so do anybody know wat is the preference of iaf??a single engine or double engine aircraft.
so do anybody know wat is the preference of iaf??a single engine or double engine aircraft.
Once again for you:
Boeing's Super Hornet seeks export sale to launch 20% thrust upgradeAlthough the core enhancements are already under contract with the USN, the programme is seeking an export customer to launch development of the F414 EPE, Gower said.
The international order would lead to follow-on sales for the USN, which would gradually replace its current inventory with the improved version, Gower said.
So once again, the USN has funded the EDE upgrades, but although the EPE is based on these upgrades and technically might only need a fan to increase thrust, it needs further developments! These are not funded and as you can see the USN would go for these engines too, if an export customer pays for it first.
Again what do you mean by 'further developments'?
Definitions of development
- act of improving by expanding or enlarging or refining; "he congratulated them on their development of a plan to meet the emergency"; "they funded research and development"
- a process in which something passes by degrees to a different stage (especially a more advanced or mature stage); "the development of his ideas took many years"; "the evolution of Greek civilization"; "the slow development of her skill as a writer"
- growth: (biology) the process of an individual organism growing organically; a purely biological unfolding of events involved in an organism changing gradually from a simple to a more complex level; "he proposed an indicator of osseous development in children"
- a recent event that has some relevance for the present situation; "recent developments in Iraq"; "what a revolting development!"
You can twist and turn as much as you want, but it remains a fact that it needs more to get the EPE than what is developed, or funded yet.the programme is seeking an export customer to launch development of the F414 EPE
Thanks Sancho, I realised that too. Its an "or" in case of "and". So it does look like we are going for Ge414 with higher endurance version, coz GE414 will anyway give higher thurst than 404.Interesting but you missunderstood some things. It says more thrust, or longer engine life and less fuel consumption, not both. Also the 20% increase for the G that the Gripen NG use is meant in comparison to the older GE 404 / RM 12 in the normal Gripen
Its upto Ge now how they are parting the TOT stuff with us.
But I have a question here, what the point of this GE414 G version which gives 20% higher thurst than the earlier poerplant of GE 404 that Gripen used. The 414 normal version also gives higher thurst.
Actually, we can go for this G version of engine coz it will be quicker, as EDE and EPE will take some time, the G one is also tested in Gripen. we need not wait for it.
"With the vectored thrust nozzles, the engines are designated RD-33OVT and will allow the MiG-35 to be the first production twin-engine aircraft with vectoring nozzles that can move in two directions or planes. Other current thrust-vectoring aircraft, such as the Su-30MKI and the F-22, have nozzles that vector in one direction/plane" - (Wiki).
All the other contenders have no such ability..
I prefer Russia over US in defense deals..
The F-414 EPE is on the table as part of the Boeing's MMRCA offering the R&E was funded by several government agencies in what began as the IHPTET program.
Dubai 09: Boeing aims to win Indian deal with engine offerPaul Oliver, Boeing's senior director for international business development, confirms the F414 enhanced performance engine (EPE) was submitted as part of Boeing's proposal to win the MMRCA contract.
The USN funded part of this R&E effort the remaining part of the program was funded by the US Army and several government agencies. The USN is yet to contract GE for EDE engines for new or operational Super Hornets - what this means is that the engine R&E effort is complete and the EPE and EDE are both available choices for future needs of the USN or current / future Super Hornet customers.
Can someone confirm this please?
Medium Multi Role Combat Aircraft (MMRCA) for IAF - a knol by Vijainder K ThakurTrial Emphasis
The emphasis in the MMRCA selection process appeared to be on attack potential and low cost of ownership, not air combat capability
The IAF needs a good attack aircraft which has considerable ait-to-air capability - so the aircraft they select won't be required to dogfight other than in self-defence. The MRCA winner is likely to be used as the Mirages were used in Kargil - to strike enemy strongholds under fighter escort (Su-30MKI).
How GE's Tejas MK-II Win Affects The MMRCA. Or Doesn't.
In a little over two months from now, the Indian Ministry of Defence will approve the Indian Air Force's field trial evaluation report and begin commercial negotiations with what the IAF hopes will be a downselected list of vendors. Remember, the IAF has not explicitly indicated a downselect, leaving it to the MoD to understand this from the level of compliance index.
Now, there's an overwhelming sense that India's selection of the GE F414 engine makes things much, much clearer about the MMRCA competition, and narrows things down considerably. For clarity's sake, variants of the F414 power the Boeing F/A-18 IN Super Hornet and the next generation Saab Gripen IN, while the Eurojet EJ200 -- which lost to GE in the Tejas MK-II competition -- powers the Eurofighter Typhoon.
The logic was always compelling. A dedicated licensed engine production line in the country for the Tejas MK-II would provide robust economy of scale advantages and funnel down the contenders in the MMRCA. That's how it probably should happen, but will it? Another matter altogether. Some scenarios:
SCENARIO 1: At least six IAF officers I spoke to suggested that it would be wrong to connect the Tejas MK-II and the MMRCA on too many levels. One of them suggested that the two deals were mutually exclusive, with a sharp line dividing the two -- in other words, the decision on one had no way of influencing the other. Therefore, in this scenario, the GE F414 selection provides no tangible advantages, going forward in the MMRCA, to the F/A-18 and Gripen NG, even though those advantages would normally shout loud. When I asked an Air Marshal, formerly at Eastern Air Command HQ, how this could be justified -- considering how it goes headlong against the economies of scale notion -- he said, "You must understand that each deal is a leverage in itself. The government can choose to draw connections and give the country the most effective deal. Or it could keep everything separate and leave all options open for maximum leverage. In my understanding, the government would not hand GE an automatic victory in the MMRCA as a default result of the Tejas MK-II selection. That is not how things happen in India." The other crucial point here is: if the GE victory wasn't politically premeditated, then there exists no procedural route for the Tejas MK-II engine selection to be taken into account in a potential MMRCA downselect. In other words, if the MMRCA is sticking unflinchingly to the RFP (as the Indian Defence Minister recently stated in Washington, and reiterated yesterday by Air Marshal NAK Browne, the IAF's Western Command chief), then GE's win would/could have no direct bearing on the MMRCA downselect simply because there is no official route for it to do so. The last critical point: the F414 engine that will be built in India under tech-transfer, will be a modified engine for the Tejas. If an F414-powered airplane happens to be selected in the MMRCA, then it is likely that there will be two lines, or a fork in the main line.
SCENARIO 2: The opposite scenario. Here, the government decides that a dedicated GE F414 engine line in the country means it makes sense to narrow down the selection based on the economies of engine scale logic. In other words, you have the Gripen going against the Super Hornet in the MMRCA finals.
SUB-SCENARIO 2 (a) But there are important points to remember here to: two extravagantly different aircraft, same engine in different configurations. The US government would obviously support the F/A-18, and GE would clearly prefer the F/A-18, since it's American and a twin-engine platform, so it means double the number of engines sold by GE as compared to the number it would sell if India chose the Gripen. In this scenario, the GE F414 economies of scale and political considerations would push the F/A-18 to the top of the list.
SUB-SCENARIO 2 (b) In this scenario, the government decides it already has economies of scale, and pushes the Gripen forward as a perceived compromise: the cheaper aircraft, with American engine and weapons. The US cannot exercise export licensing controls on the Gripen's GE engine since each vendor had to submit a signed affidavit before field trials that all systems listed in their bid documents were available, and needed no further approvals from any government. Remember, the IAF has said it won't choose a twin-engine aircraft in the MMRCA, if a single-engine aircraft can "do the job", i.e, is satisfactorily compliant on all 643 test points that each of the six airplanes were tested for during the field evaluation trials (FETs). But now it's up to the MoD.
SCENARIO 3: In this scenario, the GE victory in the Tejas MK-II engine competition, has a reverse effect on the MMRCA, and pushes the Eurofighter Typhoon, Rafale and F-16 (the MiG-35 is all but officially confirmed to be out) to the top of the pile, since alternate engines provide their own leverage. Scenarios 2 & 3 are of course assuming the government won't look at the Tejas MK-II and the MMRCA as "two watertight compartments" as an officer put it.
Livefist - The Best of Indian Defence: How GE's Tejas MK-II Win Affects The MMRCA. Or Doesn't.
an year old article , but intresting , could be a shocker for those who think that Dassault Rafeal is a front runner in MMRCA deal
India may go beyond the purchase of 126 medium multi-role combat aircraft.
The winner’s jackpot could soon become even bigger in what is already the world’s most lucrative fighter aircraft tender: India’s proposed purchase of 126 medium multi-role combat aircraft (MMRCA) for an estimated Rs 51,000 crore ($11 billion).
The reason is a breakdown in India’s long negotiations with Dassault Aviation, the French aircraft manufacturer, for upgrading 51 Indian Air Force Mirage-2000 fighters. According to senior IAF sources, Dassault has refused to reduce its quota of Rs 10,000 crore ($2.1 billion) for extending the service life of the IAF’s Mirage-2000 fleet by fitting new radars and avionics. The Ministry of Defence (MoD) considers this price — Rs 196 crore ($41 million) per aircraft — unacceptably high, given that the airframes and engines will not be changed.
In comparison, each of the 126 brand-new, next-generation MMRCAs will cost some Rs 400 crore ($87 million) per aircraft. That includes the cost of technology transfers, as well as capital costs for setting up a manufacturing line in India. Once those costs are amortised, additional MMRCAs would be significantly cheaper.
Dassault’s India head, Posina V Rao, did not return multiple phone calls from Business Standard. MoD sources say Rao is engaged in last-ditch attempts to salvage the deal.
But, the MoD is veering around to the view that the Mirage-2000 fleet should continue service in its current form. After six squadrons (126 aircraft) of MMRCAs have entered IAF service, an additional two squadrons of MMRCAs would be built to replace the 51 Mirage-2000 fighters. That amounts to a 40 per cent rise in the MMRCA’s numbers.
Israeli aerospace companies have reportedly entered the fray, offering to upgrade the Mirage-2000 for half the price being quoted by Dassault. The MoD, however, is not inclined to accept that offer.
Price negotiations for the Mirage-2000 upgrade have travelled a rocky road over two years. Initially, Dassault quoted Rs 13,500 crore ($2.9 billion), which it brought down to the current level of Rs 10,000 crore ($2.1 billion) after the IAF diluted its upgrade requirements. But the MoD believes Dassault’s reduced bid only reflects the diluted requirements, rather than any flexibility on the latter’s part.
The IAF, traditionally a staunch supporter of Dassault and the Mirage-2000 fighter, is apparently changing its views. Dassault, say pilots, has badly damaged its credibility during the recent negotiations by arm-twisting the IAF over the supply of spares for the Mirage-2000 fleet.
The Gwalior-based IAF squadrons that currently fly the Mirage-2000 are Number 1 squadron (Tigers) and Number 7 squadron (Battle Axes).
Five of the six contenders for the MMRCA contract — Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Eurofighter, Gripen and RAC MiG — know they could reap handsome gains, through larger fighter orders, if India chooses not to upgrade the Mirage-2000. The sixth contender, Dassault Aviation itself, realises failure to negotiate the Mirage-2000 upgrade contract could seriously damage the chances of its Rafale fighter for the MMRCA contract.
IAF's $11-bn order may become larger
even though the deal would be sign at the end
Last edited by luckyyy; 10-04-2010 at 11:12 AM.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)