Thunder at 100 feet: Flying the Rafale

[Will]

Septimus is at it again? Hope he's getting his bread buttered on the right side with the amount of effort he puts into praising and defending all things American

[Viv S]

Bigger radars mean more cooling, which means power management issues and less space for other equipment (like larger-calibre guns with more ammo). More moving parts means more to maintain, and also more to go wrong at the worst time (which is why a fixed refueling probe is truly a beautiful thing). Simple-minded accounting of T/R arrays is sooooooo incredibly asinine, I'm not even going to......

The radar's size makes little difference to the gun armament. With regard, to fixed refueling probes being a beautiful thing - using that same logic, the PAK-FA shouldn't carry its munitions internally either - since the weapons bay doors could stop functioning at the wrong time. With regard to the radar size, when you have two radars featuring comparable hardware (in this case the T/R modules), as a rule of thumb the larger one will have a higher power output and consequently a higher range. Also it increases the aircraft's multi functionality - it can have a channel dedicated to EW and communications.

Also; having sleeker lines and a higher top speed, also means you'll have a higher landing speed....

Marginal effect, unless its a carrier aircraft.

I thought it was a critically important aspect of the MMRCA, the ability to land on a roadway, and with minimal support from one truck and a limited ground crew, be able to refuel, pivot and take-off again within X minutes. This is a necessary wartime capability added-in because airfields are prime targets during wartime, and the MMRCA winner had to be able to continue the fight, even with degraded support facilities. From what I understand, the Rafale's incredibly low landing speed (which also gives it an advantage in naval operations from carriers), makes it the easiest plane to land on an Indian road (which I am sure everyone can appreciate is no mean feat!). This is the kind of capability that wins wars, not stupid marketing claims like the ability to spot a missile launch 1200 km away (and good luck taking a shot at it from an F-35).

Its a necessary capability for the Swedish Air Force when facing a Goliath-like Soviet military. Operating from civilian roads its the air equivalent of guerilla warfare. The Indian Air Force on the other hand trains to and intends to take its adversaries head-on. Airbases usually have at the very least a battery of SAMs protecting, radars to provide early warning and two or more of aircraft on QRA. And while runways can be repaired (and were routinely repaired in previous wars), civilians areas quite simply do not have the logistics and C4I access to maintain anywhere near the operational tempo that a regular base provides.

Never mind the F-35..... I believe the program may already be doomed. (Long story short: those who live in 'Partner Nations' have been receiving a lot of information via the press lately that indicates significant political and military backlash against the F-35; with even American service branches publically weighing other options). Here in Canada, where the role of the F-35 was supposed to involve a lot of 'Arctic Patrol', the single engine is (finally) being seen as a major weakness of the F-35, and there is now a government committee reviewing the no-tender awarding of a contract for the F-35. It is possible the committee will conclude the choice needs to be revisited.

The US has no alternative to the F-35 which is why they'll do and spend whatever it takes to achieve their program's objectives. Canada on the other hand lives under the American security blanket and it makes little practical difference even if they bought the JF-17 instead of the F-35. As for the other partner nations, they had the choice of the EF/Rafale, and whether its Japan, Australia, South Korea, Turkey or Israel, they're all firmly in the F-35 camp. Its already set to be the highest exported fighter since the F-16.

In the Indian context: If you look at the pitiful range of the F-35, and the picayne warload, never mind the fact that it only has one engine, the climb rate and turning radius of an Airbus, and significant interoperability issues with other platforms in the USAF itself (never mind the IAF, with its extensive inventory of Russian aircraft);

The F-35's range on internal fuel is comparable to the EF and Rafale. As far payload, while the air-to-air payload even when modified with 6 AMRAAMs isn't as good as the PAK-FA or F-22, it certainly better than any 'dirty' payload carrying fourth gen fighter. And since there's still no non-US munition in the SDB class, it can still can carry a respectable 8 PGMs internally. For the kind of 'first day strikes' that the F-117 used to perform, it remains the best option on the market.

altogether, I believe that all of the projections for 2500 copies of F-35 by the year 2035, these projections are HOGWASH. The Americans don't have the money for it, and more importantly, neither do they have the enemies for it either.

The F-35 has to replace the F-15, F-16, F-18, A-10, AV-8B and the EA-6B. Its going to take time, its going to take money but it will happen. Maybe they'll downsize it to 2000 units with increase the UCAV inventory, all the same once the economies of scale kick in at full production, its bound to be a cost effective aircraft.

Not to mention; until someone builds a 'stealth refueling tanker aircraft', the F-35 will never be able to do anything resembling 'deep penetration'; which is very obviously the critical warfighting role that will be assigned to many IAF Rafales, each of which will be able to carry 8-9 tonnes per sortie.

Depends on which country you're going deep into. And a brief look at the PLA's ground based and aerial assets will tell you that IAF's Rafales aren't going on a deep incursion into Chinese airspace with 8-9 tonnes any time soon.

[member_20453]

Rafale needs about 12hours of maintenance per flight hour while EF is at 9hrs. So even the slightly higher maintenance requirement of EF's far superior radar will still allow the EF to be maintained faster. Captor-E certainly is a gen ahead quite clearly, it allows for much longer detection ranges, ability to detect and track a higher number of targets and do so at angles that RBE-2 can't. RBE-2 clearly can't even compare to the APG-80 of block 60s.

Whether you use a speed of mach 2+ or a higher cieling of over 60K feet in combat is not the point, the point is Rafale can't fly as fast or as high as the EF. Just as the EF can't fly as far the Rafale in terms of range. EF has a retractable probe, Raffy doesn't. EF has better G-suits and a far more rugged FBW which Raffy doesn't. Raffy has a had a higher crash for a smaller fleet size .

For Vishnu to say its the best aircraft out there due to a bone chilling 100 feet automated flight is not accurate. Though I envy him It is a great aircraft and IAF too says it is a great aircraft but it won due to a price difference, had EF been the cheaper one and the winner, IAF would say the same thing. Both aircraft were shortlisted, both have their pros and cons and IAF can find a way to use either to their max potential, IAF is known for innovation in tactics. As far as I am concerned they are both winners, Rafale just turned out to be cheaper. for now lets just stick to that.

EF is IMO a better aircraft. I certainly do not disqualify what the Raffy can do, but to call it the best aircraft available in the world is what I do not agree with. Looking at our potential enemies who possess extensive ground infrastructure, expensive French or EU weapons are just not adequate and far too expensive per unit. My call has always been about volumes and sadly only Russia and US the ones who can deliver volumes quickly. With US weapons Raffy is a whole different beast.

A simple comparison can make the point, would you rather have a Raffy armed with 6 AASMs and take out 6 moving targets at once or would rather strap the same aircraft with 6 CBU-97 SFW and have the potential to take out about 240 moving targets. Or would rather carry upto 16 SDB in a single mission and take out 16 moving targets.

SFW, JDAM/L/ER, Paveways, SDB, AAGRM are more than enough to deal with the heavy ground force that our enemies possess. A few thousand AASM is complete waste in comparison to a few thousands of other alternatives easily available at far lower costs.

Some may call the ability of the F-35 to detect enemy missile launches at over 1200 silly and video gamish but last I heard there were hundreds of rocket launchers deployed by our enemies against us. Just because an AWACS detects 100 incoming hostiles doesn't mean the awacs will go into hunter/ killer mode firing off A2A missiles rather it redirects assets towards the threats. Same way a F-35 detecting such launches will direct countering assets towards such threats. Finding rocket launch positions deep behind enemy lines is one of the toughest things to do. One can continue to debate how capable that jet really is on and on but it will carve itself a place in aviation when it's all ready. It's proposed eletronic capabilties are significant and would be foolhardy just to undermine them as video gamish. It's radar if indeed turns out to be as shown in the marketing videos would a generation ahead of anything for atleast a decade. It is also really silly to call the USAF's idea of air warfare video gamish, they fly more combat missions per month than we flew in two decades. May say they never faced a serious enemy, true but decades of combat experience is still valuable experience. It is still madness to go up against the US military might. I just think years of wasteful distance between India and US is not needed, fortunately things are changing. We need eachother.

I am not an American or a paid agent, no I don't get my bread buttered, American bread sucks, French bread i admit is the best, it's fresher and tastes better

[Vishnu]

For Vishnu to say its the best aircraft out there due to a bone chilling 100 feet automated flight is not accurate. Though I envy him

Hey ... I never said its the best aircraft out there ! There is enough out there to suggest that EACH and everyone of the MMRCA competitors could well have been regarded the "best." The folks deciding this are the IAF and this is a plane that meets its requirements. So thats that.

[Rahul M]

Vishnu's favoured MRCA candidate was NOT the raffy, if my memory serves right.

[Vishnu]

Vishnu's favoured MRCA candidate was NOT the raffy, if my memory serves right.

Heh heh heh.

[Viv S]

del

[Viv S]

Viv, you're changing your argument now.

You originally said that India is paying $1.25 billion that translated to 5 MICAs per Mirage. Now, that was a fallacious claim of the kind that a SAAB marketing guy would make. its actually $1.23 million, i.e. $20 million less than you quoted, and that was for a total of 10 MICAs per Mirage, which is not a bad reserve.

Now, since the MICA-IR and MICA-EM are essentially the same missile except for the warhead, it is upto the IAF to choose what numbers of MICA-EM it wants out of 450. And, if you had claimed that only 5 MICA-EMs were to be bought for the Mirage fleet, then you should have also only quoted half the price of the $1.23 million price for the entire deal. You instead made it look like the IAF would get only 250 MICAs for $1.23 billion. Its not that the MICA isn't an expensive missile, but you're again making up the claim of its Pk being lower. The Pk isn't affected by the max range of the missile and on the contrary, I've only read that the MICA has a very high Pk (although not really proven in combat).

Well couple of things here.

Firstly, I disagree with many others here on the MICA-IR utility at BVR ranges. While the R-23T did employ an IR seeker, it still remains the only other BVR missile to do so. MICA-IR will primarily be for close combat and maybe a fall back when the EMs have been expended.

Secondly, with regard to the MICA's Pk, I'm sure within its NEZ, its as lethal a missile as any other, but that figure will drop with range and at say 50-60km, the AMRAAM, Meteor and R-77 will be a lot more effective.

Thirdly, with regard to the number of MICAs ordered, I suppose I should have specified that I was talking about the EM variant. That said, I might be wrong here and correct me if I am, but generally most fighters fly with a combination of 8 BVR+4 WVR (for air superiority) or 4 BVR+2 WVR (for multirole), though sometimes when flying with fuel tanks you see a 6+2 loadout. Which why I assumed it would be a mix of 300 MICA-EMs and 150 MICA-IR including training rounds. In any case, what was knocking around in the back of my mind was the PAF's order for 500 Aim-120C5s (and 200 Aim-9Ms) for $285 million back in 2007.

Besides, when speaking to an F-15 pilot recently, I enquired about what the distance for a positive ID was in most engagements they had during exercises and he claimed that it varied in a huge range. It could be as low as 5 km on certain days due to atmospheric affects and the size of the opposing aircraft, or could be as high as 50 km on certain days. Now, 50 km falls well within the range of the MICA and even the Derby, something that explained why an Air Force like the Israeli AF, which has more air combat experience than most other Air Forces must've been alright with the 50 km range of the Derby BVR missile. Any longer range really may not translate into that big an advantage due to issues with positive ID and the fear of fratricide or worse.

Well, Israeli fighter aircraft have been equipped with the AMRAAM since the late 90s IIRC. Coming to your talk with the F-15 pilot, its interesting and I'd like to know more. Was he talking about large scale exercises (like Red Flag) or standard 1v1, 2v2 training missions? 50km seems much too small for a F-16 let alone a F-15. Perhaps he was talking about a NCTR type fighter ID, not just a hostile/friendly classification? I'd imagine with high speed data-links and rapidly developing C4I as well as IFF systems, fratricide should be a far less challenging than say.. a decade back.

[member_20453]

I guess Positive ID is important if the aircraft is an unknown, is it needed to have a positive ID when the IFF confirms an incoming to be for instance a Paki f-16 and the enemy has clearly violated airspace and is non responsive to calls to turn back. What is the standard procedure in the IAF regarding this?

[Sancho]

Hi Vishnu, thanks for your very interesting report on your experience with Rafale, but I have some questions too!

Were you able to get some infos on Rafales performance during the trials in India, or during exercises with IAF MKIs? Did the French pilots share their views on these things?
Rafale is said to be able to Supercruise with a single supersonic fuel tank and MICAs, did you experienced that as well?

Hey ... I never said its the best aircraft out there ! There is enough out there to suggest that EACH and everyone of the MMRCA competitors could well have been regarded the "best." The folks deciding this are the IAF and this is a plane that meets its requirements. So thats that.

From your experience with other fighters, can you tell us where you see advantages for the Rafale in IAF?

[Sancho]

By 2015 that situation will probably favour the EF

Hey Viv S, still the same old EF supporter, with the same arguments right?

As other members already stated the EF will get AESA only if an export customer (like the Saudis) buys it, since the partners ordered only T3A fighters with Captor M and won't go for additional T3B. The radar development is still just industry funded, because if no export customer buys it, the AESA is only needed with MLU to replace Captor M from the older EFs.
On the other side, the Rafale offered for India will be upgraded in all fields, radar, engine, optronics and SPECTRA as well, so it will remain the most capable fighter available in 2015/16 for IAF.

Which why I assumed it would be a mix of 300 MICA-EMs and 150 MICA-IR including training rounds.

French M2K-5s carrierd 3 x IR and 3 x EMs in Libya when they was fielded in A2A roles, to escort Mirage 2000Ds. The fact that you can use both versions in WVR and BVR makes this to a big advantage to comparable fighters, since you have 4 more WVR shots and 2 more BVR than an LCA for example. The downside is, that this makes the missile also more costly than others, especially than other IR missiles.
For Rafale and the possible procurement timeline of IAF, we will see Meteor as the prime BVR weapon for sure.

[Viv S]

By 2015 that situation will probably favour the EF

Hey Viv S, still the same old EF supporter, with the same arguments right?

Right back at you.

Arguments still valid though.

As other members already stated the EF will get AESA only if an export customer (like the Saudis) buys it, since the partners ordered only T3A fighters with Captor M and won't go for additional T3B. The radar development is still just industry funded, because if no export customer buys it, the AESA is only needed with MLU to replace Captor M from the older EFs.

Its the other way round. They're hoping is that a developed AESA will lead to further export orders. The EF can have a developed AESA before full scale production commences. For now, new builds will only be supplied to Saudi Arabia and Oman outside of the consortium. In addition, the UK still has its parallel contract with Selex in place, though I believe its mainly to develop the EW and comm aspects of the radar. The EFs will be retrofitted as a part of the larger MLU, probably near the end of the decade.

On the other side, the Rafale offered for India will be upgraded in all fields, radar, engine, optronics and SPECTRA as well, so it will remain the most capable fighter available in 2015/16 for IAF.

Well IIRC, the EJ-200 already had a higher TWR and a lower SFC than the M88-2. I don't believe any upgrades were needed to stay current. While I don't know about the PIRATE, the DASS certainly is being upgraded, right now.

French M2K-5s carrierd 3 x IR and 3 x EMs in Libya when they was fielded in A2A roles, to escort Mirage 2000Ds. The fact that you can use both versions in WVR and BVR makes this to a big advantage to comparable fighters, since you have 4 more WVR shots and 2 more BVR than an LCA for example. The downside is, that this makes the missile also more costly than others, especially than other IR missiles.
For Rafale and the possible procurement timeline of IAF, we will see Meteor as the prime BVR weapon for sure.

Actually that was in context of the Mirage 2000's munition contract. Well we'll have to agree to disagree about the IR variant's usefulness at BVR ranges. In any case, my biggest gripe with the MICA is its cost. Especially compared to the AMRAAM. And I have a feeling the Meteor isn't going to be a very different case. When comes to cost, the scale of production matters, and its simply very hard to compete with the Americans on that score. Its the same when it comes to the AASM vis-a-vis the SDB or even Paveway IV. Hopefully, we can get a deep ToT for the Meteor, integrate across the IAF's fighter platforms, and license produce it at a domestic establishment.

[member_20292]

arrey ...Vishnu s favourite was the gripen iirc. maybe since he has ridden them all he has a good idea of how they handle ... he probably had the best. flying experience on it


Vishnu ...what other fighters have you ridden on.....how's the indian fleet to fly on??

[Karan M]

Actually that was in context of the Mirage 2000's munition contract. Well we'll have to agree to disagree about the IR variant's usefulness at BVR ranges.

Why? What exactly makes the IR variant "non useful" at BVR ranges? Its a unique missile and the only one of its kind since it incorporates mid course guidance + INS, a combination which the R-27 TE lacked, making the latter more of a glorified long range WVR missile.

In contrast, the Mica-IR has a modern, ECM resistant IR seeker, making it a deadly threat to opponent aircraft as it does not provide any warning about going active, and can effectively be "blocked" only by a DIRCM. MBDA/Safran's long history of design & development mean that its not likely to be easily jammed by flares either.

Apart from the PAK-FA there is no fighter out there with a DIRCM system intended as part of its regular fit.

The Mica-IR is arguably the silver bullet in the Mirage 2000/Rafale's loadout, a unique, one of its kind system, which no other fighter today has.

The EF can have a developed AESA before full scale production commences. For now, new builds will only be supplied to Saudi Arabia and Oman outside of the consortium. In addition, the UK still has its parallel contract with Selex in place, though I believe its mainly to develop the EW and comm aspects of the radar. The EFs will be retrofitted as a part of the larger MLU, probably near the end of the decade.

But isn't the basic point correct, that only the Rafale has a fully funded AESA committed for already. In contrast, the EF AESA path is still WIP.

[Karan M]

Firstly, I disagree with many others here on the MICA-IR utility at BVR ranges. While the R-23T did employ an IR seeker, it still remains the only other BVR missile to do so.

The R27 T/ET variants also employ IR seekers but comparisons with the Mica are facile, because they have lower G limits, their seekers are of an older gen (scaled up R-60MK seekers) and they lack MCG+INS for accurate long range shots. In contrast, the Mica is a fully specc'ed BVR missile. The seeker + self contained cooling system is capable enough that Rafale's are using it for extending IR FOV as a quasi IRST.

The only missile ergo bad logic does not work. When it is fielded, the Meteor will be the only ramjet powered BVR missile known to be in active service. Does that make it a negative..hardly.

MICA-IR will primarily be for close combat and maybe a fall back when the EMs have been expended.

That's just speculation without any evidence to suggest the same. In contrast, MBDA the missile manufacturer, openly positions them as BVR missiles.

http://www.mbda-systems.com/mediagaller ... ground.pdf

A “full MICA” configuration on an aircraft such as Rafale gives a very flexible and high BVR fire power for Air Superiority during all kind of missions: combat air patrol, sweep, deep strike, recce, maritime operations. MICA missile in BVR mode introduces a new way of waging air combat by offering multi-target capability at extended ranges with the two interoperable guidance systems to hamper enemy counter measures. All carried
(EM) RF or IR MICA missiles are fully BVR, being operable with or without data link target designation updating.

Secondly, with regard to the MICA's Pk, I'm sure within its NEZ, its as lethal a missile as any other, but that figure will drop with range and at say 50-60km, the AMRAAM, Meteor and R-77 will be a lot more effective.

The exact NEZ of all these missiles is classified, so to say that one will be dramatically more than that of the other...nobody knows.

Further, tactics matter. Passive intercepts with datalink cued Micas should be possible, enabling more subtle methods than face to face BVR volleys..if such methods are used, raw range will not be the key discriminant, but ensuring that the missile is launched well within a NEZ will be, and an advanced IR seeker equipped missile is more likely to succeed as versus RF missiles which are constantly facing better/more advanced Self Defence EW suites

Net, NEZ may not depend as much as on a long range motor but the seeker. IR equipped missiles in todays world are near sure shots, with RF missiles at a disadvantage as versus counter systems tech. In which case, the NEZ for a Mica IR may actually be a NEZ as versus a notional NEZ for a RF missile

[Karan M]

Rafale needs about 12hours of maintenance per flight hour while EF is at 9hrs.

Source?

Captor-E certainly is a gen ahead quite clearly, it allows for much longer detection ranges, ability to detect and track a higher number of targets and do so at angles that RBE-2 can't.

Evidence for bold part please. Besides which to talk of CAPTOR-E is somewhat speculative, since the radar AFAIK is not even fully funded for certain service yet
And merely having more raw range and a gimballed antenna system does not make one radar a gen ahead of the other. Per most published reports, both the Thales and Selex radar make use of similar gen TRMs derived from a common ancestor TD program and are firmly of the same generation.

RBE-2 clearly can't even compare to the APG-80 of block 60s.

UAE asked for range to be enhanced and we dont know what are the specs of the IAF specific unit.

Whether you use a speed of mach 2+ or a higher cieling of over 60K feet in combat is not the point, the point is Rafale can't fly as fast or as high as the EF.

The first is the point. Random specs with marginal benefit don't really matter.

Just as the EF can't fly as far the Rafale in terms of range.

Which is a problem and one with tangible impact.

EF has a retractable probe, Raffy doesn't.

Irrelevant.

EF has better G-suits and a far more rugged FBW which Raffy doesn't.

On what basis does the EF have a more rugged FBW? G-suits can be introduced irrespective of platform in most cases.

Raffy has a had a higher crash for a smaller fleet size .

Naval operations are invariably more demanding than those of land based ops.

It is still madness to go up against the US military might. I just think years of wasteful distance between India and US is not needed, fortunately things are changing. We need eachother.

Why are you bringing up all this stuff here? Who is talking of going against the US?

[Kartik]

The FSO offers outstanding resolution on ground targets. We didn't track the L-39 and Mirage 2000 accompanying us using the FSO. I can tell you, in having experienced the optronic pod on the F-16 IN that tracking targets at BVR ranges for ID purposes is certainly possible. We tracked an F/A-18 on a reciprocal heading from Yelahanka at clear BVR ranges on the pod.

Are you referring to the F-16 Block 60's internal FLIR mounted on the nose? AFAIK, it lacks the TV channel of the FSO.

Thanks for the reply though. I've read that at 20k feet, the FSO's IR sensor can detect aerial targets as far away as 130km and the TV channel can detect targets out to 45 km (seems very high). Both figures seem to be very optimistic. This IR image of an F-22 for instance is taken at 1 NM

The recce pod is INCREDIBLE and I was provided a demonstration of its capabilites by intel officers attached to the 1/7 Rafale Squadron at St Dizier. They showcased two things:

1. An image of Paris taken by a Rafale in a single pass at a range of 60 kms. The resolution was good enough for me to NEARLY see the number plates of cars on the road.
2. An image of a forest in Libya with a number of "anamolies" in the image. By zooming in, these could be identified EASILY as 6-7 T-55 tanks.

Good nugget here ! So, if the IAF does buy Areos recce pods then there must be a good reason for it, i.e. great resolution. Were those Synethic Aperture Radar images that you were shown?

Didn't ask. Let me try and enquire.

Thanks again Vishnu.

[John]

In contrast, the Mica-IR has a modern, ECM resistant IR seeker, making it a deadly threat to opponent aircraft as it does not provide any warning about going active, and can effectively be "blocked" only by a DIRCM. MBDA/Safran's long history of design & development mean that its not likely to be easily jammed by flares either.

Python-5 should offer same capabilities, it has newer seeker than Mica-IR and much higher kill probability it might have smaller engagement range than Mica but max range for Python-5 is still classified so the gap could be pretty small.

[Karan M]

The Mica is a bit heavier at 8 kg more but more importantly, as I recall the Python-5 has a lot of control surfaces which significantly add to drag, reducing its range but making it very maneuverable. The Israelis claimed that their 18 control surface approach was better than (or equal to using TVC). The Mica in contrast depends on TVC for end game maneuverability and has a relatively low drag streamlined airframe. Even so, you are right that Python's range is likely to be in the 30 km class or thereabouts as versus just 20 km+ and that its seeker is stated to be ahead of that in the Mica.
However, I can't seem to find any references to the Python having a datalink receiver. Without that, its clearly intended for WVR engagements and not true BVR level engagements.

The missile does have significant potential though. As I recall, there were also statements that the Derby was a "reuse" of the Python motor with a more BVR style airframe + active RF seeker, INS+MCG, giving it a 60 km class range (same level as Mica).

Refer:
Derby http://www.rafael.co.il/marketing/SIP_S ... /0/950.pdf
Python-5 http://www.rafael.co.il/marketing/SIP_S ... /1/921.pdf

[eklavya]

arrey ...Vishnu s favourite was the gripen iirc. maybe since he has ridden them all he has a good idea of how they handle ... he probably had the best. flying experience on it


Vishnu ...what other fighters have you ridden on.....how's the indian fleet to fly on??

Like Tiger, Vishnu started off riding the Swedish bird, but then decided to ride them all.

[SaiK]

I would expect any next gen IR seeker to incorporate terminal phase homing using laser designation.

The cost you pay should justify the complexity and assured kill factor even against advanced counter measures.

[darshand]

I would expect any next gen IR seeker to incorporate terminal phase homing using laser designation.

The cost you pay should justify the complexity and assured kill factor even against advanced counter measures.

I've never heard of any IR seeker using laser designation. Would like to know more. Do you have any links to how this system is supposed to work and the advantages?

[Vishnu]

Are you referring to the F-16 Block 60's internal FLIR mounted on the nose? AFAIK, it lacks the TV channel of the FSO.

Hey Kartik ... Was referring to the Sniper pod of the F-16 IN

Thanks.

[SaiK]

darshan, I did not word it correct, I should have said "aided by" on a conter-"conter-measure" move, when its seekers get jammed by the countering laser based jammer [assumption that it is laser based].

I meant the litening pod that would help., but comes with it is the intelligence needed to get corrections signals from the launcher. However, one might argue it could be guided by mmw but the scope of though is IR/counters.

example: litening air-air mode is done by AN-AAQ-28 slewing AIM-9M

[arthuro]

One thing that the EF supporter quickly forget is that the typhoon lost every single competitions when facing the rafale. It was always out first and/or deemed inferior.

-Korea
-Singapore
-Dutch evaluation
-Brazilian (did not even passed the RFI)
-Switzerland
-India

...And now first signs from malaysian media tell the same story : the typhoon is well behind and the rafale is the favorite.

Now the only argument is that we have to wait the "new typhoon"...That's a kind of desperate fanboy argument as :

-only the P1E is firmly contracted which brings minor (albeit useful) improvements.
-AESA RFP is just an RFP...which means that the four partner nations must agree together...Not only the radar architecture but the work share between selex and cassidian who both have different views on the AESA. Even Jon Lake admitted it could realistically never reach the 2015 entry service date. And then a nations has yet to commit buying it.
-with the exception of pave-way IV for P1E there is nothing contracted as far as further AtG weapon are concerned. And its not with a single 1000L that the typhoon will turn in a potent AtG striker with heavy ATG weapons (GBU-24, cruise missile etc)
I don't even talk about a true recce pod and anti-ship...

So it appears that typhoon roadmap is still uncertain at this point with less potential than the rafale as a multirole aircraft.
To play catch up with the rafale the required investment is huge...Several billions dollars to invest to become competitive and a big part of that bill is supposed to be paid buy an export customer even when your aircraft is already very expensive. In a time of budget constraints in europe you can already say goodbye to the "super typhoon" imagined by the fanboys...At best in a very distant future (circa 2020)...And don't expect TVC or even CFTs...At that time the rafale will head to a full MLU.

For the fraction of the money you need to spend on the typhoon to make it even reotely competitive you could bring the rafale to a far better level...with "if" you can dream a long time. Fact is the rafale is a mature multirole aircaft and it works now !

About malaysia cross post from key forum :

Exclusive report from Malaysia Local newspaper (chinapress Daily) for Malaysia Air-force MRCA purchase. report is in chinese language, i using Google translate .

Original link (chinese language)
http://www.chinapress.com.my/node/331793


Leading British-American. With multi-function role Rafale fighter look forward welcome to Malaysia.

Exclusive reports: Qiu Renjie

(KL7/1) in the Air Force to purchase 18 multi-role fighter program, the multi-role fighter of the French Dassault Rafale "(Rafale), success in all the candidate aircraft, becoming the most popular candidate for fighters, the British and U.S. warplanes left behind.

United States, France, Britain, Russia and Sweden are involved in the bid for our Air Force procurement of multi-role fighter program, the latest progress, the French fighter ahead, British and American fighters catch up.

Has one of the best fighters in the world known as the French "Rafale" Typhoon "(Typhoon), multi-role fighter and the U.S." Super Hornet "(Super Hornet) multi-role fighter mortal war.

A number of authoritative sources told Chinapress Daily pointed out that France is one of the most popular, the most promising candidate models, this is because the fighter operational assessment report or the French out of the economy contribute to the project, France is the most attractive.

The Government is currently promoting economic restructuring plan, economic conditions in France, in line with our government economic restructuring program to increase national employment opportunities, to help our nation's transition to high-income countries, at same time helping our country mastered the aerospace and high-tech skill.

British "typhoon" is not competitive

In addition, the sources pointed out that the recently touted in the local media, and exposure of British the Bae defense company "Typhoon" fighters, because they do not comply with the Air Force technical indicators, and economic feedback conditions, less than the conditions in France, had left behind by Rafale

As for the "Super Hornet" only temporarily "dark horse" of the potential to become the largest direct rival of the "Rafale".

Therefore, in the Battle of the Air Force multi-role fighter contract, the present pattern of 2 (rafale and Typhoon) with 1 Super Hornet battle of the war.

Our government attached considerable importance to the economic interests of feedback, so laden with the most outstanding fighter combat performance overall, "rafale", matched its economic feedback supporting, making it a dominant position.

India MMRCA decision will affected Malaysia decision

India in January 2012, select the 126 procurement French Rafale multi-role fighter, more or less, it will affect Malaysia's Air Force is also possible tendencies "gust".

This is because Malaysia's Air Force, and India had plenty of close cooperation between Malaysia's Air Force MiG fighter parts, India's support; India has also helped Malaysia's Air Force, training, Su-30MKM multi-role fighter pilots.

Air Force sources said that if our country chooses to "gust", then Malaysia and India, and cooperative relations will be able to continue at the same time, our select "rafale" India can also help our country, to provide technical support and staff training support.

Moreover, France is also willing to let India and Malaysia cooperation. As a result, allows our government to save a fee. "

It is worth mentioning is that when the Government of India announced the selection of the "Rafale", the Indian Air Force Chief of Staff Admiral Brown, just in our country have access, will meet with China's Air Force commander

France will be re-arranged "Rafale" to Malaysia for testing

French sources said France would be in the coming months, rearrange the Rafale multi-role fighter to come to our country, for testing.

Two Rafale fighters have held in December 2011, the Langkawi International Maritime Air Show; Therefore, if the "Rafale" come to Malaysia, it will be the "Rafale" 2nd visit to Malaysia.

Sources pointed out that the Rafale is equipped with "active electronically scanning phased-array radar (AESA)" Rafale "fighter.

The news that the last time the "Rafale" visit our country equipped with a passive phased-array radar (PESA).

"Active electronically scanning phased-array radar is a Malaysian Air Force's rules of engagement;, British Bae defense," Typhoon "fighters to wait until 2015 to begin testing their own AESA radar developed.

Official sources said, if Malaysia is now bought only available mechanical scanning radar "Typhoon", our country must spend extra money in the future to replace the AESA radar, this is simply not cost-effective.

Government consideration of national economic feedback

Because the Government has not yet made a final decision, the domestic suppliers of economic feedback can also be called the Compensation Scheme (offset) is inconvenient to make public.

However, the sources pointed out that French companies out of the economic conditions, or to let Malacca benefit because the aviation technology, the possibility will be settled in Malacca.

The sources said that the Frenchman had visited investigated Malacca, Malacca has related potential.

"But we also considered Perak, Malacca or Perak both possible

Sources in the Air Force multi-role fighter project, the Government has attached considerable importance to countries able to give feedback of what the economic benefits, thus promoting the country's economic transformation.

"At present, it seems the French conditions is quite attractive, because they bring economic benefits will be sufficient to push the high-income countries, in line with the policy of economic restructuring plan."

Sources said, As a result, when the government program budget for the purchase of new fighter, the government will be able to ensure that national economic interests and national defense interests, the same access to take into account.

Even with its smaller radar and even with the PESA radar the rafale was considered widely superior in AtA than the typhoon by the swiss evaluation...And the swiss praised the PESA radar quality.

Even with the PESA radar rafales can achieve very favorable exchange rate in BVR at a point that the RAF simply refuse to confront the rafale...

What about the RAF? The last exercice which opposed the two fighters was in September 2009. At Solenzara, the Rafale's EC-1/7 "Provence" inflicted a correction in combat gun (BFM) to the British Typhoons. Result: nine wins for only one defeat, and yet it was recorded by a young Rafale pilot. Few time after, BVR fights (beyond visual range), two against two, gave results largely favorable to the Rafale, according to French pilots who participated in the confrontation.

Scalded, the RAF has ,since then, refused any confrontation. During the recent visit of the Typhoon in Saint-Dizier, in early March, the British pilots purely and simply refused to be opposed to the Rafale. And next May 11, for a scheduled Rafale visit to Coningsby airbase, the RAF has indicated that none of its four Typhoon squadrons would be available for training ... By the way, this refusal has not prevented the British airmen to continue their "Rafale bashing" work in 2011, up to say to the press that during Operation Harmattan French fighters were unable to illuminate their own targets with the Damocles pod . A bad faith which swears notably with the will of reconciliation put forward by the staffs of both sides of the Channel.

http://www.air-cosmos.com/defense/rafal ... faits.html

At the end of the day typhoon supporters argument are only theoretical, hypothetic and over-simplistic. Facts tell a different story.

[member_20453]

Arthuro back again quoting a silly French magazine which is usually full of ****. Fact is on any given day EF can hold its own against the Typhoon and the proposed typhoon far superior to the currently available Rafale. The only reason it won in India is because it is cheaper, it was nearly kicked out well before trials if I remember correctly. Posting silly pics of the F-22 in its FSO, any aircraft with a proper IRST can do so. claiming kills only supported by fully biased French publications. Rafale is at best a good aircraft and yes the EF competing so far has never been equal, the proposed version for India is far more advanced than anything available out there except perhaps the International Super Hornet.

Lucky for the Rafale, unkil did have constraints in parting with tech, even our own ex-air chief himself has said US avionics and weapons were far superior to anything available. Besides the Rafale was literally dumped at prices far less than half of what was charged for them in France, probably even at a loss.

[eklavya]

IAF made a wise choice in opting for a cheaper and a more capable platform:

http://blogs.defensenews.com/farnboroug ... n-exports/

The AESA move is one of several steps underway to help address some of the capability issues that dogged the jet when it lost a multibillion-dollar face-off with Dassault Aviation’s Rafale for a large Indian order earlier this year.

One drawback, though, remains the reluctance of the four cash-strapped European partners to commit to series production at this stage.

Rafale gained the nod from India earlier this year to conduct final negotiations for the Asian nation’s multirole combat aircraft requirement after it beat Typhoon on price. Those price negotiations remain ongoing, leaving Eurofighter on the sidelines awaiting the opportunity to enter a new bid if Dassault fails to seal the deal.

Industry executives here said the sort of deals won by Rafale are never secured on price alone; other factors are normally involved.

Speaking to the Italian parliament in February, Italian procurement secretary Gen. Claudio Debertolis was downbeat about the Eurofighter program, stating, “Unfortunately, India has shown that the cost of the aircraft — the competition was lost above all on cost — as well as the air-to-ground capabilities, are factors in making the aircraft uncompetitive.”

Since the Indian decision, the Typhoon nations and industry have been doingmore than just licking their wounds. The governments and industry have been moving to sharpen their act on price, process, political co-coordination, technology growth commitments and other issues.

Speaking to reporters in June, Brian Burridge, vice president for strategic marketing at Finmeccanica UK, said having the AESA radar on contract and having weapon systems integrated on an earlier timescale, particularly Meteor, would have made a difference in India.Now the nations are starting to address some of the growth shortcomings.

For some in industry, though, it’s much later than it should have been.

“It’s great, but it’s two years too late. Eurofighter is nearly the best multirole fighter in the world, and it’s the ‘nearly’ bit that’s been the problem,” one executive said.

[arthuro]

Arthuro back again quoting a silly French magazine which is usually full of ****. Fact is on any given day EF can hold its own against the Typhoon and the proposed typhoon far superior to the currently available Rafale. The only reason it won in India is because it is cheaper, it was nearly kicked out well before trials if I remember correctly. Posting silly pics of the F-22 in its FSO, any aircraft with a proper IRST can do so. claiming kills only supported by fully biased French publications. Rafale is at best a good aircraft and yes the EF competing so far has never been equal, the proposed version for India is far more advanced than anything available out there except perhaps the International Super Hornet.

I don't even need to quote french magazines even if they are fully independent and respectable newspaper. For each competitions I can quote local medias. Look at malaysia : the typhoon offered is supposed to be offered all options and according to first local leaks it cannot even compete. Something must be wrong with all your usual arguments. I mean : korea, singapore, dutch, brazilian, swiss, indian and now probably malaysian competition lost to the rafale. That's 7 to 0 in favor of the rafale as far as opened competitions are concerned.

You should be less stubborned and start asking yourself why the rafale is so overwhelmingly superior when assessed by foreign air-forces. And as far as the french claims are concerned they are most of the time backed by pilots that speak on the record and with plenty oh Gun locks picture available...

Hey even the swiss that put an heavy emphasis in AtA scenarios (defensive and offensive) rated the rafale way ahead the typhoon in the AtA role...Even with the PESA radar which was praised by the swiss by the way...That should have opened your eyes and you should have take some distance with all your usual arguments. You are persisting in denial.

The only hope of typhoon supporters is a dreamed "supper typhoon" with AESA, CFT, TVC and a wide range of AtG weapon.
That's their consolation lot. Unfortunately nothing is firmly contracted and while we might see an AESA being ready latter this decade you can already say goodbye to TVC and very probably CFTs.

As for AtG weapons, with the F35 for the RAF and Italy it will reduce the case in turning the typhoon into a credible multirole aircraft and absorb of what remains of the ever shrinking european defense budget...You better pray for the Saudis to be generous.

All in all typhoon development roadmap is glacial due to a lack of money AND the inertia of a four nations consortium where everyone should get a share for each new development.

In comparison the rafale offer the full spectrum of capabilities expected from a genuine accomplished new generation fighter aircraft. And all this spectrum of capabilities are combat proven bare the nuclear role. The cherry on the cake is that even if you take each mission it can perform individually it performs at a world class level...

Look it can carry 9,5T of ordinance at long ranges which make it in the same league that dedicated AtG strike aircraft like the Tornado and very close to a F15E. But at the same time it is an absolutely brilliant ATA aircraft with outstanding maneuverability, supercruise (albeit not as good as the typhoon) than can more than hold its own even against the typhoon which is marketed as the reference in AtA. And mind you it can also land and take of from a boat ! Even with a skyjump ! And you know what ? Everything is already available so what you test is what you have ! no surprises.

Lucky for the Rafale, unkil did have constraints in parting with tech, even our own ex-air chief himself has said US avionics and weapons were far superior to anything available. Besides the Rafale was literally dumped at prices far less than half of what was charged for them in France, probably even at a loss.

well nothing better to quote a dassault official to debunk your falacies :

"The price of the Rafale in India is offered at French prices, adjusted for expenses related to the contract since it is not quite the same technical configuration, and that manufacturing will be in part locally. The competition was so tough that each side had to offer the best possible price. That said, we have not done any dumping to win. Under iso conditions, we proposed the price of the French Rafale."

full article :
http://archives.lesechos.fr/archives/20 ... 786647.htm

[Surya]

mods could we get rid of the pro and anti nonsense from this thread

we had a thread with gazillion pages where these worthies duked it out

its over and done

[Karan M]

Arthuro back again quoting a silly French magazine which is usually full of ****.

That tirade doesn't take away from the fact that Air & Cosmos is arguably one of the better, if not the best aviation magazines out there. Far better than the bulk of British mags for instance (bar Flight which usually has good test flight reports) which can be fairly abysmal & ridiculously biased in favour of the EF & British gear, depending on the author. A&C reports so far on French & even Brit tech have been fairly credible.

The only reason it won in India is because it is cheaper,

Yes, surely the fact that it landed in the top #2 contender list had nothing to do with it..

it was nearly kicked out well before trials if I remember correctly.

Irrelevant, as the brouhaha was over the response to the RFP missing in some sections such as the ARM capability and that was ultimately clarified. Wherein even the EF is actually at a bigger disadvantage, since it lacks a weapon such as the AASM which the Rafale has. The HARM while still listed on the MBDA website is not reported as still being in production, and as such all three European fighters lacked dedicated ARMs. The AASM even if imperfect as compared to a fully specc'ed ARM is still a F&F weapon with decent range and has been used in combat against SAMs such as the SA-3 in Libya. While it is not sufficient to handle S-3XX class missiles which PRC has, it can definitely take out Aspide 2000s which are currently the best the Pakistanis have.

Rafale is at best a good aircraft and yes the EF competing so far has never been equal, the proposed version for India is far more advanced than anything available out there except perhaps the International Super Hornet.

Key word there being proposed. The EF proposed for India didn't exist, with a radar which has not even been funded, with a weapons package (especially A2G) that is yet to be rounded off, a BVR capability currently critically reliant on US missiles (AMRAAM), with Meteor (likely to be far more expensive) - only available from 2015 onwards..

Yes, with a lot of work, the EF would ultimately meet most, if not all of IAF's "ideal" requirements, but its also equally true that this path would involve a lot of risk (ergo time and cost overrun potential) and the Rafale brings far more to the table today, and is more combat capable. A critical weakness that would remain with the EF would be range, since the version proposed for India did not have CFTs as standard (as versus the EF 2020 proposed for Turkey). The Rafale's "limitation" in contrast is its limited radar aperture, but is still fairly credible, with a 40% improvement in range in its AESA version over the PESA variant, which actually outperformed the Captor M in several respects in French eval. And with that range improvement, its still a fairly good set credible against the vast majority of threats the IAF will face. And that has to be also considered in light of the Super 30 MKI upgrade (with further performance boost to the huge 1 mtr dia radars on the Flanker-H).

At the end of the day, the Rafale meets the MMRCA requirements as they were originally envisaged - a modern fighter which can be made available to the IAF relatively quickly, and avoiding developmental risk/delay, boosting numbers to face the dual front threat from PAF/PLAAF. Like it or not, the EF simply did not make the cut.

The key issues for the IAF to set up combat capable Rafale squadrons are the pace at which it can train crew and set up infrastructure, build up weapons stocks, and the deliveries from local production. But it need not wait for the aircraft to be finetuned significantly. Thats a big plus.

Surya,

Concur. Perhaps best if all these replies are spun off into another thread.

[Karan M]

Did you glean any information on the Rafale's datalink and whether or not the IAF will replace it with the ODL being developed indigenously?

Datalinks are unlikely to be a problem - we'll probably replace the current Link-16 type system with our own. There's the Tx/Rx hardware, and then there are the protocols, plus the algorithms which decide what data is to be shared etc.

For the Tx/Rx hardware, the French have high data rate SDR (software defined radios) and HAL is also developing one for the Super30 MKI upgrade. For the rest, including the datatransfer protocols, some additional light weight encryption cards etc, to "talk" to the IAF network, data sharing is quite possible

IAI/HAL managed to squeeze in a datalink into the SHar, which is arguably far more space constrained & obsolescent (tech wise) than the Rafale, and cooperative targeting is also possible. In contrast, with the Rafale, they'll either replace the current Link-16 level system with a custom Thales fit (with last mile connectivity secured by India to talk to the IAF network) or the ODL with some hybrid Indo-French hardware to speed up things.

[Surya]

andfrankly saying the IAF went for the Rafale because it was the cheapest is insulting to the IAF and its evaluation process

[member_20453]

It was the cheaper between the two. Iaf would have been happy with either. In certain aspects Ef would have scored better while in others rafale would have scored better, to claim Rafale is the best is just lame. Ef would have required a bit more work on our side but we get an aircraft better customised for our needs. for rafale we are better off going for proper unkil weapons kit. The French kit would end up costing way to much for no serious combat advantage.

[arthuro]

Ef would have required a bit more work on our side but we get an aircraft better customised for our needs. for rafale we are better off going for proper unkil weapons kit. The French kit would end up costing way to much for no serious combat advantage.

That's not even correct.

To get the proposed typhoon for India (AESA, CFT integration of several AtG weapons) the price tag is huge. On the top of that the Typhoon is more expensive to operate. We are talking about several billions $ of additional costs operating the typhoon compared to get and operate the rafale over several decades.

For a fraction of that cost you can customize the rafale the way you want with less risk and less time. If the IAF feel the need of getting SDB and Amram and are ready to pay for it there is no reason that Dassault&Thales would block the whole deal just because they don't want to integrate additional US weapons...

If the IAF is not asking for US weapons integration it is because they don't feel the need to. The rest is your own delirium.
certainly the price tag should be a bit more expensive than french/european ones but it is also the price to pay to remain independent from the US.

Besides the rafale operates already more US AtG weapons than the typhoon does : GBU-12, GBU-22, GBU-24 and GBU-49.

[member_20453]

EF with Aim-120C-7 trumps the Raffy with MICA anyday. It being US reliant currently doesn't make it any less capable. The point of it being US reliant is so old since the Amreekees are competing in many a deal and bound to win many of them, just a waste to keep repeating the same point. Once deliveries of the CBU-97 SFW starts, it is just about the dealiest conventional bomb in our inventory, what happened to our concerns of US reliance when buying this weapon?

Besides, Astra should be the choice, Meteor, MICA are way too expensive to be procured in large numbers. EF with higher altitude cieling and faster dash speeds, larger radar detection ranges should allow it to fully exploit the Astra's max effective range in combat. True, the EF would need more work and money but there is nothing like being involved in tailoring the aircraft to our needs, we did it with the Su-30 and it is one of the most potent multirole aircraft in the world. The rafale deal won't be signed till end of financial eyar anyways and the first aircraft won't arrive till 2015, just in time to have the EF with AESA. I think had we sgined up for the EF, except for perhaps the first squadron, the remaining would be with TVC, CFT's, perhaps a higher thrust engine etc.

With the EF, we could have everything from the new helmet, larger radar, TVC, CFT's would have required sharing of costs and waiting a bit longer but would have given us EF which atleast would be .5 gen ahead of Rafale in 2020. Rafale in 2020 will be the same with a small AESA, no TVC (wont be available till MLU or more), still a IFR probe sticking out like a sore thumb, while EF of 2020 would just about be the most capable near 5th gen twin engine aircraft out there.

The initial costs of acquiring the EF would have been high indeed but they wanted to have an entire production line for EF in India thus allowing Indian made EFs to be sold to other Asian customers at a good price, plus bearing the costs of developement of the EF would pay off rich dividends on the long run.

The fact is the why pay the added cost of being independent of the US when the entire French industry can't cope with the need of delivering volume we need in order to fight both our enemies at the same time. No matter how independent you want to be from the US, The French still looked shamelessly to Unkil when stocks ran low during Libyan campaign. There is no need of being independent of the US, regardless, fighting both China and Pak at the same time we will obviously need Unkil's direct strategic support. France just doesn't have the global strategic reach that US has, that is the kind we need in order to take on China and Pak at the same time.

[arthuro]

EF with Aim-120C-7 trumps the Raffy with MICA anyday. It being US reliant currently doesn't make it any less capable. The point of it being US reliant is so old since the Amreekees are competing in many a deal and bound to win many of them, just a waste to keep repeating the same point. Once deliveries of the CBU-97 SFW starts, it is just about the dealiest conventional bomb in our inventory, what happened to our concerns of US reliance when buying this weapon?

1) The rafale with its Mica already beats the Typhoon whith the Amram (B&C5 are the only version operated by the typhoon). Yes the C7 has more range but that not automatically makes you a winner if you don't have proper situational awarness.

2) The rafale also come with the Meteor so what the point ?

3) If you want the Amram on the rafale you can pay for it...Much cheaper to integrate plenty of AtG weapons on the typhoon. Same for Astra.

4) Mica + meteor combo makes you independent from americans

I think had we sgined up for the EF, except for perhaps the first squadron, the remaining would be with TVC, CFT's, perhaps a higher thrust engine etc.

very speculative. AESA yes the rest uncertain and very unlikely for the TVC& additional thrust.

The fact is the why pay the added cost of being independent of the US when the entire French industry can't cope with the need of delivering volume we need in order to fight both our enemies at the same time. No matter how independent you want to be from the US, The French still looked shamelessly to Unkil when stocks ran low during Libyan campaign. There is no need of being independent of the US, regardless, fighting both China and Pak at the same time we will obviously need Unkil's direct strategic support. France just doesn't have the global strategic reach that US has, that is the kind we need in order to take on China and Pak at the same time.

plenty of nonsense and your personnal analysis is cerainly not shared by the IAF. Besides it is more comfortable for india to partner with France has India has certainly more leverage on France than the US.

Read below and especially the bold part :

The Real Reasons for Rafale’s Indian Victory

(Source: defense-aerospace.com; published Feb. 1, 2012)

By Giovanni de Briganti

PARIS --- While many observers cite technology transfer, prices and performance as being major factors in India’s selection of the Rafale as its next-generation fighter, reality is very different even if these factors obviously did play a significant role.

In the same way that it is true that Rafale lost several competitions through no fault of its own, it must be recognized that its victory in India was also won, to a great extent, through no fault of its own. The real reason for its victory is political, and the long memory of Indian politicians was a major contributing factor.

This is not to say, however, that Rafale’s own impressive qualities had nothing to do with its selection. The Indian Air Force, which was extensively briefed by the French air force in the autumn, was particularly impressed by its operational performance during the Libyan bombing campaign and in Afghanistan. Rafale also has a naval variant which could be of future interest to India, given its plans to buy and build aircraft carriers, while the recent decision to upgrade India’s Mirage 2000H fighters will simplify the air force’s logistics chain, as these will share with Rafale many weapons and other equipment.

The Indian Air Force also is a satisfied user of long standing of French fighters, going back to the Dassault Ouragan in the 1950s. It was also particularly appreciative of the performance of its Mirages during the 1999 Kargil campaign against Pakistan, and of the support it then obtained from France. During that campaign, India obtained French clearance – and possibly more - to urgently adapt Israeli and Russian-supplied laser-guided bombs to the Mirages, which were thus able to successfully engage high-altitude targets that Indian MiG-23s and MiG-27s had been unable to reach.

Rafale was preferred because of lower costs, and the Indian air force's familiarity with French warplanes such as the Mirage, Bloomberg reported Feb. 1 quoting an Indian source who asked not be named. "Unit-wise, the French plane is much cheaper than the Eurofighter. Moreover, the Indian air force, which is well equipped with French fighters, is favouring the French," the source said.

To Indian officials, France’s steadfastness as a military ally contrasted strongly with that of the United States, which stopped F-16 deliveries to Pakistan (but kept the money) when it found it expedient to do so, and slowed or vetoed delivery of components for Light Combat Aircraft that India was developing. And, of course, the 1998 arms embargo, decreed by the US after India’s nuclear test in May of that year, left a very bad taste in Indian mouths. France, on the contrary, was the only Western nation not to impose sanctions on that occasion.

That, Indian sources say, was New Delhi’s real reason for eliminating Boeing and Lockheed Martin from the fighter competition; India has resolved, these sources say, to buy only second-line equipment from the U.S., such as transport (C-17, C-130J) or maritime patrol aircraft (P-8I). Vital weapons such as missiles and fighters, when they cannot be locally produced, will remain the preserve of France and Russia.

Political considerations were also a significant factor playing against Rafale’s final competitor, the Eurofighter Typhoon. As this aircraft is produced by a consortium of four nations, each with different foreign policies and different attitudes and tolerances to arms exports, Indian officials were a bit nervous about their ultimate reliability as a single supplier.

Germany is a long-standing Indian aviation partner, and a respected role model for Indian politicians, many of whom were educated there. German companies – essentially the former Messerschmitt-Boelkow-Blohm, now part of EADS - helped Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd. develop both the LCA and the Advanced Light Helicopter, now called Dhruv. These links were the reason the Eurofighter bid was led by Germany’s Cassidian, and not BAE Systems, the former colonial power. But Germany had dithered over technology transfer for LCA, soft-pedaled on ALH tech transfer when German pacifists raised their eyebrows, and coughed when India almost went to war with Pakistan over Kargil and Kashmir, so in the final analysis it could not be considered a reliable supplier of major weapons.

Italy has never sold a major weapon to India, and so could bring neither influence nor reputation to support Eurofighter, while the third partner, Spain, is totally absent from the Indian military landscape.

This left BAE Systems as the best-known Eurofighter partner in India, and so by default as its ultimate public face. BAE in 2003 sold £1.5 billion’s worth of Hawk jet trainers to India, with a follow-on, £500 million order in 2010. However, its previous major sale to India was the Jaguar light attack aircraft in the 1970s. In fact, this aircraft was jointly developed by Britain and France on a 50/50 basis, and while it was license-produced by HAL it was never really successful as a fighter. Furthermore, France could claim as much benefit from its Indian career as BAE.

Taken together, the Eurofighter partner nations posed an even thornier problem: in case of war, German law prohibits deliveries of weapons and spares, Italian law and public opinions would demand an embargo, while Spanish legislation is murky. What would happen, Indian politicians must have wondered, if after buying the Eurofighter they went to war? Would spares and weapons be forthcoming, or would they be embargoed? The political risk was obviously too big to take.

Weapons also played a significant role in persuading India to opt for Rafale: not only is its weapons range mostly French-made, and thus not subject to a third-party embargo, but so are all of its sensors. Eurofighter, whose air-to-air missiles include the US-made AIM-120 Amraam and the German-led IRIS-T, and whose primary air-to-ground weapon is the US-made Paveway, was obviously at a competitive disadvantage in this respect.

Furthermore, the Rafale is nuclear-capable and will replace the Mirage 2000N in French service as the carrier of the newly-upgraded ASMP/A nuclear stand-off missile; it is also capable of firing the AM-39 Exocet missile, giving it an anti-ship capability that its competitors do not have. India is also interested in fitting its BrahMos supersonic missile to a wide range of its combat aircraft, and Rafale could apparently carry it.

Given that India had sworn to buy the cheapest compliant competitor, it would have been unable to justify picking the Rafale had this not been offered at the lower price. While official figures have not been released, and indeed may never be, initial reports from New Delhi claim that Rafale was offered at a unit price of $4-$5 million less than Eurofighter, which is a surprisingly large advantage given the French aircraft’s reputation of being high-priced.

The French offer also featured substantially lower costs of ownership, according to the same reports, thanks to lower fuel consumption and simpler maintenance requirements.

If true, these figures imply the French offer undercut Eurofighter by over $600 million, which is a large enough difference for one French insider to wonder whether Dassault Aviation will ever make any money on the contract.

But, even if it doesn’t, the Indian contract gives Rafale instant legitimacy, not only because of the thoroughness and transparency of the bidding process, but also because India is the only country to have fought four and a half major wars since 1948, and so knows something about air combat.

For Dassault, the Rafale program will now remain active, with a stabilized production line, for decades to come, and the company will have that much more time to find additional customers. Keeping its production line and supply chain humming at an economically-viable rate are sufficiently valuable achievements to push immediate profits into the sidelines. Supporting 126 – and possibly 206, if India buys an optional second batch – combat aircraft, and providing spares, fixes and upgrades over the next 40 years, will generate gigantic profits, and this more than justified lowering Dassault’s notoriously high profit margins.

In fact, as one industry official noted, "this is France's answer to 'Al Yamamah', but with twice as many aircraft," drawing a parallel with the UK's sale of Tornado fighters and related services to Saudi Arabia, which was instrumental in keeping BAE Systems prosperous throughout the 1980s and 1990s.

And, as French Defense Minister Gérard Longuet told reporters during an impromptu press conference in Parliament, France may soon find “that good news travels in formation,” implying that further, long-deferred contracts might soon be announced.

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/articl ... india.html

[member_20453]

Besides, IAF is also being too defensive, the current inventories of bombs won't last enough to properly dent the enemy. It is obvious IAF lacks on many grounds the tactical vision required to fight both the enemies at the same time. To begin with would be nice to see large orders, wonder why they haven't even placed a proper order of the sudharshan yet. This defensive approach will make it harder for us to win the fight. The aim should be to be able to deploy vast offensive capabilties asap.

[member_20453]

The Rafale would be a whole different beast, I admire very much its ability to carry the 9.5 T of payload and long range, with a bit of Amreeki weapons, bam the thing would be the most potent air to ground platform out there. I understand the choice has been made, now it is a matter of doing the right thing by placing large orders of cutting edge air to ground pounders,

Large orders of LJDAM, JDAM-ER, Paveways, JSOW, AAGRM, SFW, SDB and SLAM-ER would be ideal, besides large orders would also allow for local manufacture.

Will be checking out the Raffy mid september for the second time. Will post some pics.

[Ravi Karumanchiri]

^^^^ But OT.....

I seem to remember a photograph of an American-made bomb that had been sold to the Argentinians.
The picture showed it sticking-out of the deck of a British warship down in that neighbourhood for the Faulklands/Malvinas. Funny thing was, the bomb didn't go off.

Happy UK/USA-alliance coincidence?

.......... OR...............

Early success for RFID technology that disarms inbound bombs that have *HIDDEN* fractal antennae, RF receivers and coded-kill switches that disrupt detonation signals -- all hidden within a layer of paint -- perhaps with all such layers made of transparent semiconducting filaments, virtually invisible to the naked eye, and difficult to find with even high-end microscopy.

Does that sound far fetched to you? That can only be because you don't understand what's possible with microelectronics and fractal antennae OR, you're naive.

ADDED moments later: Don't forget that whatever the most hard-headed military minds will tell you; it is often the conniving political and financial interests that prove to be a nation's weak flank; to wit, for many reasons both obvious and hidden; China owns the USA. USA has a debt to China. USA's debt to China seems unlikely ever to be repaid in its current denomination (USDs of this value); therefore, other 'items of trade' come under consideration by BOTH the debtor and creditor.

In such affairs as these, the barter item you might have to trade, that will cost you the least, is often an act of betrayal. History is full of many examples of this, and a careful accounting will reveal that the UK #1 and the USA #2 have long histories of such dealings. Not so the French, nor the Russians. The Russians are very solid military partners. (ADDED LATER STILL: Not coincidentally; the Russians have the absolute lowest level of foreign debt of virtually any major nation. If I am not mistaken, they could pay-off their entire foreign debt within one year, if they wanted to.)

Better yet: When you've absolutely, positively got to be sure, you've gotta do it yourself! (Indiginization is a priority with ALL systems, particularly COMM and lethal systems.)

ALSO: Any piece of important equipment bought from any country that possesses advanced microelctronics manufacturing capabilities should be thoroughly inspected for hidden functionality; including destructive/dissassembly, UV microscopy and extremely thorough RF spectral analysis.

.......................... and now back to this thread's regular flow..............

[nakul]

This is not offtopic since it is well known that France supplied codes to UK for the Exocet missiles used by the Argentinians. Net net, it is not the yanks alone but the frenchies too that one must be careful of.