the Gripen KILLER.</b>Abhimanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01723364791154386945noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8726844009873922462.post-74483726101016847992011-12-08T21:36:44.906-08:002011-12-08T21:36:44.906-08:00If India buys Gripen, then IAF can be renamed IIAF...If India buys Gripen, then IAF can be renamed IIAF, Import from Importer Air Force. IAF keeps talking about imported component in Tejas. I guess those complaints do not apply to imports. Same old story.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8726844009873922462.post-29359010769479085992011-12-07T21:56:52.607-08:002011-12-07T21:56:52.607-08:00Will US allow smooth execution of this contract, g...Will US allow smooth execution of this contract, given Gripen's heavy dependence on US tech?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8726844009873922462.post-25543135850074949602011-12-07T19:58:21.438-08:002011-12-07T19:58:21.438-08:00Quote:-
Aviation week
===============
India May c...Quote:-<br /><br />Aviation week<br />===============<br />India May cancel fighter Competition.<br /><br /><br /><br />LANGKAWI, Malaysia — Victor Komardin, the deputy director of Russia’s arms export agency Rosoboronexport, contends that the two short-listed candidates for India’s Medium Multirole Combat Aircraft (MMRCA) competition have effectively ruled themselves out by putting too high a price on their fighters.<br /><br />India’s politicians told the local press earlier this year that the MMRCA contract was a $10 billion deal, but reports from India in recent weeks say the manufacturers of the two finalist aircraft, the Eurofighter Typhoon and Dassault Rafale, are each asking for around $20 billion to fulfill the 126-aircraft order, Komardin says.<br /><br />“Against the backdrop of the [financial] crisis [sweeping the world], it is hard to see how any government would allow such a waste of money, particularly when there are social problems” to deal with, Komardin says. “And there is no imminent threat to India’s [sovereignty]. My prediction is that this tender will be canceled.” Komardin spoke to Aviation Week on the sidelines of the LIMA Airshow in Langkawi, Malaysia.<br /><br />India and Russia are close partners on defense. Rosoboronexport’s MiG-35 was on the long list for India’s MMRCA competition. Komardin says the MiG-35 was withdrawn from the competition before the short list was decided. If India issues a new tender, it creates an opportunity for Russia and the U.S. to rejoin the competition.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8726844009873922462.post-15707063345360918062011-12-07T19:56:04.869-08:002011-12-07T19:56:04.869-08:00Sir,
I personally feel that Gripen would have ...Sir,<br /> I personally feel that Gripen would have been a better choice than Rafael or Typhoon. Reasons,<br />1) Gripen's engine is GE 414 which is same with Tejas. So no separate inventory, as we are buying GE 414 in hundreds. <br />2) Life cycle cost of Gripen is much much less than Rafael or Typhoon. Are we really can afford those fancy planes ? (Life cycle cost of Gripen is only 2000 USD/Flying Hour at Sweden. Our costs will be lesser.) <br />3) Swedish hardware is nevertheless very sophisticated and robust. (remeember Bofors.) <br />4) Gripen is much easier to maintain than Rafael/Typhoon. 3 persons can change an engine within 45 minutes. <br />5) If we want to buy 126 planes within the budgeted USD 10 Billion then Gripen is the only choice.<br />6) Gripen NG. is having AESA. radar and can super-cruise.<br /><br />Regards.<br /><br />Ps. DasGupta.Parthasarathihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07701421388606152443noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8726844009873922462.post-62571587341116630552011-12-06T19:08:43.313-08:002011-12-06T19:08:43.313-08:00Thanks to Ajai for his analysis. We all know that ...Thanks to Ajai for his analysis. We all know that in about a week we will get a sense of who is the MMRCA winner.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8726844009873922462.post-50639757937914960942011-12-06T10:06:24.540-08:002011-12-06T10:06:24.540-08:00i have no idea why ajai shukla cannot just get ove...i have no idea why ajai shukla cannot just get over with MMRCA. and youre just opposing the choices because you want to have a different opinion for sake of your analysis. whereas the fact is, you do know that F35 is a project whose successful ending is not known at all, even today - alright, its a great fighter and all, but as a great analyst why cant you see that india cannot commit itself to F35 as if it was a her girlfriend. likewise, you really do know that there is no frikin way on earth that gripen can outperform rafale or ef2000 in any way. swiss do not need a ef2000 for their needs are different than indias. india cannot go for gripen because her needs are way different. and now saab is just making it sound yada yada by sayind yada yada. please !Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8726844009873922462.post-15448349707337175422011-12-06T08:29:18.662-08:002011-12-06T08:29:18.662-08:00The differences if any, between the Gripen and Tej...The differences if any, between the Gripen and Tejas are basically due to two main factors. Firstly due to canards and secondly due to the unbroken company experience of design and mfg.<br /><br />Only a hyper intelligence can be a substitute for the active experience.Mr. Ranoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8726844009873922462.post-38399049378319279202011-12-06T05:29:20.777-08:002011-12-06T05:29:20.777-08:00Sir,
1)What about the article on FMBT ?
2)Could y...Sir,<br />1)What about the article on FMBT ?<br /><br />2)Could you also write about the FGFA since you told it wouldnt be a true 5th gen fighter?lspknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8726844009873922462.post-75902567945742354802011-12-06T01:43:09.994-08:002011-12-06T01:43:09.994-08:00Since both Gripen NG and LCA mk2 use the same engi...Since both Gripen NG and LCA mk2 use the same engine, we need info regarding their performance. Atleast the range with same weapons payload should match of both the aircrafts!.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8726844009873922462.post-68793091234698030452011-12-06T00:09:01.075-08:002011-12-06T00:09:01.075-08:00@Ajai Shukla
Regarding value of the deal. I guess...@Ajai Shukla<br /><br />Regarding value of the deal. I guess the terms of Indian contract will at least be at par with the Swiss, if not more demanding. Going by that calculation, the cost of 126 Gripen aircraft for MMRCA would stand at whooping 19 billion USD!! And they say Rafale and EF costs way more than Gripen on any day. What would be a decent guess of MMRCA deal - 30-35 billion???<br />Where are we heading?<br /><br />lol.. Instead, we should pay the Chinese some extortion money ourselves so that they don't attack us. That would be more economical.Sameernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8726844009873922462.post-4690389229385175652011-12-05T23:33:29.218-08:002011-12-05T23:33:29.218-08:00In fact, Saab is the company that should be appoin...<i>In fact, Saab is the company that should be appointed to provide consultancy for the LCA, not EADS.</i><br /><br />You scored a bull's eye here!<br />Forget the experience of single-engine aircraft, I doubt the EADS's will to actually help us with the LCA. They have been promising the moon in MMRCA. May be even Dassault is doing the same. But the way in which EADS has been marketing EF only consolidates their impression as pathological liars.<br /><br />Coming back to Saab, no doubt that they appear to be a staid firm. But again, why should they help us? I mean, what is the point in making a customer (with big pockets) self-reliant? It only translates to less orders in the future.Sameernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8726844009873922462.post-3777666723814989242011-12-05T22:44:59.139-08:002011-12-05T22:44:59.139-08:00Gripen purchase will kill LCA. What are the overwh...Gripen purchase will kill LCA. What are the overwhelming advantages which are worth killing a domestic product. If there are not sufficient reasons, then suggesting a foreign purchase is equivalent to treason.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8726844009873922462.post-28646758035178195962011-12-05T22:35:44.654-08:002011-12-05T22:35:44.654-08:00@AS:
On use of Standard Units.
Most people woul...@AS:<br /><br />On use of Standard Units.<br /> <br />Most people would prefer you used litres for fuel and kgs for weight. For pay load considerations, it is common to use weight of fuel instead of litres. But when we talk of range and endurance, litres are preferred.<br /><br />Similarly, in these parts one always used kgf for thrust, nowadays its Newtons.<br /> <br />Gallons, whether Imperial or US, are not used by most people in the subcontinent. <br /><br />It would seem so much the more original if you did the math for conversions.Ram Ithikkathttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06141455694191895365noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8726844009873922462.post-36861912524998027702011-12-05T22:03:02.248-08:002011-12-05T22:03:02.248-08:00My friend, it is only in marriage that you pledge ...<b>My friend, it is only in marriage that you pledge your loyalty to one woman and then cannot do a really close examination of another one.</b><br /><br />Awesome! Lol.AviaScorphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05287271893689374074noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8726844009873922462.post-28069405301992172742011-12-05T20:57:15.529-08:002011-12-05T20:57:15.529-08:00Broadsword, your point to Brandy is absolutely cor...Broadsword, your point to Brandy is absolutely correct and wise. On that basis, did SAAB elaborate on the concrete figures which led them to pretend that Gripen NG LCC would be one third of Rafale or Typhoon LCC? LCC is extremely complex to calculate and this kind of marketing assertion should be taken with great caution.<br /><br />You also mentionned that Typhoon and Rafale are under-performing MMRCAs. Maybe, but they are still the only ones fulfilling IAF MMRCA operational requirements! Gripen NG was tested and was not considered acceptable. We will see in some years what F-35 actually delivers, it remains to be seen if it is so much ahead on current 4,5+ Gen fighters (perhaps, perhaps not).Jeffnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8726844009873922462.post-19678111546290356832011-12-05T19:44:51.050-08:002011-12-05T19:44:51.050-08:00Ajai Sir,
You are right, it is Saab which develop...Ajai Sir,<br /><br />You are right, it is Saab which developed a single-engine light fighter, not EADS. But therein lies the problem-why should Saab have any interests in helping someone else develop what would in effect be a rival to its own product? It can make twice the money exporting the Gripen to us (nothing wrong in that). This is the same reason why the South Koreans went with Lockheed Martin to develop their T-50 trainer/light strike aircraft. It's not a threat to the F-16 or JSF and in theory would have a great future so Lockheed would back it. That's not how Saab would see the LCA.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8726844009873922462.post-27383303597359860512011-12-05T18:05:37.596-08:002011-12-05T18:05:37.596-08:00@ Brandy
Half the reason for the confusion in the...@ Brandy<br /><br />Half the reason for the confusion in the blogosphere about what constitutes the cost of an aircraft stems from these off-the-cuff calculations!<br /><br />Just for your information, if Country X buys 40 fighters for $4 billion, it does not necessarily mean that each of them costs $100 million. The deal could include several aspects besides the unit cost of the aircraft --- such as cost of spares, extra engines, maintenance facilities/service, training for pilots, supply of simulators, and dozens of other such components.<br /><br />So don't see the overall cost of the deal and jump to conclusions about the cost of an aircraft. To get an accurate idea, you would need to examine the contract.<br /><br />@ Arjun Rajkumar<br /><br />You are absolutely right. The air intakes of the Tejas are poorly designed and cannot be corrected at this stage without major redesign.<br /><br />When Saab designed the Gripen air passages, they catered for the possibility of a more powerful engine in the future, which would require a larger volume of air. So now, all that they need to do is (a) Expand the actual air intakes, which they have already done (see the photograph of the demonstrator that I posted and compare that with photos of the Gripen-D); and (b) Optimise the air flow by minor design changes, which they still need to do.<br /><br />That's the difference between a company that has designed fighters for 70 years; and ADA, which is still at a very early stage on the learning curve.<br /><br />@ Amol<br /><br />Are you really unaware of the difference between an opinion column and a news report?<br /><br />I threw my weight behind the F-35 in an opinion piece. I believed, and continue to believe, that the IAF should buy the F-35, not some over-priced, under-performing MMRCA like the Rafale or the Eurofighter.<br /><br />Given my view, I will still continue to travel to other aircraft manufacturers and do news reports on them. And, since all of them are worthy of favourable reporting, praise for an aircraft that they make or a process that they adopt, or a history that they have, does not mean that I have started backing their horse for the MMRCA race!<br /><br />The Gripen is a fine fighter. As is the Rafale and the Eurofighter. They are just not in the league of the Eurofighter. So... to answer your question... you might well see a report by me on the Rafale if I happen to be in Paris and have a day to spare.<br /><br />My friend, it is only in marriage that you pledge your loyalty to one woman and then cannot do a really close examination of another one.<br /><br />@ Anonymous 07:04<br /><br />It is hardly surprising that the LCA is missing from this article because the LCA was not there in Linkoping, when I visited to see the Gripen Demonstrator.<br /><br />There is no conflict between the LCA and the Gripen. In fact, Saab is the company that should be appointed to provide consultancy for the LCA, not EADS. It is Saab that has developed a highly successful single-engine light fighter, not EADS.Broadswordhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13076780076240598482noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8726844009873922462.post-24649950117982093992011-12-05T17:34:45.232-08:002011-12-05T17:34:45.232-08:00No point in buying this not yet developed Gripen N...No point in buying this not yet developed Gripen NG. The LCA MK-II will match it exactly specs for specs. Why pay Gripen to develop that fighter when you should be investing in MK-II ! If the MK-II does not satisfy the IAF for "not being the fighter we will want 30 to 40 years from now", so wont the Gripen NG. <br /><br />I notice, the LCA MK-II, the big elephant is missing totally from this piece of yours.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8726844009873922462.post-86382508908052545742011-12-05T17:29:29.420-08:002011-12-05T17:29:29.420-08:00Nice article. But the content is very poor and is ...Nice article. But the content is very poor and is more like an advertisement meant for Gripen.<br />Some points that must clear certain things<br />1. When we have the LCA, there is no need for Gripen<br />2. Sea Gripen is a concept while our own Ocean Tejas (hihi, not meant just for seas but for the blue ocean itself) is ready to fly by next month.<br />3. Gripen belongs to the light weight category. Just because they are allowed into MMRCA never means they should be selected. They cannot fulfill the criteria and the best aircraft must always be choosen. It's not wise to save money by purchasing cheap product. Then it's better to scrap the MMRCA deal itself and mass produce the LCA to about 500 in numbers. But this time Rafale seems to be the best aircraft. So if they are offering a good package, why not go for it?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8726844009873922462.post-90846013539154660572011-12-05T17:01:23.033-08:002011-12-05T17:01:23.033-08:00In the Christmas spirit, this is Part 1 of "T...In the Christmas spirit, this is Part 1 of "The Ghosts of Aircraft Past"....Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8726844009873922462.post-44326449728806101972011-12-05T16:58:12.995-08:002011-12-05T16:58:12.995-08:00anon @ 18.36 Do you have any source for your asser...anon @ 18.36 Do you have any source for your assertions about the order split or just shooting off the keyboard.<br /> And of course you must have computed the life cycle costs of a combined fleet of Raf/Typ and Gripen to say that would justify the split order. What if Rafael or Typhoon withdraw altogether from the race forcing a re-tender, there goes 10 years of the acquisition process, if you remember the 197 light heli saga you would know what I mean. <br /><br />Not to mention the addition to the logistical nightmare the IAF as it is faces with innumerable different types of aircrafts, something that the IAF is wisely thinking about winding down to just 3-4 different types i.e. LCA, MMRCA, FGFA and the Su-30 MKI. Let the best of Rafael or EF win and stop those squadrons from number plating.<br /><br />This is an all or nothing deal not only for the vendors but also for IAF.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8726844009873922462.post-39157030594058513802011-12-05T12:46:39.807-08:002011-12-05T12:46:39.807-08:00Gripen NG will be an amazing a/c!
There are reaso...Gripen NG will be an amazing a/c!<br /><br />There are reasons why Saab believe they still have a chance:<br /><br />Not only because of the much lower life cycle costs than Rafale/Typhoon but also because the NG scored well in the IAF evaluation; in addition, some of the "weak points" identified were related to the immature NG. However Saab has made a lot of progress since the eval...<br /><br />Tejas is far behind the Gripen NG.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8726844009873922462.post-55471096048716384462011-12-05T11:25:55.169-08:002011-12-05T11:25:55.169-08:00While otherwise an informative article on Gripen, ...While otherwise an informative article on Gripen, I am not quite sure what is Ajayji playing at. <br /><br />After all, not a few weeks back, while enjoying my morning breakfast, I read a somewhat similar peice on F-35 flying for IAF. So what is it going to be sir..Lockheed or Saab! <br /><br />At the risk of sounding cynical Ajay, please tell me...are you planning peices on Rafale and Typhoon next?amolhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17850810134873977120noreply@blogger.com