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.
Boudhayan
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 37
Joined: 10 Feb 2010 10:16

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Boudhayan » 11 May 2010 08:12

aditya.agd wrote:Any plane that is bought as part of MMRCA must enable India to fight a war under all circumstances and be independent of foreign policy of that particular country.

F18 SH has following features:
Day/night strikes with precision-guided weapons
Anti-air warfare
Fighter escort
Close air support
Suppression of enemy air defense
Maritime strike
Reconnaissance
Forward Air Control (Airborne) (FAC(A))
Air-to-Air Refueling
Leaflet drops with Payload Delivery Unit 5 (PDU-5) containers[44]

Do other contenders also have similar features?


Taking the so called capabilities of SH one by one:

Day/night strikes with precision-guided weapons - All planes do it. In fact our Mirage/Jaguar can also do the same using LGB units :lol:
Anti-air warfare - Again any multi-role jet is able to do that. IMO, our Mig 21 Bison with the R 77 can do that pretty nicely
Fighter escort - Hang an escort Jamming pod onto any air-craft's pilyon and you are done with this requirement
Close air support - Our Mig 27 and Jaguar rock in this requirement.
Suppression of enemy air defense - For SEAD missions, all you need are a few anti-radiation or HARM missiles and again this can be fulfilled.
Maritime strike - Any jet with long legs can do it. Ofcourse if you are talking about the capability of ASCM, then we already have that fulfilled by the Rambha(s) taking in the Brahmos. Otherwise, any jet can strafe the enemy ship with it's guns also and you get a Maritime strike aircraft :mrgreen:
Reconnaissance - All you need is an ELINT pod and this can be done by an aircraft having log legs :lol:
Forward Air Control (Airborne) (FAC(A)) - Now for this, you need a good radar. In our present inventory, Rambhas with their BARS radar does the job. Anyways with the Phalcon, this job can be done by the AWCAS. In the MMRCA competition, all the requirement is to have an AESA radar and hence all of them can be used for that role
Air-to-Air Refueling - This I believe is implemented in most of the air-crafts and if not, then all it takes is a few modifications and you are done
Leaflet drops with Payload Delivery Unit 5 (PDU-5) containers[44] - Are we talking about Afganistan type psy warfare in here ?? :rotfl: :lol: . Anyways, this can be done by any aircraft which can drop bombs :lol: India had done it previously in the Bangladesh war

So all in all, the brochure type capabilities (as correctly mentioned by Shiv Sir) can be done by any aircraft that is available in the market (including the guys who are fighting in the MMRCA) as well as most/all of the air-crafts that are present in our inventory.

ArmenT
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 4239
Joined: 10 Sep 2007 05:57
Location: Loud, Proud, Ugly American

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby ArmenT » 11 May 2010 08:33

aditya.agd wrote:F18 SH has following features:
Maritime strike

If you're talking about a carrier based aircraft, everyone knows that the USN uses the Super Hornet on her carriers. The big question is can India launch a Super Hornet from IN carriers? Bear in mind that USN carriers are a lot bigger + they have steam catapults for extra thrust. Do you know if a SH can take off from a ski-jump from INS Vikramaditya/Gorshkov?

karan_mc
BRFite
Posts: 700
Joined: 02 Dec 2006 20:53

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby karan_mc » 11 May 2010 08:35

Gripen Ng and Sea Gripen will be ideal for both air force and navy ,along with Tejas

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby shiv » 11 May 2010 08:45

Austin wrote:^^^ Shiv saar to get those info you need to be either a member of CCSA or the IAF Chief


Absolutely. And that means that a decision will require inputs from the IAF that we know nothing about - and that any comparisons and discussions we have here do not include critical information that may tilt a selection one way or another. These are all "unromantic" factors that Discovery channel fails to mention as it accelerates the rhetoric from supercruise to ballistic.

As long as everyone understands that any discussion is fine.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Austin » 11 May 2010 09:16

^^^ Shiv what you say is true and it is equally true for any defence deal , there are lot of "unromantic" factor that goes into selection of any weapon system including funding that we will never come to know at that point of time or becomes apparent later on or we will simply never know.

So if F-16 wins at the end of the day it will break many hearts but it may be in IAF top 4 selected aircraft ( tested and known performance in Indian condition and other financial/business matrix ) but number 1 in GOI interest , so GOI interest will win the deal taking defence wala view into consideration.

Shatack
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 55
Joined: 15 Apr 2010 22:06

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Shatack » 11 May 2010 15:17

Henrik wrote:
I think you need to learn how to crawl before you can walk. :roll:


:rotfl: :rotfl:

"The authors write that the cost for South Africa’s deal with several European countries to buy military equipment is around SEK 42 billion (about 4.2 billion euro). Half of that sum is spent on JAS 39 Gripen. They write that it is hard to gain acceptance in the South African society for the fact that resources are being allocated to military investments instead of fighting the legacy from the Apartheid era."
http://www.stockholmnews.com/more.aspx?NID=5064

2.1b€ / 26 = 80 millions euro a gripen fly away, or 104m$

Brahmananda
BRFite
Posts: 174
Joined: 21 Mar 2010 22:09

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Brahmananda » 11 May 2010 15:52

Read lines two and three of my post.

Ofcourse the US has interests in India.

It also has interests in our neighbors (Pakistan).

Hence, restrictions may arise in the event of a conflict.

Again, exercising a bit of caution doesn't hurt when dealing with the US.

It also doesn't mean that those who buy into this logic are "cowards".

On the one hand you call us cowards for being cautious and on the other you say that full ToT and source codes is a must.

So I must ask, why the cowardice Keizer?

Please desist from posting nonsensical arguments and reposting specs.

You sound like an American car salesman (not a very good one).

Oh and...When the war starts I'll be stitching up the place where your balls used to be.


just stating my opinion if you dont like you dont have to reply. why do you have to get so offensive? Is the name calling needed? I dont see our forces shying away from US purchases if its comes with TOT and source codes i think SH is a good aircraft. Will they give full-tot well i guess if other contenders are i think US may give it too, just my opinion. IMO talking so much about sanctions isn't our concern, i for one trust the decision of the military, if they are confident they can operate SH without problems even during war well they can go for it. I for one support their decision and i hope they the first aircraft in their shortlist. Speaking in terms of operational costs the SH has lowest in the twin engine class while NG has the lowest in Single engine class, speaking in terms of off the shelf ability and can be delivered in good numbers in good time SH remains on top and fact is no other contender has the production rate and meet deadlines.

Rafale, EF and Ng use lots of US weapons, EU weapons are atleast 2 to 3 times more expensive often dont match abilities of US counter parts especially in air to ground. NG and EF use lots of US parts and need US clearance for TOT so IMO if SH and SV are sanction prone EF and NG too are just as sanction prone. Rafale nice aircraft but very expensive to operate during its life time if IAF likes the Rafale by all means go for it. F-4+ Rafale could be a very nice addition to our forces but when is it going to be ready considering it remains largely unfunded.

Henrik
BRFite
Posts: 211
Joined: 10 Apr 2010 15:55
Location: Southern Sweden

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Henrik » 11 May 2010 16:34

Shatack wrote:
Henrik wrote:
I think you need to learn how to crawl before you can walk. :roll:


:rotfl: :rotfl:

"The authors write that the cost for South Africa’s deal with several European countries to buy military equipment is around SEK 42 billion (about 4.2 billion euro). Half of that sum is spent on JAS 39 Gripen. They write that it is hard to gain acceptance in the South African society for the fact that resources are being allocated to military investments instead of fighting the legacy from the Apartheid era."
http://www.stockholmnews.com/more.aspx?NID=5064

2.1b€ / 26 = 80 millions euro a gripen fly away, or 104m$

Are you stupid or something? Need to take some geography classes? South Africa is not Sweden, in the same way France isn't Bhutan. :rotfl: :rotfl:

I just provided you with a source from a Swedish governmental agency, who knows a lot more about this than you do. What you questioned me about was wether the Gripen C costs the SWEDISH airforce less then $30 million or not, not what it costs the South African airforce. And my source, whom I trust and so should you, proved you wrong. But maybe you don't trust your french counterparts in France? Or maybe you need a pair of glasses? I don't know, but what I do know is that you are so wrong your'e making a fool out of yourself. Aren't you ashamed? :lol:

Apparently, you still need to learn how to crawl before you can walk. Don't rush it, you may trip and hurt yourself. :rotfl: :rotfl:
Last edited by archan on 12 May 2010 06:12, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: User warned. Mind that language.

Manish_P
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2435
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Manish_P » 11 May 2010 16:44

Slightly OT, so pls. excuse...

Would the selection for the MRCA also influence the selection of the Advanced Jet Trainer aircraft ?

I read somewhere that the EADs Mako is being promoted as a good trainer for the Eurofighter, having a similar cockpit layout and instrumentation.

jai
BRFite
Posts: 366
Joined: 08 Oct 2009 19:14

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby jai » 11 May 2010 17:12

Oh and...When the war starts I'll be stitching up the place where your balls used to be.

Are you stupid or something?

Quit being a buffoon and grow up!


Gentlemen, what kind of language are we using on this forum now ? Not sure what are we trying to prove with such language on the forum, and why disagreement with a viewpoint needs such foul language ??

Please do have some regard for the sensibilities of other readers and members of this forum.

Henrik
BRFite
Posts: 211
Joined: 10 Apr 2010 15:55
Location: Southern Sweden

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Henrik » 11 May 2010 17:28

jai wrote:
Oh and...When the war starts I'll be stitching up the place where your balls used to be.

Are you stupid or something?

Quit being a buffoon and grow up!


Gentlemen, what kind of language are we using on this forum now ? Not sure what are we trying to prove with such language on the forum, and why disagreement with a viewpoint needs such foul language ??

Please do have some regard for the sensibilities of other readers and members of this forum.

Sry, I guess I should stop feeding the troll. Though I must say that the arrogance sometimes shown is deafening.

bhavik
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 50
Joined: 26 Aug 2009 02:02

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby bhavik » 11 May 2010 19:26

Boudhayan wrote:
aditya.agd wrote:Any plane that is bought as part of MMRCA must enable India to fight a war under all circumstances and be independent of foreign policy of that particular country.

F18 SH has following features:
Day/night strikes with precision-guided weapons
Anti-air warfare
Fighter escort
Close air support
Suppression of enemy air defense
Maritime strike
Reconnaissance
Forward Air Control (Airborne) (FAC(A))
Air-to-Air Refueling
Leaflet drops with Payload Delivery Unit 5 (PDU-5) containers[44]

Do other contenders also have similar features?


Taking the so called capabilities of SH one by one:

Day/night strikes with precision-guided weapons - All planes do it. In fact our Mirage/Jaguar can also do the same using LGB units :lol:
Anti-air warfare - Again any multi-role jet is able to do that. IMO, our Mig 21 Bison with the R 77 can do that pretty nicely
Fighter escort - Hang an escort Jamming pod onto any air-craft's pilyon and you are done with this requirement
Close air support - Our Mig 27 and Jaguar rock in this requirement.
Suppression of enemy air defense - For SEAD missions, all you need are a few anti-radiation or HARM missiles and again this can be fulfilled.
Maritime strike - Any jet with long legs can do it. Ofcourse if you are talking about the capability of ASCM, then we already have that fulfilled by the Rambha(s) taking in the Brahmos. Otherwise, any jet can strafe the enemy ship with it's guns also and you get a Maritime strike aircraft :mrgreen:
Reconnaissance - All you need is an ELINT pod and this can be done by an aircraft having log legs :lol:
Forward Air Control (Airborne) (FAC(A)) - Now for this, you need a good radar. In our present inventory, Rambhas with their BARS radar does the job. Anyways with the Phalcon, this job can be done by the AWCAS. In the MMRCA competition, all the requirement is to have an AESA radar and hence all of them can be used for that role
Air-to-Air Refueling - This I believe is implemented in most of the air-crafts and if not, then all it takes is a few modifications and you are done
Leaflet drops with Payload Delivery Unit 5 (PDU-5) containers[44] - Are we talking about Afganistan type psy warfare in here ?? :rotfl: :lol: . Anyways, this can be done by any aircraft which can drop bombs :lol: India had done it previously in the Bangladesh war

So all in all, the brochure type capabilities (as correctly mentioned by Shiv Sir) can be done by any aircraft that is available in the market (including the guys who are fighting in the MMRCA) as well as most/all of the air-crafts that are present in our inventory.


Agreed. Many planes do the stuff above. But which ones do them all?

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby shiv » 11 May 2010 19:45

bhavik wrote:Agreed. Many planes do the stuff above. But which ones do them all?


I am willing to make a clear statement on this issue. but I will need to be paid for it. In advance :lol:

That was meant to be a joke, but it illustrates the problem of talking about these things. One the one hand are innocent jingos who have a right to have an opinion, be a fanboy, suffer from Americanitis, brochuritis or Discovery channel syndrome, and on the other hand there will be people (probably not on this forum) who are "salespersons" for a particular company who will encourage anything positive that is said about some thing by creating the brochures, posts in fanboy forums and blogs and rhetoric on Discovery.

Ages ago a classmate of mine in medical college told me something that holds perfectly true. Anyone on earth can give medical advice, but only the people with medical degrees are legally allowed to charge money for the advice. We are all allowed to have opinions on the issue - but only the professionals in the Air Force will have the final say. So no point picking on anyone else, fanboy or detractor.

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

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby GeorgeWelch » 11 May 2010 20:00

ArmenT wrote:The big question is can India launch a Super Hornet from IN carriers? Bear in mind that USN carriers are a lot bigger + they have steam catapults for extra thrust. Do you know if a SH can take off from a ski-jump from INS Vikramaditya/Gorshkov?


Yes, Boeing has stated several times that the SH can launch from the ski-jump on the Gorshkov

RoyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5180
Joined: 10 Aug 2009 05:10

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby RoyG » 11 May 2010 20:13

Brahmananda wrote:
Read lines two and three of my post.

Ofcourse the US has interests in India.

It also has interests in our neighbors (Pakistan).

Hence, restrictions may arise in the event of a conflict.

Again, exercising a bit of caution doesn't hurt when dealing with the US.

It also doesn't mean that those who buy into this logic are "cowards".

On the one hand you call us cowards for being cautious and on the other you say that full ToT and source codes is a must.

So I must ask, why the cowardice Keizer?

Please desist from posting nonsensical arguments and reposting specs.

You sound like an American car salesman (not a very good one).

Oh and...When the war starts I'll be stitching up the place where your balls used to be.


just stating my opinion if you dont like you dont have to reply. why do you have to get so offensive? Is the name calling needed? I dont see our forces shying away from US purchases if its comes with TOT and source codes i think SH is a good aircraft. Will they give full-tot well i guess if other contenders are i think US may give it too, just my opinion. IMO talking so much about sanctions isn't our concern, i for one trust the decision of the military, if they are confident they can operate SH without problems even during war well they can go for it. I for one support their decision and i hope they the first aircraft in their shortlist. Speaking in terms of operational costs the SH has lowest in the twin engine class while NG has the lowest in Single engine class, speaking in terms of off the shelf ability and can be delivered in good numbers in good time SH remains on top and fact is no other contender has the production rate and meet deadlines.

Rafale, EF and Ng use lots of US weapons, EU weapons are atleast 2 to 3 times more expensive often dont match abilities of US counter parts especially in air to ground. NG and EF use lots of US parts and need US clearance for TOT so IMO if SH and SV are sanction prone EF and NG too are just as sanction prone. Rafale nice aircraft but very expensive to operate during its life time if IAF likes the Rafale by all means go for it. F-4+ Rafale could be a very nice addition to our forces but when is it going to be ready considering it remains largely unfunded.


It all started with you labeling others as cowards.

I feel that disrespecting others and posting nonsensical arguments warrants a reply.

So now talking so much about sanctions isn't a concern?

Why BR then? Lets be happy with w/e the military and political elite does!

Afterall, they are very very comfortable and confident these days...

I'm still confused as to the position you're taking on ToT and source codes.

You state one thing and then contradict yourself with another.

I apologize if I may have your hurt your poor feelings Keizer.

Toodles!

Brahmananda
BRFite
Posts: 174
Joined: 21 Mar 2010 22:09

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Brahmananda » 11 May 2010 22:20

Day/night strikes with precision-guided weapons - All planes do it. In fact our Mirage/Jaguar can also do the same using LGB units :lol:
Anti-air warfare - Again any multi-role jet is able to do that. IMO, our Mig 21 Bison with the R 77 can do that pretty nicely
Fighter escort - Hang an escort Jamming pod onto any air-craft's pilyon and you are done with this requirement
Close air support - Our Mig 27 and Jaguar rock in this requirement.
Suppression of enemy air defense - For SEAD missions, all you need are a few anti-radiation or HARM missiles and again this can be fulfilled.
Maritime strike - Any jet with long legs can do it. Ofcourse if you are talking about the capability of ASCM, then we already have that fulfilled by the Rambha(s) taking in the Brahmos. Otherwise, any jet can strafe the enemy ship with it's guns also and you get a Maritime strike aircraft :mrgreen:
Reconnaissance - All you need is an ELINT pod and this can be done by an aircraft having log legs :lol:
Forward Air Control (Airborne) (FAC(A)) - Now for this, you need a good radar. In our present inventory, Rambhas with their BARS radar does the job. Anyways with the Phalcon, this job can be done by the AWCAS. In the MMRCA competition, all the requirement is to have an AESA radar and hence all of them can be used for that role
Air-to-Air Refueling - This I believe is implemented in most of the air-crafts and if not, then all it takes is a few modifications and you are done


Anti-Air: SH can do it very well with Aim-120D and soon Meteor once integrated, newer missiles better kill chances
Fighter Escort: F-18 G can carry lots of jammers and its the best aircraft for electronic attack
Close Air support: abilties to provide that with even better gps/laser guided weapons and loner range JDAM-ERs, SDB can be launched from 60NM away.
SEAD: new AAGRM missiles that can kill shut down radars as well.
Maritime strike: can fire Harpoon, Slam/ER, JSOW for naval targets, ideal for non-critical maritime targets, Brahmos is a bit too expensive to hit easier naval targets
Recon: together with ATFLIR and SHARP recon pod SH can do it really well from long ranges of over 50NM and share real time intel with ground stations.
FAC: SH can perform AWACS roles and with its radar being able to track 1m2 target at over 90 to 100 NM, its long range ability gives it an edge. Its datalink the same one on board the EF as well can share data with in a 300NM range
http://www.baesystems.com/ProductsServi ... s_lvt.html
Tanking: SH can tank and refuel all types of aircraft and not just buddies.

aditya.agd
BRFite
Posts: 174
Joined: 28 Apr 2010 00:37

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby aditya.agd » 12 May 2010 05:56

Rafale features (simply amazing and best of it's class):
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Crew: 1–2
Length: 15.27 m (50.1 ft)
Wingspan: 10.80 m (35.4 ft)
Height: 5.34 m (17.5 ft)
Wing area: 45.7 m² (492 ft²)
Empty weight: 9,500 kg (C), 9,770 kg (B),[66] 10,196 kg (M) ()
Max takeoff weight: 24,500 kg (C/D), 22,200 kg (M)[67] (54,000 lb)
Powerplant: 2× Snecma M88-2 turbofans
Dry thrust: 50.04 kN (11,250 lbf) each
Thrust with afterburner: 75.62 kN with M88-Eco >90 kN after 2010 (17,000 lbf) each
Performance

Maximum speed:

High altitude: Mach 2 (2,390 km/h, 1,290 knots)[66]
Low altitude: 1,390 km/h, 750 knots
Range: 3,700+ km (2,000+ nmi)
Combat radius: 1,852+ km (1,000+ nmi) on penetration mission
Service ceiling: 16,800 m (55,000 ft)
Rate of climb: 304.8+ m/s (1,000+ ft/s)
Wing loading: 326 kg/m² (83 1/3 lb/ft²)
Thrust/weight: 1.13
Armament


Guns: 1× 30 mm (1.18 in) GIAT 30/719B cannon with 125 rounds
Missiles:

Air-to-air:
MICA IR/EM or
Magic II and in the future
MBDA Meteor
Air-to-ground:
MBDA Apache or
SCALP EG or
AASM or
GBU-12 Paveway II or
AM 39 Exocet or
ASMP-A nuclear missile
Avionics


Thales RBE2 radar
Thales SPECTRA electronic warfare system.
Thales/SAGEM OSF (Optronique Secteur Frontal) infrared search and track system.

Nair
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 56
Joined: 13 Mar 2010 06:25

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Nair » 12 May 2010 06:56

GeorgeWelch wrote:
ArmenT wrote:The big question is can India launch a Super Hornet from IN carriers? Bear in mind that USN carriers are a lot bigger + they have steam catapults for extra thrust. Do you know if a SH can take off from a ski-jump from INS Vikramaditya/Gorshkov?


Yes, Boeing has stated several times that the SH can launch from the ski-jump on the Gorshkov



I don't think anyone has a question whether the SH can launch off the ski jump on Gorshkov..the question is with what load?

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16831
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby NRao » 12 May 2010 07:29

I don't think anyone has a question whether the SH can launch off the ski jump on Gorshkov..the question is with what load?


The question WAS if there was enough clearance. Evidently there is. Load should be whatever the IN needs, since the question was posed by IN.

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5246
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby ShauryaT » 12 May 2010 09:00

Shiv: Your post with your points (which comes after years of reading, observing), did not make any dent on the brochure touting crowd (Ooops: Gentlemen here). One post of mine (an article by BK), with a view point that questioned the whole point and purpose of the MRCA, was dismissed as if, I have just landed from Mars.

I have asked this question many times to myself, debating with myself, on what is the use of the MRCA, in what threat or opportunity scenarios can this proposed capability be effectively employed in a given time period. But gurus here, do not want to dwell on it, so it seems.

Air power, loses value, unless used offensively - as proved in Kargil. If we were not willing to even cross the LOC air space, the excused being a threat of escalation, do not know, under what circumstances and where will we use such imported offensive power.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby shiv » 12 May 2010 09:39

ShauryaT wrote:I have asked this question many times to myself, debating with myself, on what is the use of the MRCA, in what threat or opportunity scenarios can this proposed capability be effectively employed in a given time period. But gurus here, do not want to dwell on it, so it seems.

Air power, loses value, unless used offensively - as proved in Kargil. If we were not willing to even cross the LOC air space, the excused being a threat of escalation, do not know, under what circumstances and where will we use such imported offensive power.


Shaurya - this is how I see it.

It is essential to see the Air Force as a separate and independent organization that has a duty to perform. There are 3 groups here
1) Air force/armed forces
2) Indian government
3) Peepals - fanboys/jingos/wet blankets etc

For the purpose of the MRCA deal group 3 and their views must be excluded. They have nothing to do with the MRCA deal and overestimate the importance of their views.

1) Air Force: The duty of the Air force (as part of armed forces) is to defend India's territorial integrity and take orders from the civilian government with regard to this.

In order for the Air Force to perform their duty they need to have an overall view of the security environment and maintain "operational readiness' to face foreseeable security threats. The question of not crossing LoC etc is not an Air Force decision. The Air Force will have to maintain operational readiness to cross LoC or hit China even if that is not demanded of them because that requirement is part of their job description.

In order to maintain operational readiness the Air Force has to have a minimum number of assets in terms of Aircraft, personnel and bases. In addition the Air Force needs to foresee a situation in which operational readiness will go South because of an ageing fleet, and they need to notify the GoI in advance of that requirement so that plans can be made to acquire new assets to prevent loss of operational readiness.
It has been foreseen for a long time that the retirement of the Mig 21 fleet would lead to loss of operational readiness despite the induction of new MKIs and upgradation of existing fighters.

It was hoped that the LCA would make up the required numbers. it is clear now that the LCA cannot make up the required numbers soon enough without depleting India's operational readiness. For that reason it has become imperative to increase numbers by means of an existing aircraft to be imported. And that is what the proposed MRCA deal is all about.


It is a stop gap measure that hopes to use India's financial clout to kill two birds with one stone
a) Maintain the Air Force's operational readiness and fleet size (This is an Air Force requirement)
b) Upgrade the technical capability of the Indian Aerospace industry from (I hate the word "generation" here, but I will use it) from 3 gen to 4 gen at least. (This is a Government of India clause)

2) The Government of India: The IAF cannot make any purchase decisions on its own. It has to go via Goi. The GoI can insert or remove clauses in the deal based on political considerations.

In theory (in theory) the government can take a huge bribe from the biggest bribe giver and ask the Air Force to eat whatever shit it gets. This in fact is what has happened in Pakistan, where one set of competing armed forces officers are often "the government". In general this is less likely to happen in India for reasons that are OT for this post.

It is the government that has several "arms" to employ. The Armed Forces are an arm of the Government to be employed as the government sees fit, and it is therefore essential for the GoI to ensure the health of the armed forces. Whether the Air Force is employed across the LoC or not is a government decision.

However I agree with the point you make. The government asked the Air Force not to cross the LoC in Kargil. The same elected government of India (and "different party" is a stupid excuse) wanted to use the Air Force against Naxalies within Indian borders. Luckily the AF had the good sense to tell the GoI where to get off.

Sadly (and it makes me mad) the GoI behaves exactly like the stupid sentiment expressed in another thread. The GoI wants the Security Forces to do a job, but be gentle about it. Defeating enemies is not a job that can be done gently. The government is allowed to be ignorant and takes stupidity to an art form. The Air Force cannot afford to be stupid.

Shatack
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 55
Joined: 15 Apr 2010 22:06

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Shatack » 12 May 2010 15:25

Henrik wrote:Sry, I guess I should stop feeding the troll. Though I must say that the arrogance sometimes shown is deafening.


"silence is the perfectest herald of joy"

W.S :wink:

Shatack
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 55
Joined: 15 Apr 2010 22:06

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Shatack » 12 May 2010 15:29

"The JSF is the only candidate that fulfils all the operational requirements specified by the Norwegian government, and is offered at a lower price than the Gripen NG," the nation’s defence ministry announced on 20 November.

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/20 ... en-ng.html

"Buying a fleet of 48 conventional take-off and landing F-35As will cost NKr18 billion ($2.5 billion), it says, with the programme’s value expected to rise to NKr145 billion over a 30-year service period. Saab’s rival Gripen NG would be up to NKr6 billion more expensive to acquire, and cost NKr20-30 billion more in life-cycle costs, according to Oslo’s analysis."

Henrik
BRFite
Posts: 211
Joined: 10 Apr 2010 15:55
Location: Southern Sweden

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Henrik » 12 May 2010 16:12

Shatack wrote:"The JSF is the only candidate that fulfils all the operational requirements specified by the Norwegian government, and is offered at a lower price than the Gripen NG," the nation’s defence ministry announced on 20 November.

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/20 ... en-ng.html

"Buying a fleet of 48 conventional take-off and landing F-35As will cost NKr18 billion ($2.5 billion), it says, with the programme’s value expected to rise to NKr145 billion over a 30-year service period. Saab’s rival Gripen NG would be up to NKr6 billion more expensive to acquire, and cost NKr20-30 billion more in life-cycle costs, according to Oslo’s analysis."

I thought I told you to read up on the Norwegian deal before mentioning it ever again, which you clearly haven't.

I'll quote an earlier post made by Ponen who explains it brilliantly. 8)

Ponen wrote:The Norwegian calculations of the Gripen were way off. Their calculations predicted something like that half of all the aircraft were going to crash and I think they took the cost / flight hour from their F-16s. IIRC NL used the Norwegian calculations as a basis for their evaluation.

The Norwegian calculations were so laughably off that Saab made their own calculations with the Norwegian numbers and got the result that buying and using Gripen would cost the Norwegians more than the F-35s even if they would have acquired the F-35s for free.

Honestly I think SAAB/SwAF has got a pretty good idea of what the cost / fh is as the Gripen fleet has flown like 140,000h
in total. It's not like the difference between $3000/fh(or whatever SAAB/SwAF claims it to be) and $10000/fh is a marginal one.


:rotfl: :rotfl:

Gaur
Forum Moderator
Posts: 2009
Joined: 01 Feb 2009 23:19

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Gaur » 12 May 2010 16:21

Shatack wrote:"The JSF is the only candidate that fulfils all the operational requirements specified by the Norwegian government, and is offered at a lower price than the Gripen NG," the nation’s defence ministry announced on 20 November.

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/20 ... en-ng.html

"Buying a fleet of 48 conventional take-off and landing F-35As will cost NKr18 billion ($2.5 billion), it says, with the programme’s value expected to rise to NKr145 billion over a 30-year service period. Saab’s rival Gripen NG would be up to NKr6 billion more expensive to acquire, and cost NKr20-30 billion more in life-cycle costs, according to Oslo’s analysis."

Really? Norwegian deal? :roll:
Since you obviously have problems reading up the Norwegian deal, perhaps you would bother to see the following video. However, I have a feeling that any proof will not quench the fanboy flame in you, but perhaps the video will be interesting to other members.
http://www.viddler.com/explore/signatoryvideos/videos/1/

MarcH
BRFite
Posts: 122
Joined: 22 Feb 2009 10:32

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby MarcH » 12 May 2010 19:23

Oh sweet Jesus. Next time people will quote Carlo Kopp. :rotfl:

Henrik
BRFite
Posts: 211
Joined: 10 Apr 2010 15:55
Location: Southern Sweden

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Henrik » 12 May 2010 19:32

MarcH wrote:Oh sweet Jesus. Next time people will quote Carlo Kopp. :rotfl:


I don't get it. :roll:

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16831
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby NRao » 12 May 2010 20:10

MarcH wrote:Oh sweet Jesus. Next time people will quote Carlo Kopp. :rotfl:


Not funny. CK is now claiming that the IAF has managed to build two horns into the MKI!!!

Bharadwaj
BRFite
Posts: 386
Joined: 09 Oct 2006 11:09

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Bharadwaj » 12 May 2010 20:14

Henrik wrote:
MarcH wrote:Oh sweet Jesus. Next time people will quote Carlo Kopp. :rotfl:


I don't get it. :roll:


Carlo Kopp= someone who achieves an or**** when the word raptor is mentioned

parshuram
BRFite
Posts: 327
Joined: 28 Feb 2006 09:52

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby parshuram » 13 May 2010 10:07

Any updates whether field trials for all the contenders and hence the MMRCA trials are over ?? IAF was supposed to wind it up by april end this year

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16831
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby NRao » 13 May 2010 13:43

parshuram wrote:Any updates whether field trials for all the contenders and hence the MMRCA trials are over ?? IAF was supposed to wind it up by april end this year


well, someone missed that memo.

No. May endish. That one little bug called NG could not make it pre-April.

Shatack
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 55
Joined: 15 Apr 2010 22:06

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Shatack » 13 May 2010 16:37

aditya.agd wrote:Rafale features (simply amazing and best of it's class):
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Crew: 1–2
Length: 15.27 m (50.1 ft)
Wingspan: 10.80 m (35.4 ft)
Height: 5.34 m (17.5 ft)
Wing area: 45.7 m² (492 ft²)
Empty weight: 9,500 kg (C), 9,770 kg (B),[66] 10,196 kg (M) ()
Max takeoff weight: 24,500 kg (C/D), 22,200 kg (M)[67] (54,000 lb)
Powerplant: 2× Snecma M88-2 turbofans
Dry thrust: 50.04 kN (11,250 lbf) each
Thrust with afterburner: 75.62 kN with M88-Eco >90 kN after 2010 (17,000 lbf) each
Performance

Maximum speed:

High altitude: Mach 2 (2,390 km/h, 1,290 knots)[66]
Low altitude: 1,390 km/h, 750 knots
Range: 3,700+ km (2,000+ nmi)
Combat radius: 1,852+ km (1,000+ nmi) on penetration mission
Service ceiling: 16,800 m (55,000 ft)
Rate of climb: 304.8+ m/s (1,000+ ft/s)
Wing loading: 326 kg/m² (83 1/3 lb/ft²)
Thrust/weight: 1.13
Armament


Guns: 1× 30 mm (1.18 in) GIAT 30/719B cannon with 125 rounds
Missiles:

Air-to-air:
MICA IR/EM or
Magic II and in the future
MBDA Meteor
Air-to-ground:
MBDA Apache or
SCALP EG or
AASM or
GBU-12 Paveway II or
AM 39 Exocet or
ASMP-A nuclear missile
Avionics


Thales RBE2 radar
Thales SPECTRA electronic warfare system.
Thales/SAGEM OSF (Optronique Secteur Frontal) infrared search and track system.


DSI Magazine, ATLC UAE 2009

An imperative: export!

That's the most promising prospects in the short term. Come s' to add to it, obviously, the negotiations with India (126 machines). The opening of the commercial offers of various competitor may occur this summer. But the selection process will still take years. With regard to Switzerland (11-22), it is still up on political debates about the desirability of such an acquisition program. And the budget currently provided for is markedly insufficient. For Libya (14 to 40) and Kuwait (28), these are State to State negotiations of which the eventual outcome obeys to very specific considerations ... A Kuwaiti team has recently come to France and the contact was extremely positive.

As for export shipments, they could start very soon after the signing of the contract if the customer is satisfied with the french standard. Brazil, for example, could receive its first six aircraft in 2012 or 2013 by levying French aircraft on the production line. This would relieve the public finances. Because budgetary resources provided by the LPM [law] can not fund all the commitments recently made by the french government to ensure the industry at least11 Rafale deliveries per year in 2012 and 2013- the minimum to maintain industrial skills and competitiveness -. In fact, the credits of the LPM provide only half of that commitment. The authorities played poker by betting on obtaining an export command that would result from this commitment. In absence of export command, the state will have to find an additional envelope to take its commitment, cropped heavily on other programs. In contrast, a Brazilian command served very quickly relieve this commitment. For Emirates, development and integration of M88 9 tons will not make possible to withdraw planes from the production line [...]. It will take 36 to 42 months between signing the contract and the delivery of the first aircraft. Deliveries can begin as late 2013/early 2014 to reach 2018 with a rate around 15 per year.[...]. The Rafale production line was calibrated to be able to deliver 33 aircraft per year without additional investment. This leaves scope for prospective customers to meet additional export!

The Rafale makes the buzz.

Concurrently, the Rafale shown one's claws. At the end of the last autumn was held on the Al-Dhafra air base, the annual edition of ATLC (Advanced Tactical Leadership Course). Organized since 2000 by the UAE Air Warfare Center, ATLC aims to help air forces pilots of the Arabian Peninsula to improve their tactics and techniques by confronting them to the pilots of major Western air forces. For this particular case, the Rafale from the Air Force take the opportunity to confront their main competitors on the international scene. Especially since , in parallel , stood the Dubai airshow, which could be used as a sounding board for results obtained during the exercise.

The Army Air has shipped on site for five weeks, from November 8 year December 12, not less than 6 Rafale and 3 Mirage 2000-5E. A detachment served by only 125 people and which required only 60 tons of material. The availability rate of the Rafale, which have accumulated 220 flight-hours in 148 missions, while shotting down - virtually meant - not less than 61 hostile fighters, was 97% for the entire period. And no missions has been canceled . According to Lt. Colonel Fabrice Grandclaudon, squadron leader of the EC 1/7 in Saint-Dizier and commander of the detachment," the weapon system Rafale, taking its place in COMAO (raids) of thirty different combat aircrafts, made at the ATLC the demonstration of his extraordinary flexibility. And to cite the case of this mission on November 29 during which a Rafale pilot, has launched, in barely 66 seconds, 3 Mica on 3 enemy planes (two virtually destroyed) and six AASM bombs on as many targets, some 48 km far . All destroyed!

Versatility is not an empty word.

Better yet, december 7, a pair of Rafale which protected a SAR combat device shot down 10 incoming hostile fighters while dropping six AASM on 6 different land targets forty km far , everything without leaving their CAP racetrack.In addition, the Rafale OSF allowed the positive identification of hostile fighters forty kilometers far. And, December 6, a MICA has been assigned its target - indeed virtually destroyed - only with the SPECTRA system. SPECTRA which was also capable, twice, to detect and classify - and to propose flight path changes to the pilot to avoid detection-specific envelope - some air defense systems (SA-6) that even the F-16 CJ American specialized in the SEAD mission (suppression of air defense opponents), yet also in flight, were not able to collect.. Certainly, the F-16 CJ in question had not been equipped during the flights with their common SEAD equipment, namely the HTS pod (HARM Targeting System), while their threats library had not been refreshed to integrate some of the air defense radars in the area. SEAD was not their daily mission. But it was not either the case for the Rafale. And yet, the Spectra, with no other equipment than those onboard daily, has done better than the F-16 CJ which, however, are specialized in the SEAD mission. That's the difference between multirole who need to return to land on its base to switch from one type to another mission and versatility that allows flight operations at the same time in different roles. It also demonstrates, incidentally, the ability of the AdA to quickly take advantage of "hostile" ground-radar records tunes operated the day before and to integrate them into the rafale SPECTRA library. This allowed the Rafale to classify them without any difficulty. In short, the performance was moderately appreciated by our American allies! Especially since the six F-22 Raptor deployed there by the 27th FW Langley FS/1st proved incapable of giving the beating promised to the Rafale. Of the six dofights - gun limited - which pitted the two types of aircraft in the Emirians skies in late 2009, only two saw the virtual destruction of a Rafale. Other meetings were concluded without a winner. A "performance" for the Rafale against the most modern [and most expensive] fighter in the world, presented as particularly agile thanks to its steering nozzles and moreover stealthy. Because the Rafale was, according to the lieutenant-colonel Grandclaudon, "a serious challenger in matter of maneuverability " And the french pilot to regret that his USAF colleagues had not allowed the simulated employment of MICA missiles during these confrontations.

The Typhoon were inferiors.

Concurrently, November 16, the Rafale gave, according to the french pilot, a memorable beating to the RAF Typhoon - the most recent version - which were also deployed in the UAE for the ATLC. To put it bluntly, Lieutenant-Colonel Grandclaudon said the two air battles - battles with IR-guided missile and cannon - which opposed Rafale and Typhoon gave a score of 7 wins for the first and 0 for the second, the only Rafale considered as having been destroyed flew below the allowed flight floor ! Obviously this statement has immediately raised an outcry among British pilots, relayed by the media and the Anglo-Saxon specialized blogosphere, including claims that the Typhoon does not fly as such during the fighting, but simulated "red" attackers, MiG-29 and Su-27 in that case. So ,the 1/7 Provence squadron leader made a point to recall that 2 of his Rafale were also"red chest" (MiG-29 index "Charlie") when they shot down 4 "blue" Typhoon - flying as Typhoon - while being reduced to use virtual russians AA-10C missiles to be guided by the Rafale until the impact on their target, which forbade to shoot multiple targets at once . For Fabrice Grandclaudon, the limitations of the "red" plastron role don't prevent a weapons system to show its real capabilities, because the pilots are taking advantage of the real human-machine interfaces and sensors on board, one of the Rafale has benefited from a refresh of its tactical situation by his teammate via Link-16. In other words, even if some of them simluated Su-27, the British pilots virtually shoot down were using the sensors and the avionics of their Typhoon and not those of a Su-27! And the french pilot to recognize, with great sportsmanship, that the Typhoon pilots who had been opposed to the Rafale the week preceding the ATLC were young and relatively inexperienced, as the French already benefits from lessons learned from 3 operational detachments in Afghanistan (one year of presence in all) and 4 of its pilots had participated in Red Flag 2008.

Some advantages that make the difference.

However, he heavily emphasized the performance of the french system in the field of arms data fusion, from his point of view, the main reason of the superiority obtained. Instead of each sensor to display its studs (aircraft detected) on a specific screen, forcing the Typhoon pilot to operate an intellectual gymnastics , annoying in combat stress, to check if the plot of its corresponding screen of electronic warfare was or was not the one visible on the radar screen or IRST, the Rafale's systems present to the pilot a single plot on a screen, the system automatically compared the plots provided by the various sensors on board and decided if it was or not the same plane. The french pilots have also appreciated the agility of the antenna of the electronics RBE2 radar - The Typhoon has for now only a mechanical antenna - allowing to refresh the situation in the whole volume monitored. But they insist, for close combat, on the perfect controllability of their Rafale, thanks to the excellence of FBW, to the extreme limits of the flight envelope.. To point the nose toward the target and to design it to the weapons system in the absence of a viewfinder-HMD while operating at very low speed. What are not necessarily capable of the main opponents of the Rafale ...
Well obviously, one should not rejoice in excess. The extremely positive results of these meetings have been obtained in special circumstances. The pilots had been set specific roles by the commander of the COMAO device and were therefore not free to exploit in depth all the potentials of their weapons system. The results have been different perhaps in other circumstances (nevertheless, some time ago, another meeting between Typhoon and Rafale, in Corsica, was also turned into "massacre" at the expense of the first 8 losses to 0 ). But, simply put, the EC 1 / 7 pilots are particularly satisfied with their stay in UAE. Their demonstration has , aptly, made a strong buzz [noise] among the aviators of the region and troubled the Anglo-Saxons until now convinced of the utter superiority of their planes. A disturbance also compounded by the loss - virtual of course - of an F-22 gun shot by an UAE Mirage 2000-9 flown, this time, by a French experimented pilot. Really, when everything goes wrong ... P

Image
Image

Henrik
BRFite
Posts: 211
Joined: 10 Apr 2010 15:55
Location: Southern Sweden

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Henrik » 13 May 2010 19:12

Yeah, quoting a nationalistic article from a french magazine is credible.. or not.

Craig Alpert
BRFite
Posts: 1440
Joined: 09 Oct 2009 17:36
Location: Behind Enemy Lines

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Craig Alpert » 14 May 2010 08:03

F/A 18 Super Hornet will fit the bill for IAF, says U.S
As the race for the IAF bid to procure 126 Medium Multirole Combat Aircraft enters the home stretch, the United States Navy vouched for the versatility of the F/A-18 Super Hornet, one of the six aircraft in competition, with features closer to a fifth-generation fighter aircraft.

The Indian Air Force is scheduled to complete flight evaluation trials during the month with the last of the six competitors. The Super Hornet from the Boeing stable has gone through all three phases of trial across different weather conditions in India and weapons at the manufacturers' locations.

The Naval Air Station, Oceana here in the U.S. southeast coast, has under its wing 17 operating squadrons of these fighter jets including 10 Super Hornet squadrons that fly from both the land base and the aircraft carrier.

Emphasising that F/A18 would continue to be the U.S. Navy's workhorse even after the induction of the futuristic F-35, Cmdr Mike Gusko said the new version would complement the existing fleet of Super Hornets, which would continue to serve well beyond 2035.

He said the aircraft could operate from dry, wet and icy runways, an ability fitting in with the overall requirements of the IAF.

The Block-II aircraft (Super Hornet) comes with ability to operate in all-weather providing air defence superiority, precision attack, close-air support, and an advanced radar for weapons system.

Apart from combat manoeuvrability and unlimited angle of attack, which its test pilots demonstrated to the visiting group, it had the active electronically scanned array radar (AESA), the Navy official said. The AESA radar is being upgraded and the version would be on offer.

The Commanding Officer of the Center for Aviation Technical Training Unit, Cdr John Wood, said the NAS, Oceana facility also had both maintenance and training establishment, with the latter running courses for fresh recruits to advanced level staff of varying durations.

The simulator-assisted training establishment brings the technicians closest to understanding the intricate wiring pattern and design, breaking it into segments and guiding them through electronic and printed manuals.

Bret Marks, programme manager for F/A 18 India, said the IAF would get two of the training units in India as part of the deal with the option of buying a third one and an offer to train trainers here. Of the 126 aircraft, the IAF is looking for 80 single-seaters and the rest with tandem operated cockpit. Boeing offers F/A-18 E in the first category and F/A-18 F in the other.

Shatack
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 55
Joined: 15 Apr 2010 22:06

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Shatack » 14 May 2010 14:49

Henrik wrote:Yeah, quoting a nationalistic article from a french magazine is credible.. or not.


DSI, AFM or aviationweek nationalistic? :rotfl: :rotfl:

Samay
BRFite
Posts: 1143
Joined: 30 Mar 2009 02:35
Location: India

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Samay » 14 May 2010 16:18

F/A 18 Super Hornet will fit the bill for IAF, says U.S

do they know our bill?
every year billions are not spend,and then suddenly we shoot the c17 for 6bn
they should not challenge us in spending

Henrik
BRFite
Posts: 211
Joined: 10 Apr 2010 15:55
Location: Southern Sweden

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Henrik » 14 May 2010 16:50

Shatack wrote:
Henrik wrote:Yeah, quoting a nationalistic article from a french magazine is credible.. or not.


DSI, AFM or aviationweek nationalistic? :rotfl: :rotfl:

DSI.

Asking a french pilot about his plane is like asking the Pope to describe Catholisism, if the story about Adam and Eve is true and compare it to other religions. To ask the National Gun Association if everybode should be allowed to carry a gun, or ask a frenchman what he thinks about his National Anthem.

It's baised, that's what I'm trying to say. It's just propagating on "superiour the Rafale is" and downgrading other. All french bragging should be divided by at least 3.

manjgu
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2483
Joined: 11 Aug 2006 10:33

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby manjgu » 14 May 2010 17:30

Henrik.. what you say is correct.. but you gotta admit that frenchie stuff is very good/ top notch ( maybe not cost effective for a importer). plus the article also admits to the fact that the opposing pilots were rookies, whereas the French pilots were old horses.

sumshyam
BRFite
Posts: 552
Joined: 23 Sep 2009 19:30
Location: Ganga ki dharti.
Contact:

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby sumshyam » 14 May 2010 17:49

Just my routine OT....sry if I am worng.

I am just fed up with all these giggling....It is like being in circles. Just disgusting and disappointing.

Waiting for results to be announced anyhow My personal fev is typhoon. :-? :-?

Samay
BRFite
Posts: 1143
Joined: 30 Mar 2009 02:35
Location: India

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Samay » 14 May 2010 18:05

sumshyam wrote:Just my routine OT....sry if I am worng.

I am just fed up with all these giggling....It is like being in circles. Just disgusting and disappointing.

Waiting for results to be announced anyhow My personal fev is typhoon. :-? :-?

you can assume that it will win , only something dramatic can stop it from winning
Last edited by Samay on 14 May 2010 18:07, edited 1 time in total.


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 37 guests