LONDON, March 26 (AFP) - 17:11 GMT - The Indian Air Force (IAF) wants to buy more than 100 French Mirage 2000-5 fighter aircraft and has begun discussions with the constructor of the jet, Dassault Aviation, a British weekly defence magazine reported Tuesday.
"Official sources in New Delhi said the IAF plans to acquire 126 Mirage 2000-5s to equip seven squadrons that will comprise the backbone of India's proposed strategic nuclear command," said Jane's Defence Weekly.
The IAF, it continued, "wants 36 Mirage 2000-5s to be delivered in completed form and the remainder to be assembled by Hindustan Aeronautics Limited in Bangalore."
Saintsman From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2002, 2065 posts, RR: 2 Reply 1, posted (10 years 2 months 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 1447 times:
This story sounds familiar, only it was BAe Hawks and Jaguars. They have had BAe sweating on this for years with no sign of a contract. BAe must have spent a fortune sucking up to the Indians. It wouldn't surprise me if the French have been doing some lavish entertaining which is why thet are now flavour of the month.
BarfBag From India, joined Mar 2001, 2029 posts, RR: 7 Reply 2, posted (10 years 2 months 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 1424 times:
If past record is any indicator, this deal will receive more priority that the trainer deal. Besides, it appears increasingly possible that BAe will NOT get the trainer jet order, since the Hawk is a dated aircraft, and the Italians have a much newer plane to offer, at better rates. However, the IAF is not exactly known for giving the trainer deal the priority it deserves, to say the least; the need was first made public in 1983 and the IAF has been sitting on it ever since.
GDB From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 12359 posts, RR: 83 Reply 3, posted (10 years 2 months 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 1412 times:
The Mirage 2000-5 is an improved version of the fighter, multi-role aircraft for sure, but not a nuclear strike as implied in the article, (Mirage 2000N).
To me this is an admission that that LCA is still a very long way from service, to be honest the Light Combat Aircraft looks a bit dated now
BarfBag From India, joined Mar 2001, 2029 posts, RR: 7 Reply 4, posted (10 years 2 months 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 1418 times:
Actually the LCA is a poor candidate to be a nuclear delivery platform, and was *never* intended for such a role, period. Its way too light, as its name itself reveals. The LCA is primarily an agile, light interceptor meant to be a replacement for the ageing 60s-era MiG21, which are at the end of their life, upgrades notwithstanding. Besides, if anything the LCA project has received a kickstart post Sept.11, with the US clearing the sale of GE404 engines for it, along with other stuff. It has already completed one batch of test flights and another prototype is due for tests any day now, if press reports are any indicator. It'll always have its share of detractors anyway.
Indianguy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 5, posted (10 years 2 months 19 hours ago) and read 1397 times:
The immediate *provocation* for hurrying thru the deal now is the rap the Govt. from the Opposition parties got over the Mig-21Bis issue. The IAF has lost over 100 of these aircraft in the past decade. The 600+ Mig-21's operated by the IAF form the backbone of the Airforce. The Joint Parliamentary Commitee recommended last week the scrapping of the entire Mig-21 fleet, which has now been in service for a decade more than originally planned. The long delayed, indegenous LCA programme was scheduled to replace the Mig-21.
The LCA or the Mig-21 that it replaces was never a candidate for the Nuclear delivery option. First the British design Jaguar DPSA (Deep Penetration Strike Aircraft) was considered for the role but rejected as it was found unsuitable for the task. Finally the Mirage-2000's already in service were modified for the task.
For longer range missions the Su-30MKI will be used. Significantly India has ordered them with a 2-crew cockpit and refuelling pods, which could mean that India is preparing to take on the Commie Chinks.
Though the IAF is maha-pleased with the Mirage-2000's, they have not been without problems. The 2000's are the only aircraft in the IAF which need special air-conditioned hangars which is horrendously expensive.
GDB From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 12359 posts, RR: 83 Reply 6, posted (10 years 2 months 14 hours ago) and read 1386 times:
I meant that the LCA was dated as a fighter, and it is.
India might been much better off licence building the Gripen, affordable way of replacing those Mig-21's.
The RAF operated the Jaguar in the nuclear and conventional strike role for years, still operate recently updated models for conventional attack.
The RAF re-discovered the Jaguar's virtues in the Gulf War, it's ease of maintenance and ability to deploy quickly, then this often underrated aircraft got belated upgrades to avionics, weapons and engines.
And the RAF Jaguars were meant to operate against the intensely well-defended Warsaw Pact defences in central Europe.
HAL are still building Jaguars in small numbers.
As for the Hawk being 'ageing', latest models have glass cockpits, new avionics and uprated engines.
Whatever trainer is picked, it cannot come a minute too soon.
I agree that the Mirage 2000 is probably the most potent aircraft in IAF service, until the avionic fit on the SU-30's are sorted out.
Russian aircraft are cheaper to buy, but I understand that time between overhauls on engines compare very unfavourably with Western types, plus aircraft like the Mig-29 were not designed for a long service life, and the avionic/weapon fit was designed for rigid ground-controlled interceptions, which has been shown to be very inflexible and vunerable to interdiction, witness the Syrians in 1982, Iraqi's in 1991 and Yugoslavs in 1999.
Of course upgrades are available for the Migs, but that undermines the savings made in costs.
So in the Mirage 2000, the IAF has made a wise choice.
BarfBag From India, joined Mar 2001, 2029 posts, RR: 7 Reply 7, posted (10 years 2 months 4 hours ago) and read 1364 times:
GDB: If you have a reference that provides a proper analysis of why the LCA is dated, can you provide it ? I do agree the LCA has seen its share of growing pains and cost overruns.
However I strongly believe India should continue with it. No country had it easy building a defence aerospace industry from scratch, esp when it starts with a 4th gen. FBW fighter jet. Considering the poor funding and haphazard political support the LCA project has received, I think they've done a creditable job getting it going.
Plus, the spinoffs in experience gained developing the plane and the engine will count in future, just as India's space program has matured in 20 years from sounding rockets to cutting edge satellites and heavy-lift rockets. Licence production of foreign aircraft is basically a quick fix, and it's better for India to bite the bullet and develop its own defence industry.
As for the Jaguar, it is a ground attack bomber. It is still a capable plane, but low-level attack is no longer particularly viable, especially against heavily SAM-defended Pakistani targets. India has the Mirage 2K and Tu-22M Backfire bombers.
Its true that the MiG29 is dated with regard to avionics (they are being upgraded though). But then India does not have to deal with US/NATO forces. Also, with the Phalcon AEW systems coming up, the MiGs will no doubt be upgraded with proper avionics.
GDB From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 12359 posts, RR: 83 Reply 8, posted (10 years 2 months ago) and read 1359 times:
The very long gestation period of the LCA is obvious by looking at it, it's basically a small Mirage 2000.
Now the Mirage is still a potent aircraft, but it first flew in 1978, the LCA some 20 years later.
There could be spinoffs from LCA, or it could be a dead end like the HAL Marut aircraft.
RAF Jaguars now operate as both medium level, and low level strike aircraft, and sometimes you still have to go low, as should have been done in Kosovo in 1999, stupid political rules of engagement designed to reduce losses of aircrews prevented that.
Because it was a controversial war, and Clinton was desperate to avoid any losses.
The result was patchy bombing results against the Serbian Army, and too many tragic mistakes caused by being too high to properly indentify targets. The RAF were furious at these restrictions.
If the Backfires can be integrated into the IAF, and there is no reason to suppose they could not be, that gives the IAF a better long-range attack capability than China!
But if the Chinese get decent SAM's, ironically from Russia in all probability, they'll be vunerable.
I've seen a TU-22M, impressive but a big radar reflector, are the Russians supplying their version of the cruise missile, or AS-4 and/or AS-6 stand-off bombs?
Still good for maritime strike/recce though.
BarfBag From India, joined Mar 2001, 2029 posts, RR: 7 Reply 9, posted (10 years 1 month 4 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 1346 times:
There aren't many fighters around that didn't have a gestation period of at least a decade. The EF2000 itself is a contemporary of the LCA, and is about 5 years ahead of the latter in development time. Many jets have faced costly design overhauls, like the F/A18.
The LCA was meant for a certain requirement, and any similarity to the M2K is purely co-incidental. There are a whole bunch of delta-wing fighters around anyway. I find absolutely no basis in saying that the LCA is dated because it looks like the M2K.
Admittedly I have quite some amount of faith in the LCA project, but I'm willing to be convinced of its redundancy by a proper argument. The M2K comparison just doesn't hold water, however. If anything, practically every jet around is dated, compared to, say the S37 Berket with its sweptforward wings!
Both China and Israel have been involved in the defence aerospace area, and have faced plenty of problems. China remains by and large a serial copycat producer, including in the case of the latest J10/F10 jet that is based on the Israeli Lavi, which in turn was a failed project because the Americans pulled out of it.
As for the Backfires, IIRC they are already part of the strategic bombing command. I do not think they would be useful for maritime recce. India has Tu95 Bears for that purpose. The Bears would be sitting ducks to a SAM, but are excellent for maritime reconaissance because of their endurance.
India and Russia have developed a supersonic cruise missile, the Brahmos, recently. I have no idea whether the Backfires would be armed with them though.
GDB From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 12359 posts, RR: 83 Reply 10, posted (10 years 1 month 4 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 1339 times:
I was just very surprised that HAL did not go for a delta-canard configuration, I suspect they took a good look at the Mirage 2000's config, and why not? It was the most modern aircraft in IAF service when LCA began.
If it was entering service now, fine, but it's still years away.
In the early days of the SAAB Gripen programme, the Swedes approached HAL, hoping they would maybe become a partner, this was about 1986.
BAe helped with the Gripen's design, then lost interest, only to re-join the programme a few years ago.
(The SAAB looked a lot like the BAe P.106 design, but that got nowhere due to lack of RAF interest).
The point about the Gripen is, if HAL had got involved, they'd be built by HAL right now, and in IAF service.
HAL would have probably been allocated the Asia region for any Gripen exports, but by the time the LCA enters service the SAAB, along with 2nd hand F-16's, would have taken a huge part of that area of the market.
I know the IAF will have a big requirement for the LCA, but there is nothing like exports to make these projects profitable.
BarfBag From India, joined Mar 2001, 2029 posts, RR: 7 Reply 11, posted (10 years 1 month 4 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 1334 times:
Actually the naval version of the LCA *does* have the delta-canard configuration. The current prototype, thats going thru flight tests in my hometown of Bangalore, does not.
According to current projections the LCA is supposed to go into serial production in 4 years, with the initial IAF requirement being for 220 aircraft, and probably more for the navy once someone in the Defence Ministry puts his foot down and finalises the new aircraft carrier building/purchase plan.
I'm not particularly well informed on the Gripen story until now. But if it did not work out, it means the IAF did not want it. The Mig29's were ordered during the same timeframe (the late 80s).
If anything, rumors suggested that India would go for the Rafale, and not a large M2K purchase. But its a costly plane. Also, the IAF is building up on avionics upgrades and AAM capability, with the AA-12 AMRAAMSKI and the Python-4 on the Mig29s and Su30s.
L-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 28959 posts, RR: 66 Reply 12, posted (10 years 1 month 4 weeks 1 day ago) and read 1329 times:
The Indian governement has a long history of putting "teases" out there for various aircraft manufacturers to chomp on in order to get the best prices from them. You know get the various manufacturers to play off of each other.
This Mirage rumor may be another case of this. As somebody pointed out they have special requirements and are fairly espensive aircraft.
OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
Indianguy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 13, posted (10 years 1 month 4 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 1321 times:
GDB:
With Reference to your statement of the LCA being *outdated*, please understand that the version of the LCA that is flying now is almost a totally new aircraft than the project Mrs.Gandhi had launched in the 80's.
The aircraft now has a super-advanced FBW avionics system; so advanced, that theoretically atleast, the aircraft could be programmed for unmanned missions. When Indian scientists mastered the art of aerospace quality Composites (an offshoot of the ICBM project), the LCA design was reworked to incorporate these composites with the result that when this aircraft enters service in 2004, it will be the lightest 4th gen fighter, and will have the best Weight-Payload ratio of any Fighter, anywhere in the world.
The scientists are going through a learning curve here, virtually reinventing the wheel, and delays were to be expected. But the scientists have taken great care to ensure that the aircraft stays *current* when it finally enters service. I strongly believe that like the nuclear programme and the Space programme, India must walk the distance and develop the whole range of technologies indegenously. The British enslaved India because they had the military technology that we didnt. The mistakes of history must not be repeated. China has got a headstart over India in Defence Production by copying Russian designs. The limitations of that approach are already becoming painfully aware. India cannot afford to make that mistake. We must understand the technologies involved and make our own designs. This will take more time, but the long term benefits are enormous.
The Light Combat Aircraft:
And this is the only way we can beat Western pressure tactics. Our space and missile programmes have now reached a stage that Western sanctions only have a little nuisance value. Our Aircraft Manufacture now needs a similar boost. Further development of the LCA will also result in a host of spinoff technologies that will benefit other projects in the pipeline like the Saras high-speed commuter transport and the 100-seat Regional Jet.So i feel that the LCA must continue, even if as a Technology Demonstrator. The LCA has also attracted a lot of interest from other Airforces across the region, fuelling hopes that the LCA could be India's first Export success for Aircraft.
In the meantime, the M2K's and the Su's will keep the balance of power.
As far as the Hawk is concerned, it is clearly a dated aircraft, especially when put against the Russian Mig-AT, which can be programmed to represent any aircraft in the IAF's inventory. Plus the Brits have been acting pricey, by jacking up the prices once India started tilting towards the Hawk.
In any case, the British are particularly untrustworthy as defence partners. Few Indians have forgotten how the British stopped the supply of components for the Sea King ASW helicopters and Sea Harrier jump jets used by the Indian Navy after the Nuclear Tests in 1998. The amount of trouble that caused! So the British have a credibility problem here, esp. now with Tony Blair having become a ranch hand at Bush Jr's. The French and the Russians on the other hand, went out of their way to ensure unrestricted supply of material.
I certainly dont see the similarity between the M2K and the LCA. The LCA is said to be heavily inspired by the work of some German designer(i forget his name) who briefly advised the Indian Govt at one time, and who is virtually worshipped by some scientists here.
Suneil: AFAIK, The Tu22's have not yet entered service. The negotiations are still going on. From what i last heard, the Russians were talking of a *all-or-nothing* deal for the Tupolevs, an Aircraft Carrier and the Nuclear Submarines, while the Indian Govt wants to negotiate the 3 separately. All 3 are vital components of India's nuclear defence project and it is hoped that the deal(s) get thru ASAP.
GDB From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 12359 posts, RR: 83 Reply 14, posted (10 years 1 month 4 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 1310 times:
Well the Hawk first flew in 1974, like the F-16, both aircraft have been continually updated since.
No one's calling the F-16 dated.
And it looks like the Russians have gone with the Yak for it's trainer aircraft, so where does that leave the Mig-AT?
Lack of perfomance was one reason cited.
As for Blair being a 'ranch-hand', he's a pragmatist who has to deal with whoever is in the White House.
He thinks, rightly or wrongly, that he'll have more influence being in the tent than throwing a hissy fit outside of it.
The Russians are desperate for hard currency, that's why they'll sell virtually anything right now.
GDB From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 12359 posts, RR: 83 Reply 15, posted (10 years 1 month 4 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 1307 times:
Interesting pics of the LCA, if there has always been an intention to put it on aircraft carriers that could have influenced it's design.
Better idea than adapting a land based design.
I cannot remember the German designers name either, but he worked on the HAL Marut aircraft.
When the first IAF Mirage 2000's arrived in the 1980's some reports claimed that they had the Antilope radar and attack system of the French AF 2000N and D versions, both two seaters, but of course the IAF aircraft were mostly single-seat C versions.
Also, plenty of pics were published showing the Mirages operating with Mig-21's and 29's.
Not seen any of them carrying the Super R530 SARH AAM associated with the fighter versions, and not compatible with the N and D versions, but I'd be surprised if the IAF 2000C's did have the Antilope system.
The new 2000-5's will have the much newer systems fitted, and will be true swing-role aircraft anyway.
Will the IAF update the -2000C's to the latest standards? The French AF did the same with some of their early 2000Cs.
BarfBag From India, joined Mar 2001, 2029 posts, RR: 7 Reply 16, posted (10 years 1 month 4 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 1305 times:
The German guy you're referring to is Kurt Tank, who was a designer for Focke-Wulf during WW2. He was also the chief designer of the Marut - a very capable aircraft that was however grossly underpowered. I do not think the LCA is inspired by the Marut, though Tank is still revered in Indian aerospace circles.
I agree with Roy's statement of the Brits not having been particularly trustworthy in defence deals. Both the Sea King and Harrier problems with them will not be forgotten by Indian decision-makers in a hurry. In my own opinion, I'd rather Aermacchi or Yak got the deal. If its gonna kill the Hawk production line, so be it.
The Hawk vs F-16 comparison is stale. The F-16 per se may not be dated (not as much as the Hawk), but the concept of agile WVR dogfighting it is tailored for, is. Newer aircraft like the F22/JSF are tailored to be very capable at BVR attack, with long-range radars and the AIM-120 missiles, but not as maneuverable as the F-16. Besides there isn't a plane quite like the F-16, while the same cannot be said of the Hawk.
GDB From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 12359 posts, RR: 83 Reply 17, posted (10 years 1 month 4 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 1297 times:
The Rolls Royce rep. at work has heard that a top-up order for modernised Hawks for the RAF is likely, so a non-IAF order is not terminal, also top up orders from other customers, the NATO training group in Canada being likely.
I compared Hawk with F-16 as they are regarded as the best aircraft their respective catergories, best sellers too.
Whatever is picked, and the Yak/Aermacci is a brand new type, the IAF really do need a modern trainer, with all these modern types entering the inventory.
Not providing one 20 years after the requirement was recognised, is a grave disservice to IAF pilots, who are highly regarded by NATO airforces for their training and amount of hours flown.
Reliability cuts both ways, India has become regarded as a snake-pit to do defence business with, the level of corruption involved, all those political payoffs etc, while not unknown in this business, seems to have really arrived in India during the 1980's.
The fallout from the Bofors scandal is remembered here, poor old Sweden, that model of responsible dealings, really got their fingers burned with that artillery deal!
(Maybe that's why the French and Russians do so well)!
Back to topic, any idea why the Mirage 2000-5 was picked, when the even newer Mirage 2000-9 is available?
Thanks for the link.
Alessandro From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 18, posted (10 years 1 month 4 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 1294 times:
Dear GDB!
Remember that India been socialist for a long time, so
the Russians where favored because of that. As for Sweden, well, I don´t think India will go for the JAS Gripen, too expensive. The Bofors thing was big in India
and Sweden but the quality of the haubitz wasn´t bad
at all, since India consider to buy more of them and start build them on licence in India. Maybe a benefit for
Bofors nobody saine person in India will ask for bribes
from them, so Bofors can keep a lower price tag on their
products....
BarfBag From India, joined Mar 2001, 2029 posts, RR: 7 Reply 19, posted (10 years 1 month 3 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 1288 times:
India chucked out Nehruvian socialism out of the window in favor of unabashed capitalism more than a decade ago, and continues to buy Russian arms for the simple reason that most of our armament is Russian, and dealing with them has not been much of a problem. They are shrewd but then who isn't. At least they don't bellyache hypocritically about non-proliferation and impose useless sanctions.
In India's case, sanctions have always been counter-productive. US computer export restrictions led us to develop our own supercomputers. The same happened with rocket and aerospace technology - we now have our our cryogenic technology and the potential to build ICBMs, which from all indicators, we will build.
As for the Bofors deal, the howitzers themselves were extremely potent at pulverizing the Pakistani army when they intruded into Kargil 3 years ago, and at providing great battlefield action visuals on satellite TV all over India. I read somewhere that India is trying to buy more of these guns from them.
Alessandro From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 20, posted (10 years 1 month 3 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 1252 times:
Well, I think that India have changed a bit, but still have socialist ideas on their agenda (unfortunatly!).
As for Bofors Howbitz, I think it can be used against
helicopters as well? Only competitior is the South Africans with their artillery developed during the war
in Angola by Mr Gerhard Bull among others....
Rodrigo Santos From Brazil, joined Sep 2001, 87 posts, RR: 0 Reply 21, posted (10 years 1 month 3 weeks ago) and read 1236 times:
Just clearing some confusion: Mirage 2000_9 = Mirage 2000_5 biplace.
2000_x - X is the number of color displays on the cockpit. _5 = 4 displays + holografic HUD.
_9 = front cockpit + some 3 color displays and HUD on the back.
Cyril B From France, joined Jun 2001, 396 posts, RR: 3 Reply 22, posted (10 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 1205 times:
The mirage 2000 is very good plane, almost as good as the Rafale, wich is already in service in the french navy. I hope the indian government will order this plane.
BarfBag From India, joined Mar 2001, 2029 posts, RR: 7 Reply 23, posted (10 years 1 month 1 week 2 hours ago) and read 1210 times:
Since the Koreans picked the F-15, there was talk in some Indian forums that the French may try to hardsell the Rafale to India instead of the M2K, of course with discounts to make it palatable. Given the choice India would probably take the Rafale any day. The deterrent is its price.
Sponsor Message: 
From India, joined Mar 2001, 2029 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2002, 2065 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 28959 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Brazil, joined Sep 2001, 87 posts, 
From France, joined Jun 2001, 396 posts, 
Sponsor Message: 
Printer friendly format
