By: hopsalot
- 4th January 2017 at 01:48Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
NEW DELHI — The Indian Navy's primary fighter operating from the aircraft carrier INS Vikramaditya faces operational deficiencies due to defects in engines, airframes and fly-by-wire systems, according to a report by India's autonomous auditor, the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG). However, Indian Navy officials say the Russian-made MiG-29K remains the best choice available.
The report said the "aircraft MiG-29K is being technically accepted despite having discrepancies and anomalies."
India ordered 45 MiG-29K aircraft and equipment worth $2.2 billion in two separate orders — in 2004 and 2010 — from Russia. It is the primary combat platform on Vikramaditya, which was acquired from Russia when it was known as the Admiral Gorshkov.
...
On problems with the engine, the CAG report said: "Since induction in February 2010, 40 engines (62 percent) of twin-engined MiG-29K have been withdrawn from service/rejected due to design-related defects."
Additionally, the serviceability of the warplanes was low, ranging from 21.30 percent to 47.14 percent, according to the report.
"The roots of these problems (serviceability and defects) lie in the extremely poor quality control in the Russian military-industrial complex and dismal product support being rendered by the Russian industry to the Indian Navy for the past 25 years," Prakash said. "This is in spite of the fact that the development of the MiG-29K has been totally funded by the Indian Navy."
On how the aircraft could affect combat worthiness of the Navy, the CAG report said: "The service life of MiG -29K is 6,000 hours or 25 years (whichever is earlier) but the deficiencies and snags in the aircraft is likely to reduce the operational life of the aircraft, thereby affecting combat worthiness of [the Indian] Navy."
Detailing the defects of the engine on MiG-29K, the report noted that "even as the RD-33 MK engine (mounted on MiG-29K) was considered an advancement over the engine of the MiG-29K, its reliability remains questionable."
So $50 million each, only to have 2/3rds broken from the very start.
Kinda explains why they keep looking for Western designs...
Hmm, those Mig-29K availability rates are close to what France is getting with its Rafale these days.
Terrible indeed. Maybe India can sign on to a billion dollar support package like most "Western deals", and then we can see available the plane is.
New
Posts: 1,168
By: KGB
- 4th January 2017 at 04:06Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
They're classic Su-30MK2, just like Vietnam, Uganda or Chinese Navy use.
No, there is no variety of configurations. There are just two.. KnAAZ-built Su-30MK2 (discontinued recently) and IAZ-built Su-30MKI, incl. russianized mod called Su-30SM. There is nothing else..
And you can't modify an Su-27UB into an Su-30 as they are structurally different, don't make things up.
How many different configurations/variations though, of the original su 27 family is there for export ? Including su 35's and copies, kit planes that went to China and India ?
New
Posts: 1,168
By: KGB
- 4th January 2017 at 04:13Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
So $50 million each, only to have 2/3rds broken from the very start.
Kinda explains why they keep looking for Western designs...
This is the exact kind of BS that India is famous for. They probably cheaped out on the maintenance contract and then ran the jets into the dirt. Then after THEY wreck them, (from cheaping out and not listening) they come out and complain about quality.
Then they will go out and spend twice as much on western fighters and repeat the process.
But it sure makes for good trash talk. This is why it is sometimes better just not to make sales to certain customers.
New
Posts: 1,168
By: KGB
- 4th January 2017 at 04:17Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Hmm, those Mig-29K availability rates are close to what France is getting with its Rafale these days.
Terrible indeed. Maybe India can sign on to a billion dollar support package like most "Western deals", and then we can see available the plane is.
Places like India cut corners and skimp on maintenance and or go it alone. Who do they blame ? The manufacturer of course. Happens in a lot of industries.
The US deals with the exact opposite environment. Selling to Norway and Israel is not like selling to India and Uganda.
By: TR1
- 4th January 2017 at 06:00Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Places like India cut corners and skimp on maintenance and or go it alone. Who do they blame ? The manufacturer of course. Happens in a lot of industries.
The US deals with the exact opposite environment. Selling to Norway and Israel is not like selling to India and Uganda.
Comparing Indian Su-30 availability (or even MIG-29K, especially challenging since it is a much newer type) to what the French AF gets out of its domestic birds ( I only pick France because their numbers are recently available ) and one gets the idea it can't be explained away by just Indian incompetence.
Though it does appear appropriate in-house overhaul facilities always lag behind aircraft acquisition,with predictable results.
New
Posts: 2,040
By: Y-20 Bacon
- 4th January 2017 at 07:22Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
By: TooCool_12f
- 4th January 2017 at 08:08Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Comparing Indian Su-30 availability (or even MIG-29K, especially challenging since it is a much newer type) to what the French AF gets out of its domestic birds ( I only pick France because their numbers are recently available ) and one gets the idea it can't be explained away by just Indian incompetence.
Though it does appear appropriate in-house overhaul facilities always lag behind aircraft acquisition,with predictable results.
except that you make an apples to oranges comparison... the french spend their time sending fighters to various wars, but keep reducing the maintenance budgets, which means that aircraft operating in war get more or less what parts they need at the expense of those at home who can't be repaired because the parts aren't bought in sufficient quantities. AFAIK, India isn't fighting any war right now, especially with those Migs, making the circumstances (and their causes) quite different
By: Levsha
- 4th January 2017 at 11:00Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
TR1 is getting mixed up between aircraft that have low availability due to low funding and those which have poor mechanical servicability.
New
Posts: 3,156
By: hopsalot
- 4th January 2017 at 11:48Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
This is the exact kind of BS that India is famous for. They probably cheaped out on the maintenance contract and then ran the jets into the dirt. Then after THEY wreck them, (from cheaping out and not listening) they come out and complain about quality.
Then they will go out and spend twice as much on western fighters and repeat the process.
But it sure makes for good trash talk. This is why it is sometimes better just not to make sales to certain customers.
Sure, it must be their fault that their brand new jets broke as soon as they received them... keep telling yourself that.
Their Western aircraft BTW work just fine, which is why they keep seeking to buy more.
New
Posts: 2,040
By: Y-20 Bacon
- 4th January 2017 at 12:10Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
TR1 is getting mixed up between aircraft that have low availability due to low funding and those which have poor mechanical servicability.
so which aircraft have low availability due to low funding and which are poor mechanical?
By: TooCool_12f
- 4th January 2017 at 13:06Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
In India? in the middle... poor maintenance provider (HAL)... overall the aircraft is fine, sufficient funding is there, only quality wasn't delivered by HAL... even if now, they've been put under pressure to start delivering and things seem to improve somewhat...
By: Vnomad
- 4th January 2017 at 13:08Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
thanks, where would you put the Flanker availability issues?former or latter?
The primary issue with the Flanker was an outstanding dispute regarding the setup of a local MRO facility that clogged up the maintenance chain with unserviceable aircraft. It faced some reliability issues with the aircraft (particularly engine failures) but none as severe as those faced by the MiG-29K.
By: Levsha
- 4th January 2017 at 13:10Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
thanks, where would you put the Flanker availability issues?former or latter?
Well IAF su-30 was reported at 60% - a respectable figure all considered, compared to say, F- 22 which is also around 60%. Both F-22 and Su-30mki are complex expensive beasts.
By: FBW
- 4th January 2017 at 13:18Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Even two operators of the same aircraft have different availability rates and can experience differnent problems. The F/A-18's have had a brutal year operationally, does that make them junk? No, it makes them old, with a shrinking supply of spares.
That said, time to stop blaming India every time reports come out that the MKI or Mig-29K are not meeting availability, or India reports engine issues. They've operated Mirage 2000's, Jaguars, and the like without these leaks hitting the Indian news about shoddy workmanship, engine, FBW issues. It's not like they pamper the western types in their inventory then break out the duct tape to repair their Migs.
By: FBW
- 4th January 2017 at 13:23Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Well IAF su-30 was reported at 60% - a respectable figure all considered, compared to say, F- 22 which is also around 60%. Both F-22 and Su-30mki are complex expensive beasts.
F-22 availability rate was 69% 2014 and 63% last year, part of that is due to RAMMP. There are 9 F-22 undergoing RAMMP at any given time. While that is a small number, it is also 5% of the total fleet.
MKI availability was 55% in 2014 with a similar sized fleet, the difference in availability between the two types in 2014 would be equivalent to a squadron of 24 more aircraft.
Edit-Oops, "last year" should read 2015. It isn't 2016 anymore.....
Posts: 3,156
By: hopsalot - 4th January 2017 at 01:48 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/naval/naval-aviation/2016/08/10/india-mig-29k-aircraft-navy-defects/88510782/
So $50 million each, only to have 2/3rds broken from the very start.
Kinda explains why they keep looking for Western designs...
Posts: 9,579
By: TR1 - 4th January 2017 at 01:59 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Just ignore him, this is getting painful.
We have numerous deals, various spreads of per-unit cost, and the only one he focuses on is Uganda lol.
I am not sure what is so confusing about domestic purchases being cheap either, but....
Posts: 9,579
By: TR1 - 4th January 2017 at 02:02 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Hmm, those Mig-29K availability rates are close to what France is getting with its Rafale these days.
Terrible indeed. Maybe India can sign on to a billion dollar support package like most "Western deals", and then we can see available the plane is.
Posts: 1,168
By: KGB - 4th January 2017 at 04:06 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
How many different configurations/variations though, of the original su 27 family is there for export ? Including su 35's and copies, kit planes that went to China and India ?
Posts: 1,168
By: KGB - 4th January 2017 at 04:13 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
This is the exact kind of BS that India is famous for. They probably cheaped out on the maintenance contract and then ran the jets into the dirt. Then after THEY wreck them, (from cheaping out and not listening) they come out and complain about quality.
Then they will go out and spend twice as much on western fighters and repeat the process.
But it sure makes for good trash talk. This is why it is sometimes better just not to make sales to certain customers.
Posts: 1,168
By: KGB - 4th January 2017 at 04:17 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Places like India cut corners and skimp on maintenance and or go it alone. Who do they blame ? The manufacturer of course. Happens in a lot of industries.
The US deals with the exact opposite environment. Selling to Norway and Israel is not like selling to India and Uganda.
Posts: 9,579
By: TR1 - 4th January 2017 at 06:00 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Comparing Indian Su-30 availability (or even MIG-29K, especially challenging since it is a much newer type) to what the French AF gets out of its domestic birds ( I only pick France because their numbers are recently available ) and one gets the idea it can't be explained away by just Indian incompetence.
Though it does appear appropriate in-house overhaul facilities always lag behind aircraft acquisition,with predictable results.
Posts: 2,040
By: Y-20 Bacon - 4th January 2017 at 07:22 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
ok slightly updated. keep them links coming.
Posts: 3,259
By: TooCool_12f - 4th January 2017 at 08:08 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
except that you make an apples to oranges comparison... the french spend their time sending fighters to various wars, but keep reducing the maintenance budgets, which means that aircraft operating in war get more or less what parts they need at the expense of those at home who can't be repaired because the parts aren't bought in sufficient quantities. AFAIK, India isn't fighting any war right now, especially with those Migs, making the circumstances (and their causes) quite different
Posts: 2,814
By: Levsha - 4th January 2017 at 11:00 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
TR1 is getting mixed up between aircraft that have low availability due to low funding and those which have poor mechanical servicability.
Posts: 3,156
By: hopsalot - 4th January 2017 at 11:48 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Sure, it must be their fault that their brand new jets broke as soon as they received them... keep telling yourself that.
Their Western aircraft BTW work just fine, which is why they keep seeking to buy more.
Posts: 2,040
By: Y-20 Bacon - 4th January 2017 at 12:10 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
so which aircraft have low availability due to low funding and which are poor mechanical?
Posts: 2,814
By: Levsha - 4th January 2017 at 12:14 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Low funding? NATO Typhoons, F-22, Rafale. Mechanical issues? MiG-29k?
Posts: 2,040
By: Y-20 Bacon - 4th January 2017 at 12:54 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
thanks, where would you put the Flanker availability issues?former or latter?
Posts: 3,259
By: TooCool_12f - 4th January 2017 at 13:06 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
In India? in the middle... poor maintenance provider (HAL)... overall the aircraft is fine, sufficient funding is there, only quality wasn't delivered by HAL... even if now, they've been put under pressure to start delivering and things seem to improve somewhat...
Posts: 2,661
By: Vnomad - 4th January 2017 at 13:08 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The primary issue with the Flanker was an outstanding dispute regarding the setup of a local MRO facility that clogged up the maintenance chain with unserviceable aircraft. It faced some reliability issues with the aircraft (particularly engine failures) but none as severe as those faced by the MiG-29K.
Posts: 2,814
By: Levsha - 4th January 2017 at 13:10 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Well IAF su-30 was reported at 60% - a respectable figure all considered, compared to say, F- 22 which is also around 60%. Both F-22 and Su-30mki are complex expensive beasts.
Posts: 3,106
By: FBW - 4th January 2017 at 13:18 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Even two operators of the same aircraft have different availability rates and can experience differnent problems. The F/A-18's have had a brutal year operationally, does that make them junk? No, it makes them old, with a shrinking supply of spares.
That said, time to stop blaming India every time reports come out that the MKI or Mig-29K are not meeting availability, or India reports engine issues. They've operated Mirage 2000's, Jaguars, and the like without these leaks hitting the Indian news about shoddy workmanship, engine, FBW issues. It's not like they pamper the western types in their inventory then break out the duct tape to repair their Migs.
Posts: 3,106
By: FBW - 4th January 2017 at 13:23 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
F-22 availability rate was 69% 2014 and 63% last year, part of that is due to RAMMP. There are 9 F-22 undergoing RAMMP at any given time. While that is a small number, it is also 5% of the total fleet.
MKI availability was 55% in 2014 with a similar sized fleet, the difference in availability between the two types in 2014 would be equivalent to a squadron of 24 more aircraft.
Edit-Oops, "last year" should read 2015. It isn't 2016 anymore.....
Posts: 4,731
By: JSR - 4th January 2017 at 15:01 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
So india with budget smaller than France can maintain airforce and Navy 3 times the size based on imported parts. Talk some logic.