Bangladesh Air-Force MRCA Program

[Afif]

I'm not aware of your trainer, and drone program. Do you have any pictures or some more information regarding the 2 projects? Such projects would indeed take a good amount of time until it matures. In the meantime, Bangladesh could go for Hurjet and kizilelma. I'm referring to post-2035 btw, as TFX could be an ideal procurement for Bangladesh in the future.

Here,

Primary Trainer | UAV | Other Projects

Note: Since our first indigenous primary training aircraft will make maiden flight soon, perhaps it's time to open a dedicated thread for the trainer, UAV and other projects to keep all related news/information together in one place. Not much information are publicly available on these projects...

defencehub.live

As you can see from the reading both projects are progressing.

 

[rai456]

We will have to replace our F-7s and we can't afford an all western fighter fleet.

If you got 11 years to pay for it like Pakistan did with this deal then an all western fighter fleet wouldn't be unaffordable. Not sure if western countries would give such generous financing terms.
Though given how bankrupt Pakistan is maybe China doesn't expect to get its money back anyway. They are currently giving the minimum amount of financial support necessary to keep them afloat.

 

[Knowledgeseeker]

Here,

Primary Trainer | UAV | Other Projects

Note: Since our first indigenous primary training aircraft will make maiden flight soon, perhaps it's time to open a dedicated thread for the trainer, UAV and other projects to keep all related news/information together in one place. Not much information are publicly available on these projects...

defencehub.live

As you can see from the reading both projects are progressing.
View attachment 55698
View attachment 55699

Perhaps talking about smaller drones? I read the thread you mentioned, and i could see that one of the first projects started in 2008. The US also assisted with a small budget for Bangladesh to produce drones for UN peacekeeping efforts. If Bangladesh does not have the necessary ecosystem when it comes to the aerospace industry, then a dream of a "jeniah" or kizilelma will be pretty far away. Where there is a will there is a way but if you take a look at countries such as Turkey, and South Korea then you would realize that they have built some solid mature industries that have been there for many decades.

 

[Afif]

Perhaps talking about smaller drones?

Well, it is small but not too small.
Probably similar to Falco Evo in size.

The US also assisted with a small budget for Bangladesh to produce drones for UN peacekeeping efforts.

Yes but they only anounced about their assistance in 2019.
And if I am not mistaken before that, BAF already flew a scaled down version of the drone.

If Bangladesh does not have the necessary ecosystem when it comes to the aerospace industry, then a dream of a "jeniah" or kizilelma will be pretty far away.

As I said, after these two project of primary trainer and UAV are completed, Not now.

Where there is a will there is a way but if you take a look at countries such as Turkey, and South Korea then you would realize that they have built some solid mature industries that have been there for many decades.

You see UAE doesn't have any trun key ecosystem for aerospace industry and yet they are moving ahead with Jeniah program. For example jeniah many subsystem including engine as well as sensor and avionics package will be sourced from aboard. ( and maybe assembled locally ) Yet it is not an obstacle.

And even if you look carefully at Baykar it didn't have an stablished ecosystem from the beginning.
at first TB-2 was mostly an assembly of foreing parts. But now look where does it stand today.

I think, hopefully BAF and BSARAAU will work togather to stablished necessary R&D and ecosystem in the near future ( as much as possible I mean )

I guess what I am trying imply is developing a platform and developing the ecosystem can be done simultaneously.

 

[Knowledgeseeker]

You see UAE doesn't have any trun key ecosystem for aerospace industry and yet they are moving ahead with Jeniah program. For example jeniah many subsystem including engine as well as sensor and avionics package will be sourced from aboard. ( and maybe assembled locally ) Yet it is not an obstacle.

And even if you look carefully at Baykar it didn't have an stablished ecosystem from the beginning.
at first TB-2 was mostly an assembly of foreing parts. But now look where does it stand today.

UAE does have at least an established aerospace industry that exports more than 500 + million dollars every year. They do also have the financial capabilities to hire engineers from abroad such as countries as South Africa, and Brazil. Outsourcing for EDGE, or baykar mina in the beginning is a natural process to start with but i would not mix it with the ecosystem of a whole industry. Turkey has the necessary infrastructure for its industry to perform, and it still paying off with baykar hiring thousands of engineers, and technicians.

 

[Afif]

UAE does have at least an established aerospace industry that exports more than 500 + million dollars every year. They do also have the financial capabilities to hire engineers from abroad such as countries as South Africa, and Brazil. Outsourcing for EDGE, or baykar mina in the beginning is a natural process to start with but i would not mix it with the ecosystem of a whole industry. Turkey has the necessary infrastructure for its industry to perform, and it still paying off with baykar hiring thousands of engineers, and technicians.

Well, let’s just wait and see.
every country has its unique process of development in certain domains.
Obviously Bangladesh is not doing this in the conventional way. So I don’t except Export numbers to be the definition of establishing aerospace ecosystem ( at least not for now ) as both projects are led by airforce ( with the involvement of the university.)
perhaps when primary trainer makes its maiden flight we will have a better idea what is the next roadmap may looks like.
But as I said, if primary trainer start flying soon (As its has been announced already) an advanced trainer like hurjet won’t be a far fetched idea as the next step.

 

[Isa Khan]

16 fighters will never be enough. Probably best if we stop going for twin engine fighter. A country riddled with corruption, bureaucracy which can't maintain economic stability, mainly relies on RMG export and remittance and fails to provide enough budget to BAF should stick to cheaper, cost effective single engine fighter. We're not invading anyone, what we need is good deterrence which we don't have now imo. Maintaining a single engine would be easier than expensive twin engine fighter.

Just look at BAF's history before Mig-29, all were single engine jet. Even Mig-29 wouldn't come if US approved F-16 then. Fighter like Gripen need less manpower, less maintenance and has short take-off and landing capability. We have several airstrips from WW2 so those can be useful for fighter like Gripen.

So a combo of Gripen/Upgraded FA-50/Hurjet MRF with European engine and J-10/customized FC-1 Blk 3 with Chinese engine and Turkish weapons could be sufficient for BAF. (Even F-16 Blk 60 will do) 32+32 combo should balance quantity, quality and geo-politics. Besides we should work for a single engine fighter to tackle future problem cause 5th gen fighters are expensive and most of them are twin engine. Plus these will come with more strings attached in future imo.

Just an idea. Try putting a competition among China, US, France, EU, Sweden, Korea and Turkey for MRCA program Phase-1 to get the best deal from the Chinese for J-10/FC-1. See how the West react. If it's still ok then commence MRCA program Phase-2 for a Western single engine fighter, consider offers from previous phase. No need to reveal that true intentions of these programs. Instead of achieving superiority with expensive twin engines, try achieving parity first with single engine while maintaining both quality and quantity. No need to go bankrupt for force modernization.

Like we said before, Myanmar isn't the only potential adversary here. Yes, China is supporting Myanmar. But there also some Western allies supporting that country. Once Myanmar issue is resolved the West will surely care more about Myanmar. The West will certainly take side with our neighbors if there is any conflict in future cause they are bigger countries than Bangladesh and have more resources with be more useful against China, Russia.

 

[Afif]

Yeah, if only BAF was competence and innovative enough for out of the box thinking and a new reform.

24 Gripen for more or less $3 billion would've been a better choice than 16 Eurofighter.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.businessworld.in/article/Sweden-s-Saab-Pitches-Gripen-Fighter-Aircraft-To-India-At-Half-The-Price-Paid-For-Rafale-/01-12-2021-413505&ved=2ahUKEwi35ojo147-AhVncGwGHdiJC4YQFnoECAwQAQ&usg=AOvVaw2A9RRcFl2Milfvsq3yXDnK

1. We could make two squadron with independent operational sctrucutre. Permanently assigned them at two different air bases (preferably at Dhaka and Chottogram)

2. And at war time we could easily disperse them at multiple bases and airfields. (Enhancing the survivability of the platform and increasing the operational flexibility, in the meantime maintaining the qualitative advantage with gripen)

However, what we are talking about above would require doctrinal changes not only for the BAF, but also for all warfighting forces across the spectrum.
Bacause in reality such single engine fighter would only be best suited for A2A or A2G/A2S missions at once per individual sorties.

A2A loadout With a single fuel tank under the main fuselage (like the picture below) to increase flight hour/airborne time for CAP.

Or like this one for mainly A2G

Even though gripen technically can perform both A2A and A2G in single sortie but it is practically insufficient for a single engine light fighter. (As it won't be able to maintain 4 BVR missiles while performing dual mission in single sortie)
Especially when we are planning to go against numerically superior adversary while relying only on the qualitative age.

However, when it comes to the Eurofighter, it can effectively carry out both A2A A2G mission in single sortie somewhat sufficiently thanks to its twin engine and 14 hard point.

Changing those two fuel tanks under the wing with two NSM/JSM or scalp while adding one under the main fuselage (like the picture below)

And this is advantageous considering our Numerical limitation.

For example, in case of a conflict with Mayanmar two BAF typhoon can take off and perform deep strike/Anti ship strike while simultaneously be completely ready for CAP and A2A engagement with over the bay of bengal or at our south-eastern airspace, all in relative sufficiency in a single sortie.


Also, after receiving warning from our early warning radars about approaching potential enemy aircrafts, it is tactically time critical to climb up to the higher altitude, given our uncomfortably small Airspace and lack of strategic depth.
Specially when we will deploy some of fighters at Chottogram or Coz bazar. And twin engine jet, more specifically Eurofighter (which one of the few aircrafts that can climb up vertically) is very ideal for that.

Unlike Gripen which has quite a low thrust to weight ratio.


So, in a nutshell with single engine fighter BAF A2G/A2S strike capability would become limited, as they would likely to require escorts.

If we want BAF to become a dedicated force for Airspace denial role with single engine platforms, ( which would be a very sound strategy considering all the aspects ) that would require a revaluation of army and navy's dependency on BAF for deep strike and anti ship missions.

The question is can they do achieve those without too much dependency on BAF?

I would say yes, specially for navy. Our new frigates+new submarines ( +preferably 2/3 costal batteries ) would be sufficient enough even without air forces A2S support.

However, for army that would be more complicated.
But in my opinion, we should invest in type-A (like khan) and type-b MLRS (like TRG-300) capability to strike targets behind enemy lines. ( similar to how Ukraine did )

And this is how BAF can rightfully focus on its main strategic objective, which would be Airspace denial.

However, it would require doctrinal changes across the all spectrum.
Which is unlikely to happen.

@F-6 enthusiast Bro, what is your thoughts?

 

[PutinBro]

Relations between the govts of Sweden and Bangladesh are very cold due to certain reasons.This combined with the stupid arms export regulations of Sweden is the reason why gripen has less chance compared to other alternatives.SAAB rarely gets the support from their government compared to say...Dassault.

Gripen-E/F will likely not find any more export customers.

 

[F-6 enthusiast]

24 Gripen for more or less $3 billion would've been a better choice than 16 Eurofighter.

Unfortunately the Gripen will not be selected for political reasons.

Yeah, if only BAF was competence and innovative enough for out of the box thinking and a new reform.

24 Gripen for more or less $3 billion would've been a better choice than 16 Eurofighter.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.businessworld.in/article/Sweden-s-Saab-Pitches-Gripen-Fighter-Aircraft-To-India-At-Half-The-Price-Paid-For-Rafale-/01-12-2021-413505&ved=2ahUKEwi35ojo147-AhVncGwGHdiJC4YQFnoECAwQAQ&usg=AOvVaw2A9RRcFl2Milfvsq3yXDnK

1. We could make two squadron with independent operational sctrucutre. Permanently assigned them at two different air bases (preferably at Dhaka and Chottogram)

2. And at war time we could easily disperse them at multiple bases and airfields. (Enhancing the survivability of the platform and increasing the operational flexibility, in the meantime maintaining the qualitative advantage with gripen)

However, what we are talking about above would require doctrinal changes not only for the BAF, but also for all warfighting forces across the spectrum.
Bacause in reality such single engine fighter would only be best suited for A2A or A2G/A2S missions at once per individual sorties.

View attachment 55760

A2A loadout With a single fuel tank under the main fuselage (like the picture below) to increase flight hour/airborne time for CAP.

Or like this one for mainly A2G

View attachment 55761

Even though gripen technically can perform both A2A and A2G in single sortie but it is practically insufficient for a single engine light fighter. (As it won't be able to maintain 4 BVR missiles while performing dual mission in single sortie)
Especially when we are planning to go against numerically superior adversary while relying only on the qualitative age.

However, when it comes to the Eurofighter, it can effectively carry out both A2A A2G mission in single sortie somewhat sufficiently thanks to its twin engine and 14 hard point.

View attachment 55762

Changing those two fuel tanks under the wing with two NSM/JSM or scalp while adding one under the main fuselage (like the picture below)

View attachment 55763

And this is advantageous considering our Numerical limitation.

For example, in case of a conflict with Mayanmar two BAF typhoon can take off and perform deep strike/Anti ship strike while simultaneously be completely ready for CAP and A2A engagement with over the bay of bengal or at our south-eastern airspace, all in relative sufficiency in a single sortie.


Also, after receiving warning from our early warning radars about approaching potential enemy aircrafts, it is tactically time critical to climb up to the higher altitude, given our uncomfortably small Airspace and lack of strategic depth.
Specially when we will deploy some of fighters at Chottogram or Coz bazar. And twin engine jet, more specifically Eurofighter (which one of the few aircrafts that can climb up vertically) is very ideal for that.

Unlike Gripen which has quite a low thrust to weight ratio.


So, in a nutshell with single engine fighter BAF A2G/A2S strike capability would become limited, as they would likely to require escorts.

If we want BAF to become a dedicated force for Airspace denial role with single engine platforms, ( which would be a very sound strategy considering all the aspects ) that would require a revaluation of army and navy's dependency on BAF for deep strike and anti ship missions.

The question is can they do achieve those without too much dependency on BAF?

I would say yes, specially for navy. Our new frigates+new submarines ( +preferably 2/3 costal batteries ) would be sufficient enough even without air forces A2S support.

However, for army that would be more complicated.
But in my opinion, we should invest in type-A (like khan) and type-b MLRS (like TRG-300) capability to strike targets behind enemy lines. ( similar to how Ukraine did )

And this is how BAF can rightfully focus on its main strategic objective, which would be Airspace denial.

However, it would require doctrinal changes across the all spectrum.
Which is unlikely to happen.

@F-6 enthusiast Bro, what is your thoughts?

Let's not forget AWACS. we will need at least 2 of them the Russia-Ukraine war has proven the need for tail assets.
with 3 billion USD we can get J-10s + AWACS + Transport aircraft from China (Y-20?) instead of buying 16 hangar queens which will cost an arm and a leg to maintain and run.

 

[rai456]

Relations between the govts of Sweden and Bangladesh are very cold due to certain reasons.This combined with the stupid arms export regulations of Sweden is the reason why gripen has less chance compared to other alternatives.SAAB rarely gets the support from their government compared to say...Dassault.

Gripen-E/F will likely not find any more export customers.

Never understood the hype about the Griphen-E/F. It uses lots of American parts including the engine so it is still vulnerable to American export controls.

The F-16 Block 70 is also still a bigger plane with higher range and payload. The Americans also have better avionics and radar tech than the Europeans. The F-16 is probably cheaper and the thousands of F-16s in service around the world means that spare parts aren't hard to come by.

 

[F-6 enthusiast]

@Cabatli_TR when Mr Kotil says ''our missiles'' does he mean Air-Air missiles ?

HÜRJET-Advanced Jet Trainer/ Light attack aircraft

Tusas did work on ther PR....

defencehub.live

may be we should look into the possibility of replacing our F-7s with something more affordable like FA-50 or Hurjet (maybe get some workshare) in addition to BVRAAM missiles and strike missiles like SOM/Cakir while MRCA deals mainly with A-A?
@Afif

 

[Afif]

@Cabatli_TR when Mr Kotil says ''our missiles'' does he mean Air-Air missiles ?

HÜRJET-Advanced Jet Trainer/ Light attack aircraft

Tusas did work on ther PR....

defencehub.live

may be we should look into the possibility of replacing our F-7s with something more affordable like FA-50 or Hurjet (maybe get some workshare) in addition to BVRAAM missiles and strike missiles like SOM/Cakir while MRCA deals mainly with A-A?
@Afif

@F-6 enthusiast Bro, even though this idea of yours economically feasible, (also, capability wise hurjet block 20 equipped with MURAD Aesa and Gokdogan/gokhan BVRM sounds attractive) but to be honest, this would be another half solution, Again.
Like we did with 16 F-16 that we bought in 2013. (I mean, who fuck is dumb enough to buy second gen planes in 2010s. They said, not to worry, it is only a temporary solution.)

Given the fact that, whatever option we choose to replace F-7s with, is gonna stay in service for next 30 years or so, it has to be a full solution this time. (Even if we face delay and budget issue, so be it)

And performance wise (with all of its excellence) Hurjet is a light combat aircraft, which probably wouldn't meet our requirements in 2030s and 2040s.

 

[yf120]

@F-6 enthusiast Bro, even though this idea of yours economically feasible, (also, capability wise hurjet block 20 equipped with MURAD Aesa and Gokdogan/gokhan BVRM sounds attractive) but to be honest, this would be another half solution, Again.
Like we did with 16 F-16 that we bought in 2013. (I mean, who fuck is dumb enough to buy second gen planes in 2010s. They said, not to worry, it is only a temporary solution.)

Given the fact that, whatever option we choose to replace F-7s with, is gonna stay in service for next 30 years or so, it has to be a full solution this time. (Even if we face delay and budget issue, so be it)

And performance wise (with all of its excellence) Hurjet is a light combat aircraft, which probably wouldn't meet our requirements in 2030s and 2040s.

I was pretty sure that we were getting J-10 back then, but the rumors were that the election and other regional political influences changed the decision to take another batch of F7s. I think you probably know what I'm talking about. We were stopped from getting the F-16 25 years ago, and now the J-10C is facing the same reality.

BTW, don't we already have the Yak-130 light combat aircraft? Now why would we need the Hurjet? Those Yak-130 and M-346 Master are kind of similar, and we heard software can be updated to M-346 and funny thing is here Yak-130s are better than those f-7s. On the other hand, FA-50 looks like a good solution

 

[Isa Khan]

So anyone think there's any possibility left for American fighters or EFT in this economic crisis and after what US and EU did?

 

[Afif]

So anyone think there's any possibility left for American fighters or EFT in this economic crisis and after what US and EU did?

US fighters? No. (And there wasn't any practical chance to begin with)

EFT? Yes.
They will wait until the crisis is over and economy is more normalized. (Probably around 2025.) Also, EU didn't do anything over the top yet.

Didn't you previously thought, BAF already chose the aircraft? My instinct is also same.

 

[Isa Khan]

Didn't you previously thought, BAF already chose the aircraft? My instinct is also same.

EU also dragged GSP+ facility in this matter which is completely irrelevant. After what British high commissioner said, EFT still isn't final. After seeing some new developments either China is back in this project or may still have chance. Looks like EFT is making offer for more than 5 years.

 

[Afif]

After seeing some new developments either China is back in this project or may still have chance.

Could you specify little more?

 

[Isa Khan]

Could you specify little more?

Current problems plus one project was canceled and other saw new plan, few got stalled. Lets say there's financial problem and i think there's outside pressure and corruption is involved. (I'll share news later) Also existing facility and slow development is causing hindrance. There's no guarantee when economic crisis will be over, how many EFT we can buy, will it be sufficient and can we maintain them. Overall J-10 is still most logical option. Sooner or later we'll have to buy that anyway. Better get a deal like Pakistan and go for EFT later. It seems BD is facing some serious trouble.

 

[F-6 enthusiast]

US fighters? No. (And there wasn't any practical chance to begin with)

If BAL is removed from power things will change

EFT? Yes.
They will wait until the crisis is over and economy is more normalized. (Probably around 2025.) Also, EU didn't do anything over the top yet.

We simply cannot afford to Purchase and Run EFT, has too much political baggage (See Germany and UK)
It is just a pipe dream. There will never be an EFT flying with a BAF roundel