MRCA News and Discussion

All threads that are locked or marked for deletion will be moved to this forum. The topics will be cleared from this archive on the 1st and 16th of each month.
Baldev
BRFite
Posts: 501
Joined: 21 Sep 2009 07:27

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Baldev » 23 Oct 2009 10:24

rafale OSF

The complete system weighs 95kg with a volume of 0.09 m³.Can function as IRST, FLIR, laser rangefinder and be used for surveillance, tracking and visual identification (VID), with an estimated range of 80km.The OSF is coupled with the radar VID of air targets and surface.

http://sistemadearmas.sites.uol.com.br/ ... afale2.jpg
Infrared image showing the signature exaggerated APU in the middle of the fuselage of the Rafale.

http://sistemadearmas.sites.uol.com.br/ca/irstfso1.jpg
Image OSF showing a commercial aircraft to 31km and a 50km Rafale.

http://sistemadearmas.sites.uol.com.br/ca/irstfso2.jpg
Image OSF showing the courtyard of the Dassault aircraft 34km and 50km a ship.

RameshC
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 87
Joined: 20 Sep 2009 12:09

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby RameshC » 25 Oct 2009 01:21

what use is a russian missile when more than half of BVR missiles in our inventory are malfunctioning, r-27/r-77s, kh-31a/ps are not reliable. The mig-35 is the worst choice. SH is the ideal aircraft. SH wins hands down in a technical POV in relation with price.

RameshC
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 87
Joined: 20 Sep 2009 12:09

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby RameshC » 25 Oct 2009 03:22

r-27s and r-77s are the real culprits, useless missiles some of them didnt even function well for one year, its no only the missiles but also their launchers. russian aircraft are gr8 but they are useless with out good and realible weaponry. the block 70 seems like a better option, but viper's chances arent that bad either, they can offer, lots of cuztomization, deploying of existing EU/Issy and US weapons, better avionics and even MATV, the rcs is lower and it can deploy the aim-120D. But is the SV is a no no well that leaves us with the SH which was, is and will be the only aircraft that can fullfill the needs of navy, army and AF. Its payload flexibility, multiple roles and top notch avionics are excellent, comes with options for new engine. now question remains tot, well i dont think US will have problem giving atleast full-tot. plus the fact is LCA engine is either the more expensive EJ or the more powerful GE 414, the rd-33 is not part of the tender and hence the mig-35's chances are very low. besides mig themselves say they cant begin mig-35 production till late 2013 whihc will delay the dleivery of first aircraft beyond 2015, with around 9 crashes so far this year and exected crash rate of 10 every year, we'll loose another 30 aircraft before 2013, now i don think IAf will wait till 2015 for deliveries to begin. mig is out, now gripen, SH, SV remain ideal options.

Baldev
BRFite
Posts: 501
Joined: 21 Sep 2009 07:27

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Baldev » 25 Oct 2009 05:18

RameshC wrote:what use is a russian missile when more than half of BVR missiles in our inventory are malfunctioning, r-27/r-77s, kh-31a/ps are not reliable.
whatever knowledge you have about reliability of US built stuff please please post that,eager to know

vavinash
BRFite
Posts: 556
Joined: 27 Sep 2008 22:06

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby vavinash » 25 Oct 2009 06:04

Yeah right..right missiles are not functioning :(( . Only unkils c grade missiles will work, at twice the price and half the range of russian missiles they will make IAF invincibles... :rotfl:

Shameek
BRFite
Posts: 833
Joined: 02 Jan 2009 20:44
Location: Ionosphere

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Shameek » 25 Oct 2009 06:58

Hold your horses buddy. You start off with R-27 put in the LCA and end with the Super Hornet. A few clarifications may be required.
RameshC wrote:r-27s and r-77s are the real culprits, useless missiles some of them didnt even function well for one year, its no only the missiles but also their launchers. russian aircraft are gr8 but they are useless with out good and realible weaponry.

What launchers are you talking of? In the same sentence you call the aircraft good and useless.
the block 70 seems like a better option, but viper's chances arent that bad either, they can offer, lots of cuztomization, deploying of existing EU/Issy and US weapons, better avionics and even MATV, the rcs is lower and it can deploy the aim-120D. But is the SV is a no no

Block 70 what? Again a contradiction. You start with vipers good chance and end with a strict no no. Any reason?
SH which was, is and will be the only aircraft that can fullfill the needs of navy, army and AF

Says who? Even the USAF does not use the SH. And Army? :shock:
with around 9 crashes so far this year and exected crash rate of 10 every year, we'll loose another 30 aircraft before 2013

Whats the basis of this prediction? Forgive my ignorance, but I didn't know we had an expected crash rate!

Luxtor
BRFite
Posts: 200
Joined: 28 Sep 2003 11:31
Location: Earth ... but in a parallel universe

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Luxtor » 25 Oct 2009 12:10

SaiK wrote:makes no use, until it can up the smile of frenchies themselves. they normally refuse to smile at all., and for them losing a $12b order is nothing against, keeping the technology upto themselves. its the french pride!


French pride? Are these the same French who were willing to sell Rafales to the commie Chinese a few years ago until Uncle and western Europeans knocked some sense into them and kept them from going through with the deal? :eek:

RameshC
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 87
Joined: 20 Sep 2009 12:09

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby RameshC » 25 Oct 2009 12:33

i dont know about US missile reliability, all i know is that the IAF had a lot of complains and problems about Russian BVR missiles. By SH being useful for all 3 services i meant the multirole aspect of its performance, it can carry and deploy more A2A missiles on a single misssion than all the other contenders..which by the way is 12 Aim-120s + 2 Aim-9x block 2 missiles. It deploys a large variety of air to ground munitions and massive host load of PGMS which have no equal Russian alternatives and its A2S weapons are also pretty good. SV is still a better option than the mig because the SV's weapons flexibility is the highest and easily allows for EU/Issy/US weapons to be deployed but its a no no because Pak operates. Actually thats the only reason why SV is a no no. unkils' 'C-grade' missiles are the only ones combat proven, now again people will say, unkil never really faced a real enemy but hey again the Soviets got their butts nailed by village people in afgan and their losses were even more attrocious. Aims have killed 6 mig-29s, 1 mig-25 and other aircraft these are facts. now there are a lot of CAG reports saying the Russian missiles in our inventory are of poor quality...now i have no choice but to believe that. when the mig-29 faced off with the f-16 in Serbia, it was shot down period. The mig-35 is no better, its a joke because every other aircraft in contention offers much more flexibility. the SH being really mature helps, currently SH is undergoing biofuel tests as well, this will drastically reduce its fuel costs by a huge margin.

i know Unkil is a new player for us in the market but their platforms are combat proven, no matter how inferior the enemy the US still has the most amount of combat experience. Weapons like JDAM have been in US inventory for 15 years and have always delivered, the Russians just began testing their first gps guided bomb from a su-24 Fencer and they are a good 15 years late. In the mean time JDAM has expanded to LJDAM, JDAM-ER both weapons with added mission flexibility. btw the R-27 was never tested from the LCA but the r-73.

vavinash, the r-77 has a longer range than the Aim-120A/B but aim-120C-5/7 have ranges over 100km, C-5 is around 105 km and C-7 around 120km, Aim-120D matches the R-77m-1 in terms of range. R-77M might be a gr8 missile but only the sukhoi with a long range radar can deploy it. As of now the Mig-35's radar can detect a 3m2 target at around 130km this means the SH will only be detected at around 70-80km, which renders this missile useless because a simple SH would have fired its Aim-120D already. the mig-35's missile warning system has a range of 50km for SAMs and 30km for A2A missiles which is already too late because even if fired from 100km the Aim-120D is well within its kinematic no escape zone and will kill the mig. In case it misses the SH carries 11 more to feed the enemy.

We may not have an expected crash rate but hey its our habit to loose aircraft every year and this year we lost 9. so in a mediocre estimate we'll loose another 9 next year, its just reality if its not 9 its 5...eitherway we'll loose some aircraft and looking at the delay the mig will cause well, no thank you. I am sure IAf wont delay the delivery of the first aircraft beyond 2013 and hence mig is out. Rafale is no no thanks to their own folly with the mirage upgrade, Ef is no no because of too high costs, Gripen is a no no because of it is inferior to the SV in many aspects. The only remaining ideal option is the F-18IN with uprated engines. its fits in well with C-130J, P-8, Chinooks, apaches, V-22s, c-17s that india will acquire soon.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36417
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby SaiK » 25 Oct 2009 20:58

the statistics can't be wrong.. it started with mig-21s, now the mig-27s, and you know how the stats may look at for the next in series.. what I am saying, the 35 is not very far from this.

I know I am triggering a stat contest between various airframes.. yes, that would actually bring to some conclusions on the airframes, which might last longer than the others in comparison.

imho, EF2K and Rafale may take the top two spots with numero uno from EADS.

prabir
BRFite
Posts: 150
Joined: 27 Aug 2008 03:22

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby prabir » 25 Oct 2009 21:57

We may not have an expected crash rate but hey its our habit to loose aircraft every year and this year we lost 9. so in a mediocre estimate we'll loose another 9 next year, its just reality if its not 9 its 5...eitherway we'll loose some aircraft and looking at the delay the mig will cause well, no thank you.

Do we have the same crash rate with Su 30 MKI ?
We just can't extra-polate numbers based on Mig 21/23/27. Did the Migs have the same consistent crash rate in 70s, 80s ?
We can't just say, that as it is MIG or anything Russian, it is inferior.

RameshC
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 87
Joined: 20 Sep 2009 12:09

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby RameshC » 25 Oct 2009 22:15

i am not saying anything about the mig's record, what i am saying is crashes are common in the IAF, we loose aircraft every year and we have to start mrca acquisiton ASAP, we cant wait for the mig-35 to begin production in 2013 and i am sure IAf wont delay the procurement, by 2013 the first mrca will land and it will most likly be the SH because its only airframer that has the production rate, speed and on time delivery with proven weapons and avionics. Our mirages need Issy upgrades, i heard the EL-2052 can go on board the mirage, mig-29 wonder why we didnt go for that.

prabir
BRFite
Posts: 150
Joined: 27 Aug 2008 03:22

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby prabir » 25 Oct 2009 22:20

If we are in so much hurry, then, we can acquire Mig 29 and Mirage 2000 to shore up the numbers. That will be a stop gap arrangement at best and I am sure, that is one of the short-run option. Even acquiring additional Su 30s is also an option.

But, in a deal that is more to do with improving our own manufacturing capabilities, we have to vet every offer very carefully, and can't just go blindly with what US has to offer, because US has not done anything that helps gain trust.

One day they say, we are their strategic partner and another day, they say NPT, CTBT etc.

Katare
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2579
Joined: 02 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Katare » 25 Oct 2009 22:21

It makes sense to buy MRCA from Americans just to have all the basis covered. Battle tested high tech stuff of US would give additional confidence to IAF and create additional deterence/doubt in minds of those enemies who wouldn't take Russian weapons as serious threat. Out of ~40 planned Squads of combat aircrafts, I think IAF can afford to take risk of having ~6 of them from sanction prone, unreliable, paki supporting, cold war enemy, CTBT/NPT forcing unkil.

vavinash
BRFite
Posts: 556
Joined: 27 Sep 2008 22:06

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby vavinash » 25 Oct 2009 22:24

RameshC wrote:i dont know about US missile reliability, all i know is that the IAF had a lot of complains and problems about Russian BVR missiles.


Really because I know pilots who would swear by R-77. Who has been complaining? The pilots , CAG or the DDM's on unkils payroll??

RameshC wrote:By SH being useful for all 3 services i meant the multirole aspect of its performance, it can carry and deploy more A2A missiles on a single misssion than all the other contenders..which by the way is 12 Aim-120s + 2 Aim-9x block 2 missiles. It deploys a large variety of air to ground munitions and massive host load of PGMS which have no equal Russian alternatives and its A2S weapons are also pretty good.


SH was rejected by USAF (as F-17) and repackaged in a hurry for USN. It is a mediocre aircraft by all standards. With the payload you have suggested it will be lucky to fly at Mach 1.2. Please cut the crap, US has no equivalent to a host of russian missiles and bombs. When they are able to make something like Brahmos, Kh-101 or R-33 let us know. Only a complete idiot would want to buy Sewer hornet.

RameshC wrote:SV is still a better option than the mig because the SV's weapons flexibility is the highest and easily allows for EU/Issy/US weapons to be deployed but its a no no because Pak operates. Actually thats the only reason why SV is a no no.

SV is another piece of junk IAF should not touch with 10 foot pole. If Mig-35 is just a repackaged Mig-29 this repackaged lawndart should not fool anyone. Weapons flexibility :rotfl: with exactly what in IAF arsenal.

RameshC wrote:unkils' 'C-grade' missiles are the only ones combat proven, now again people will say, unkil never really faced a real enemy but hey again the Soviets got their butts nailed by village people in afgan and their losses were even more attrocious. Aims have killed 6 mig-29s, 1 mig-25 and other aircraft these are facts. now there are a lot of CAG reports saying the Russian missiles in our inventory are of poor quality...now i have no choice but to believe that. when the mig-29 faced off with the f-16 in Serbia, it was shot down period. The mig-35 is no better, its a joke because every other aircraft in contention offers much more flexibility. the SH being really mature helps, currently SH is undergoing biofuel tests as well, this will drastically reduce its fuel costs by a huge margin.


Err no actually US only faced enemies with 20:1 numerican superiority and 5-6 other nations supporting them. Even then they got their asses handed on a platter in vietnam and now in Iraq and afghanistan. The russian losses in afghanistan pales compared to the ass whopping americans took in nam. Yeah as per the CAG the Dhruv still can't carry enough supplies to Siachen (also as per the morons in IE). But then only a low IQ moron would believe them. Mig-29 kills against serbia and Iraq :mrgreen: . NAtions that were under sanctions and crippled economically. Don't make me laugh. The only equal combat between american and russian weapons has occured in the subcontinent with americans coming a distant second. The F-18 has been shot down by Mig-25 in Iraq which escaped 4 of the sewer hornets after downing one.SH is not mature it is something which should never have been made.

RameshC wrote:i know Unkil is a new player for us in the market but their platforms are combat proven, no matter how inferior the enemy the US still has the most amount of combat experience. Weapons like JDAM have been in US inventory for 15 years and have always delivered, the Russians just began testing their first gps guided bomb from a su-24 Fencer and they are a good 15 years late. In the mean time JDAM has expanded to LJDAM, JDAM-ER both weapons with added mission flexibility. btw the R-27 was never tested from the LCA but the r-73.


Please don't make me laugh. If testing against an enemy who is 20 times weaker numerically and technologically is combat proven the LCA can be combat proven by simply bombing maldives, seychelles and the like.Most of those weapons are not on offer and IAF has yet to show any interest in them. IAF PGM's are mostly russian, french and israeli and there is no need to add more variety.


RameshC wrote:vavinash, the r-77 has a longer range than the Aim-120A/B but aim-120C-5/7 have ranges over 100km, C-5 is around 105 km and C-7 around 120km, Aim-120D matches the R-77m-1 in terms of range. R-77M might be a gr8 missile but only the sukhoi with a long range radar can deploy it. As of now the Mig-35's radar can detect a 3m2 target at around 130km this means the SH will only be detected at around 70-80km, which renders this missile useless because a simple SH would have fired its Aim-120D already. the mig-35's missile warning system has a range of 50km for SAMs and 30km for A2A missiles which is already too late because even if fired from 100km the Aim-120D is well within its kinematic no escape zone and will kill the mig. In case it misses the SH carries 11 more to feed the enemy.


Er no the R-77 izd-180 will be out soon with a range > 200 km and unkil has no missile matching Ks-172.R-33/R-37. The Sh is not stealth by any stretch of imagination and unless it is flying without any missiles on its pylons rest assured the Mig-35 will catch it around 100 km. The Sh has the maneuverability of a hippo on land and certainly won't try to engage in dogfight. If The SH is carrying 12 missiles then rest assured it will light up the radars like a christmas tree.The R-77m will be sufficient to down the flying joke.

RameshC wrote:We may not have an expected crash rate but hey its our habit to loose aircraft every year and this year we lost 9. so in a mediocre estimate we'll loose another 9 next year, its just reality if its not 9 its 5...eitherway we'll loose some aircraft and looking at the delay the mig will cause well, no thank you. I am sure IAf wont delay the delivery of the first aircraft beyond 2013 and hence mig is out. Rafale is no no thanks to their own folly with the mirage upgrade, Ef is no no because of too high costs, Gripen is a no no because of it is inferior to the SV in many aspects. The only remaining ideal option is the F-18IN with uprated engines. its fits in well with C-130J, P-8, Chinooks, apaches, V-22s, c-17s that india will acquire soon.

Considering lawndarts reputation for crashing SV is a no no and considering that IAF was never impressed with F-18 we can safely assume the real contest is between Rafale, Mig-35 and Eurofighter. C-130 is meant for special ops in limited numbers(12-18 max) will never be acquired in numbers like HAL/Irkut MTA. P-8 is a mistake IN will learn from and chinook, V-22 and C-17 will never enter IAF service. Well actually chinook probably in small numbers to replace Mi-26 but the others will never enter IAf service.

b_patel
BRFite
Posts: 150
Joined: 22 Feb 2009 04:08

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby b_patel » 25 Oct 2009 23:05

i am not saying anything about the mig's record, what i am saying is crashes are common in the IAF, we loose aircraft every year and we have to start mrca acquisiton ASAP, we cant wait for the mig-35 to begin production in 2013 and i am sure IAf wont delay the procurement, by 2013 the first mrca will land and it will most likly be the SH because its only airframer that has the production rate, speed and on time delivery with proven weapons and avionics. Our mirages need Issy upgrades, i heard the EL-2052 can go on board the mirage, mig-29 wonder why we didnt go for that.

The reason so many migs crash is b/c they are way beyond their service life. Russia doesn't even operate the Mig-21's and Mig-27's anymore. There ridiculously old, hence they are more prone to crashes. The EF also has the production rates and proven avionics/weapons! The EL-2052 has not finished testing yet, its in the final stages. The new Zhuk radar is good enough for the Mig-29's no need to upgrade them with an AESA.

RameshC
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 87
Joined: 20 Sep 2009 12:09

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby RameshC » 25 Oct 2009 23:10

well CAG, even IAF has complained in reports so your jack about r-77 being this miracle missile is useless. f-17 and SH have no comparison and we can see quickly whose the moron. well r-33 has been there for a while but i wonder why we didnt order it, besides missiles like r-33, brahmos, ks-172s can be fired from the Su-30mki. SV is a very capable aircraft and 6 mig-29s kills is more than enough combat proof to counter your mindless claim, Block 70 is a much better options in avionics, radar, rcs and weapons any given day. Nam was ages ago and lots of lessons were learned from Nam, the russian combat experience is limited to Afgan and thats it, atleast the USAF has been busy all the time. the fact is the ruskis got it handed to them by an army with no air power...so please lets not compare US/Russian war experiences they are on a whole different league atleast the US faced aerial threats. Well f-18s were shot down so have the f-16s, f-117, but even the mig-25 has been killed by the f-15. well KS-172, r-33, r-37 have been tested long time ago and i wonder why IAF didnt order them. the SH's rcs is below 1m2 and the mig wont see it comign till atleast 80km, by then its too late. by the way why we wait till 2015 to get the mig coz the production version wont land in india before that, so its out out out. IAf never impressed with SH...well says you...i'l wait till it wins the deal. P-8 a mistake, yet it remains the best piece of maritime hardware on order in our force. c-17 never, but Govt. is already began procedures to acquire the c-17. IN is interested in as many as 40 V-22s. moreover, the aim-120D's range outclasses the r-77 armed with it the SV/Sh will down mig long before the mig even see either of them. Both SV/SH's radars have detection ranges well over 230Nm or over 460km. migs' current AESA radar wont allow for anything more than the r-77 to be fired for now which is simply out classed by the aim-120D armed SV/SH. SH's radar will start tracking the mig at well over 200km or more.

http://theasiandefence.blogspot.com/200 ... o-air.html

by the way its not the CAG's job to check missiles, IAF checks it inventory and no CAG. CAG is not the one opening up the missiles test simulating it, IAF does it.

So CAG only claims what IAF has verified so please lets no underestimate this problem because the IAF says its a problem. R-77 is junk, offcourse pilots will swear by it because the ones that actually work are the only long range BVRs in large numbers in our inventory.
Last edited by RameshC on 25 Oct 2009 23:20, edited 1 time in total.

akshay
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 60
Joined: 20 Jun 2009 12:54

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby akshay » 26 Oct 2009 00:20

Regarding user trials F16 should have been done. Rafale must be on. Seems like 40-45 days is time for this stage per aircraft till now.
Whats next? A shortlist and elimnation round..any idea?

putnanja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4516
Joined: 26 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: searching for the next al-qaida #3

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby putnanja » 26 Oct 2009 00:31

RamesC, please look up on the web how mny aircrafts US loses per year

Katare
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2579
Joined: 02 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Katare » 26 Oct 2009 00:34

How many as compared to who? This is 10 year old debate at BRF. Nothing has changed.

putnanja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4516
Joined: 26 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: searching for the next al-qaida #3

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby putnanja » 26 Oct 2009 00:43

RameshC's posts somehow imply that IAF losses are more because of Russian aircraft and buying US aircraft would reduce the accident rate of IAF.

What I am pointing out is that even USAF/USN has aircraft crashes too ( there was one couple of weeks back when two SHs crashed on a night flying excercise). To claim that buying Mig35 wouldn't reduce IAF's crash rate is an absurd argument.

The reasons are manifold, and include the large number of birds near IAF bases, the age of the aircraft, the usage of the aircraft etc. And USAF or any other country's airforce isn't immune to crashes. It is only that in India the media gets pretty aggressive on any crash.

RameshC
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 87
Joined: 20 Sep 2009 12:09

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby RameshC » 26 Oct 2009 00:50

well nothing is clear yet and it wont be clear till atleast weapons trials begin in home countries, we'll know by April next year the shortlisted contenders.

its not about the russian aircraft and crashes..its about the rate of losing aircraft every year, we are bound to loose another 20-25 aircraft before mrca lands in 2013, i am just concerned about a severe shortfall. Besides P.V.Naik already said MRCA will land by 2014 which is too late for the mig. For all the USAF crashes has every year, USN's SH hasn't crashed yet due to technical failure. for all we know our mirages which need structural upgrades ASAP could come crashing down as well. I aint blaming russian equipment, just sayin we will have low numbers the longer we wait till the mrca arrives and i certain am IAF will not wait till 2015+ before the first mig-35 comes home.

vavinash
BRFite
Posts: 556
Joined: 27 Sep 2008 22:06

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby vavinash » 26 Oct 2009 01:02

The F-18 and F-16 simply won't make the cut. Too old too costly and have no similarity to anything in IAF inventory and will come with a massive political baggage. EF/Rafale are new a/c's and hence will be costlier but Mig-35 will have similarity with IN's Mig-29k and IAF Mig-29's and will be cheaper than most western aircrafts.Not to forget more rugged and reliable unlike F-16's which are having trouble in the heat of Banglore :rotfl: , imagine if the test was done in peak summer in Jaipur. The Mig-35 can start production and supplying IAF by 2014 and in the mean time 50 more MKI is the way to go. MKI makes the SH redundant anyway, a simple midlife upgrade around 2015-18(AESA, saturn 117c engines would do the needful).

GeorgeWelch
BRFite
Posts: 1393
Joined: 12 Jun 2009 09:31

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby GeorgeWelch » 26 Oct 2009 01:24

vavinash wrote:The F-18 and F-16 simply won't make the cut. Too old


If the F-16 and SH are too old, the MiG-35 is too old also

just sayin . . .

vavinash wrote:too costly


cheaper than the EF or Rafale

vavinash wrote:no similarity to anything in IAF inventory


1. that's obviously not a requirement or there would be no competition
2. when a fleet reaches critical mass, which will certainly be the case with the MRCA, any benefit from commonality with other fleets goes away
3. diversity of weapons systems could be a benefit, both from a political and technical standpoint

vavinash
BRFite
Posts: 556
Joined: 27 Sep 2008 22:06

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby vavinash » 26 Oct 2009 02:00

I agree Mig-35/ lawndart and SH come in same age group.Just pointing out that price, capability and logistic wise Mig-35 has advantages. Secondly mig-35 has far far less political baggage so will be chosen. 200 aircrafts is a lot, unlike 6-12 C-130's for spec ops. They have to be absolutely reliable and sanction proof.

RameshC
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 87
Joined: 20 Sep 2009 12:09

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby RameshC » 26 Oct 2009 03:32

mig-35 wont begin production till 2013/2014, looking at russian nature of delay well the mig wont arrive in India before end 2015 thats if production really begins in 2013, it usually takes well over 2.5 years for a single unit to be produced. F-16 is capable of deploying Mica, Magic, Delilah, Popeye-2, Griffin guided LGBs and new Griffin mk-3 guided munitions, As-30L, , paveways, Harpoons in our inventory and soon the CBU-105/97 sfw. All these can be fired readily no need for integration. by 2018 after mki MLU, offcourse the mki will be deadly but by 2020 when the last of 126 mrca are being delivered the block 3 super hornet will be ready and we order it part of the 74 options we hold, Block 3 will feature matv, super cruise, even more reduced rcs with ability to carry some weapons internally. the question remains tot and sanction proofing, well the only way to achieve this is constant negotiations.

putnanja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4516
Joined: 26 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: searching for the next al-qaida #3

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby putnanja » 26 Oct 2009 03:47

F16 is a pretty old design and I don't believe India should go for an aircraft which has no growth potential. It has reached the end of its potential. It was/is an excellent aircraft no doubt, and should have been considered if we were buying 10 years back. Not now though!

And my opposition to US arms for such a major portion of our fleet still remains though! I would have sort of reconsidered my oppostion if Obama's policies wrt India was similar to Bush in his latest term. However, his position on policies affecting India ( Af-Pak, nuclear deal, NPT/CTBT) etc just reinforces my opposition to US arms. Who knows, Obama might use the arms to arm-twist India later on. He now has a nobel prize to live up to now!

VinodTK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2419
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby VinodTK » 26 Oct 2009 04:01

We do not know as to which aircraft will be picked, and regardless of which aircraft is picked GOI
needs keep one thing in mind; that is India will never be able to match Chinese air
force in numbers. Just like the west was not able to match the Soviet Union during
the cold war days.

To make up for the lack of numbers the west chose technologically advanced aircraft to
tackle the larger Soviet air force. In the same way India also should go for technologically advanced
aircraft, which can fight against an enemy who will throw up a large number of aircraft.

The aircraft chosen by India should not be available to the Chinese after few years with
a different name. If that happens India will be doubly screwed, because the opponent
will have matching aircraft and in grater numbers. Since India will not be able to match
PLA numerically choosing the right aircraft and in large quantities is required to fight two
air wars concurrently.

vavinash
BRFite
Posts: 556
Joined: 27 Sep 2008 22:06

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby vavinash » 26 Oct 2009 04:12

That would ideally be EF or Rafale but since IAf will be buying up PAK-FAs in less than a decade, will they want to spend on 200 costly gen 4+ aircrafts? Mig-35's or Mirage 2k-5's would have been ideal since both are technologically superior to anything in PLAAF or PAF.

Baldev
BRFite
Posts: 501
Joined: 21 Sep 2009 07:27

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Baldev » 26 Oct 2009 05:25

RameshC wrote:the SH's rcs is below 1m2 and the mig wont see it comign till atleast 80km, by then its too late. the aim-120D's range outclasses the r-77 armed with it the SV/Sh will down mig long before the mig even see either of them. Both SV/SH's radars have detection ranges well over 230Nm or over 460km. migs' current AESA radar wont allow for anything more than the r-77 to be fired for now which is simply out classed by the aim-120D armed SV/SH. SH's radar will start tracking the mig at well over 200km or more.

from where did you get the detection ranges of apg79/80,please post link

and when aim120d will be operational knowing that first METEOR going to be operational only by 2012-13 and americans and russians yet to test their ramjets,and i don't want to argue over this

did you measure the RCS of SH that its less than 1 meter sq :wink:

Baldev
BRFite
Posts: 501
Joined: 21 Sep 2009 07:27

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Baldev » 26 Oct 2009 05:51

here are weapons offered with mig35 and this is published by RAC
http://www.missiles.ru/_foto/PR_ASM-5-GEN/35ILA08.jpg

i think this has been posted before,if not please let me know :D

Katare
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2579
Joined: 02 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Katare » 26 Oct 2009 07:47

RaviBg wrote:RameshC's posts somehow imply that IAF losses are more because of Russian aircraft and buying US aircraft would reduce the accident rate of IAF.


Ravi,
But this may be true! In numerous debate that happened on BRF over the years, all concluded that there simply is not enough open source data to compare and conclude either way. Conditions, size of open sky and flying pattern are vastly different which makes it difficult to conclude/compare based on data. But generally Russian's made simple, robust and low cost hardware as compared to western philosophy of gold plating a smaller number of platforms using their vastly superior resources. One can deduct from above that western aircraft would have better safety record by design. Although you can't prove it because of the complexity of the issue and lack of data. You can take a dig on it yourself and see if you can collect enough data to show it one way or the other.

Katare
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2579
Joined: 02 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Katare » 26 Oct 2009 07:56

vavinash wrote:The F-18 and F-16 simply won't make the cut. Too old too costly and have no similarity to anything in IAF inventory and will come with a massive political baggage. EF/Rafale are new a/c's and hence will be costlier but Mig-35 will have similarity with IN's Mig-29k and IAF Mig-29's and will be cheaper than most western aircrafts.Not to forget more rugged and reliable unlike F-16's which are having trouble in the heat of Banglore :rotfl: , imagine if the test was done in peak summer in Jaipur. The Mig-35 can start production and supplying IAF by 2014 and in the mean time 50 more MKI is the way to go. MKI makes the SH redundant anyway, a simple midlife upgrade around 2015-18(AESA, saturn 117c engines would do the needful).


It's a myth that Russian hardware are cheaper, I believe that they may cost more than western weapons when cost is calculated over the entire life and normalized for the uptime/availability/performance.

I think this is the reason that RFP tenders has been changed to include total life cycle cost and performance (up time, ease of maintenance, MTBF, cost of consumable/fligh hour etc) while selecting the L1.

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17062
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Rahul M » 26 Oct 2009 08:04

katare sahab, admittedly the up-front price of russi aircraft is misleading on account of lower service life of parts but it would still be lower priced over western aircraft because of lower labour prices and the economy of numbers that usually favour the russians.

GeorgeWelch
BRFite
Posts: 1393
Joined: 12 Jun 2009 09:31

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby GeorgeWelch » 26 Oct 2009 08:54

pandyan wrote:RameshC, GeorgeWelsh,

Any insight into how F18/F16 performed in India during the trials?


As someone in the US with no inside sources, I would be the last to know

Baldev
BRFite
Posts: 501
Joined: 21 Sep 2009 07:27

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Baldev » 26 Oct 2009 08:58

Katare wrote:It's a myth that Russian hardware are cheaper, I believe that they may cost more than western weapons when cost is calculated over the entire life and normalized for the uptime/availability/performance.

I think this is the reason that RFP tenders has been changed to include total life cycle cost and performance (up time, ease of maintenance, MTBF, cost of consumable/fligh hour etc) while selecting the L1.

this was true but not any more

Baldev
BRFite
Posts: 501
Joined: 21 Sep 2009 07:27

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Baldev » 26 Oct 2009 09:09

electro optical heads for KH29 and KH59

FULL Television-optical sight buttons HEAD "T-2P-1
http://www.tecon.lviv.ua/rus/images/avi ... abomb1.jpg

purpose - Search, detection and auto tracking of ground and surface objects in conditions of visibility.

SPECIFICATIONS
Auto-tracking objects with the level of contrast the TV signal 0.1
Spectral range (0,5-1,0) mm
Working light (10-100000) lx

Dimensions:
diameter 275 mm
length 515 mm
Bulk 22,5 kg

COMPACT AVIATION TELEVISION Homing T-2U "
http://www.tecon.lviv.ua/rus/images/avi ... abomb2.jpg

Purpose: Search, detection, auto tracking ground and surface objects in visibility.

SPECIFICATIONS
Auto-tracking objects with the level
contrast of the TV signal 0.05
Spectral range (0,5 - 1,0) mm
Working light (5,0-100000) lx
Digital image processing
The size of the object auto-tracking to 3x3 pixels
Range of recognition and support
small objects not less than 5 km
Diameter 180 mm
Bulk 15 kg

TELEVISION Homing T-2-KP "
http://www.tecon.lviv.ua/rus/images/avi ... abomb3.jpg

SPECIFICATIONS
Auto tracking objects with a contrast level of TV signal 0.05
Spectral range (0,5-1,0) mm
Working light (0,5-100000) lx
Diameter 380 mm


so if T 2U TV head with dia 180mm has range of 5 km for small target recognition then T2KP TV head with 380mm dia used in KH59MK will have range over 15 km for same purpose
Last edited by Baldev on 26 Oct 2009 09:37, edited 2 times in total.

Baldev
BRFite
Posts: 501
Joined: 21 Sep 2009 07:27

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Baldev » 26 Oct 2009 09:27

APK 9 SERIES POD

The APK-9 series datalink pod is 4 metres long, has a diameter of 0.45 m, weighs 260 kg, and has a range of 140 km using nose and tail mounted antennas

this pod has

Ku-BAND IMPULSE MAGNETRON TRASMITTER "1HA-401BK" (1 ha-401BK)
http://www.tecon.lviv.ua/eng/images/optics/optics4.jpg
Applications: Command data trasmitting in radio link of SU-30MK aircraft.

TRANSCEIVING TRACKING TWIN ANTENNA SYSTEM "GA-129BMK" (HA-129BMK)
http://www.tecon.lviv.ua/eng/images/optics/optics2.jpg
Applications: Transceiver twin antenna system for command TV-radio link of SU-30MK aircraft and bearing.

KU-BAND FM TV-RECEIVER "RP.7000K" (RP.7000K)
http://www.tecon.lviv.ua/eng/images/optics/optics1.jpg
Applications: Demodulation of analog FM TV-signals of command TV-guidance link.


KH59 systems

RECEIVER WITH GYRO STABILIZED TRACKING ANTENNA "1DV1-401AMK" (1DV1-401AMK)
http://www.tecon.lviv.ua/eng/images/optics/optics3.jpg
Applications: 2D-tracking for direction of arrival impulse
signals of 3cm command guidance radio link and transmitting of TV-signals . signals of 3cm command guidance radio link and transmitting of TV-signals.

KU-RANGE SOLID STATE TV FM TRANSMITTER "SB-1A" (SB-1A)
http://www.tecon.lviv.ua/eng/images/rad ... lines1.jpg
Applications: Transmitting of FM TV-signals in TV command guidance systems.

and TV homing head
http://translate.googleusercontent.com/ ... 8vWED--NuQ


now both data link pod and kh59 works like this
http://translate.googleusercontent.com/ ... Pm1sEX4bLQ

Analog FM and FSK TV radio links
http://translate.googleusercontent.com/ ... Rg0ps3LzVg

but some the electronics in APK 9 pod is not built by TEKON ELEKTRON any more

akshay
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 60
Joined: 20 Jun 2009 12:54

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby akshay » 26 Oct 2009 16:47

pandyan wrote:RameshC, GeorgeWelsh,

Any insight into how F18/F16 performed in India during the trials?


"IAF was impressed with SH" ..i havnt the link with me now ..i think its compared to F16 which obviously IAF is not keen since Pak got the block 52.

The M35 IRST & HMS stands out,russians have a longer development cycle over that.

i have a question..why MRCA when the Su30mki is a lethal platform already,read on BRF itlsef..why not develop and upgrade that itself.

Venu
BRFite
Posts: 161
Joined: 26 Oct 2009 17:23
Location: rimbola..rimbola

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Venu » 26 Oct 2009 17:43

Hi Guru log and Aam log, dont know if you guys have noticed this,

Wiki's MiG-35 page is updated lately and it has a MiG-35 comparison pic with Canards :eek:

Image

Here is the link, just in case if my try to include image fails,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Compare_MiG-35_and_MiG-29_mirror.png

I have seen many many and many pics and videos of MiG-35, but never observed the canards on it (Had no problem with my eyes, what-so-ever).

Are these canards considered intially and dropped later as they offer nothing special? or are they considering to have them included in it now, just to lure we Indians knowing our obsession towards Canards :roll: ( I am talking about MKI here. Don't chide me flz :(( , on my very first post if I am overboard)

Actually, I kind of liked it. Infact, it is my dream as well, to see it in canards. Me a typical Indian onlee 8)

Thanks, Venu

Baldev
BRFite
Posts: 501
Joined: 21 Sep 2009 07:27

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Baldev » 26 Oct 2009 19:36

its a great possibility that both KAB 500/1500 KR or TV guided weapons have either T2P TV head with 180mm dia or T2U TV head with 280mm dia

http://www.missiles.ru/_foto/Ahtuba-2005/DSC00678.jpg
http://www.ausairpower.net/GNPP-KAB-500Kr-U-1S.jpg


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 41 guests