MRCA News and Discussion - March 2011

jai · Post by **jai** » 02 Apr 2011 19:40

If IAF get anything less than their preference; and they seem to be going out of their way to indicate what these are - the Rafale followed by EF, it will be a sad reflection on MMS and his masters - this is a test of their integrity.

Ravi Karumanchiri · Post by **Ravi Karumanchiri** » 02 Apr 2011 20:15

Can anyone here offer any insight as to whether or not the Gripen could one day be made to fly with a Kaveri engine, brought up to speed by SNECMA? If the Tejas, Gripen and MCA could share a common engine, then there would be obvious operating advantages.

Does anyone (Henrik?) know how would the Swedes respond to such an idea?

Would it be possible without major alterations to the Gripen airframe?

Like many people here, I am partial for the Rafale to win the MMRCA (my second choice would be the MiG-35). However, there is a lot to be said for raising greater numbers of fighters for an engagement, and so therefore; the cheaper Gripen -- Kroner-for-Kroner -- may bring more punch to the fight than a smaller number of any other aircraft. JMT.

I was just pondering the prospects for a geostrategic alignment along an Indo-French axis, with the Swedes in-tow, which would include the Rafale and SNECMA involvement, along with SAAB. (Consider, in the coming decades, Africa will rise as well; and the French standing in Africa is quite strong. An IAF order for Rafales, and/or Kaveri-SNECMA engines for the Tejas and the MCA, with perhaps some Gripen also; would possibly also open-up some doors in the export market for the Tejas and MCA, and the Gripen, particularly to African AFs.)

Your thoughts, Rakshaks?

Arya Sumantra · Post by **Arya Sumantra** » 02 Apr 2011 20:34

^^ few would replace f414 with kaveri-snecma in a gripen. If you want our engine progress to succeed via a venture route then rafale completes the picture with lca+rafale+amca using kaveri snecma engine in future. Also it would be good for Tejas's future if a twin-enginned mmrca is chosen.

Ravi Karumanchiri · Post by **Ravi Karumanchiri** » 02 Apr 2011 20:53

Arya Sumantra wrote:^^ few would replace f414 with kaveri-snecma in a gripen...

Why do you say so? Not that I'm doubting your opinion; I'd just like more insight into your reasoning.

Arya Sumantra wrote:... Also it would be good for Tejas's future if a twin-enginned mmrca is chosen.

Why is this the case? Again, not that I'm doubting you; I'd just like more info.

Thanks.

Henrik · Post by **Henrik** » 02 Apr 2011 21:13

Ravi Karumanchiri wrote:Can anyone here offer any insight as to whether or not the Gripen could one day be made to fly with a Kaveri engine, brought up to speed by SNECMA? If the Tejas, Gripen and MCA could share a common engine, then there would be obvious operating advantages.

Does anyone (Henrik?) know how would the Swedes respond to such an idea?

Would it be possible without major alterations to the Gripen airframe?

Like many people here, I am partial for the Rafale to win the MMRCA (my second choice would be the MiG-35). However, there is a lot to be said for raising greater numbers of fighters for an engagement, and so therefore; the cheaper Gripen -- Kroner-for-Kroner -- may bring more punch to the fight than a smaller number of any other aircraft. JMT.

I was just pondering the prospects for a geostrategic alignment along an Indo-French axis, with the Swedes in-tow, which would include the Rafale and SNECMA involvement, along with SAAB. (Consider, in the coming decades, Africa will rise as well; and the French standing in Africa is quite strong. An IAF order for Rafales, and/or Kaveri-SNECMA engines for the Tejas and the MCA, with perhaps some Gripen also; would possibly also open-up some doors in the export market for the Tejas and MCA, and the Gripen, particularly to African AFs.)

Your thoughts, Rakshaks?

Of course it would be possible, everything is possible with the right amount of money and time. The size difference between the GE engines and Kaveri is a problem. The Gripen could of course be rebuilt for it if India felt it would be necessary, but I don't understand why. India have chosen the F414 engine, it's highly unlikely that India suddenly would scrap those engines in favour of Kaveri in the Tejas planes. If India fits Kaveri in Tejas there would be plenty of F414 engines to use elsewhere, like spares for a Gripen for instance?
I hope you understand what I mean.. Or maybe I'm just rambling, a bit tired at the moment.

Ravi Karumanchiri · Post by **Ravi Karumanchiri** » 02 Apr 2011 21:36

^^^Henrik,

From my reading of things; the IAF went with the F414 only because the Kaveri wasn't ready in time, and DRDO/HAL were keen to get the Tejas through ramped-up production lots (to work out the inevitable kinks); so they can get'er up and into the air; even if it meant an American engine (which, believe me, isn't what they had originally hoped for).

I am sure the F414 is a fine engine, but India has been burned by the denial of spares in the past, and I am sure this has put a bitter taste in India's mouth when it comes to American kit. I believe, this has also counted as a strike against the Gripen, with her F414 -- hence, I was curious about replacing the F414 with a domestic option (which, believe me, India would love to work out, if it could meet her defense needs).

IIRC, India has an order for 99 GE F414s, and they have a 'Tranche 1' plan to induct 40 Tejas LCAs. By my estimation, they will run each plane on two engines -- swapping them out for maintenance -- thereby keeping the fleet strength high at all times. (That's what I'd do, FWIW.) This would allow for 9 spares, so that longer-cycle maintenance wouldn't effect fleet strength either. I am sure that in the fullness of time, India will likely induct between 250-400 LCAs, and I can guarantee you the plan is for the Tejas to run on Kaveris (which is why GRTE is tied-in with SNECMA). Just look at how the Tejas is built for manufacturability -- and you'll see much larger produciton lots on the horizon, but only when the Kaveri is ready for mass-induction. This isn't just about money, it's also about self-reliance and immunity from denial of spares gambits, and even supply-line interdiction, as you might expect in a large scale war.

Does anyone know the relative dimensions of the GE F414 compared to the likely Kaveri in its final, SNECMA incarnation?

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 02 Apr 2011 22:09

I recall some (small?) talk linking the Kaveri and the Rafale, but not beyond that.

My gut: Rafale for technical reasonS + F-18 for strategic.

I do not think India needs to fear any out come. I do not see any long term negatives with the selection of any of the planes, but, it would add to a few things if India were to mix-match.

JMTs.

Gurneesh · Post by **Gurneesh** » 03 Apr 2011 00:01

Ravi Karumanchiri wrote: From my reading of things; the IAF went with the F414 only because the Kaveri wasn't ready in time, and DRDO/HAL were keen to get the Tejas through ramped-up production lots (to work out the inevitable kinks); so they can get'er up and into the air; even if it meant an American engine (which, believe me, isn't what they had originally hoped for).
Does anyone know the relative dimensions of the GE F414 compared to the likely Kaveri in its final, SNECMA incarnation?

Kaveri was not chosen as a) it is not ready and b) it is underpowered.

414 has thrust rating of 98kN. India is said to have been offered the highest rated variant, which i believe would be the EPE with 108 kN (?).

Kaveri-Snecma engine will produce around 90 kN (said by some official a few months ago). So, there is a deficit of around 15-20kN if some later LCA were to run on Kaveri. I don't think IAF will like that.

For same reasons Gripen on Kaveri might not be that lucrative an idea.

IMHO, no new LCA will come with Kaveri. Only the 40 Mk1 will get it as MLU (since it is designed for this airframe).

Where Kaveri-Snecma engine would be used is MCA which would begin it's testing by the time this engine is ready (2017 if I am not wrong).

Gurneesh · Post by **Gurneesh** » 03 Apr 2011 09:11

nukavarapu wrote: underpowered for LCA, not underpowered for Rafale. Check the current engines on Rafale and check their thrust values and compare it with Kaveri. Check out the dimensions too:

Well I too am not sure why IAF considers LCA as underpowered while M2000 does just fine. I just stated the reasons given out by IAF/HAL for replacing the 404.

But, TWR cannot be the only parameter of a plane's performance. M2000 has lesser TWR than LCA, but i guess it is more slippery than LCA too. LCA Mk2 should have lesser drag (due to fuselage lengthening) though.

IIRC the 414 offered for LCA is the one with 98kN and the one offered for F18 might be the EPE. I have not come across any article that suggests they are offering 109 kN 414 for LCA.

I think you are mixing two different scenarios and models of 414.

GE414 INS6 is touted as the highest thrust producing engine. GE tested the EDE version back in 2006 which is said to give 15% thrust increase over the 414-400. The EPE has about 20% advantage. It would be safe to assume that the LCA engine would at least be EDE.
http://www.geae.com/aboutgeae/presscent ... 01001.html

Plus even if the 414-INS6 is just a 414-400, there will be a 8kN deficit of thrust when going back to the 414. IAF may well find this insignificant when kaveri-snecma is ready and go with it.

PS: current Kaveri has generated 75kN and not the wiki stated 81kN

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 03 Apr 2011 09:17

Samay wrote:
New offset rules won’t apply to multi-role fighter contract: MoD
Lolz
another scam
wonder what they were deciding all these years
This will decide who will be the winner

These guys who are competing are already beyond offset requirements. Also, they are willing to give a lot for Indian manufacturers (little that I know of the deal). So, Offset rules might be actually working against us in this case.

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 04 Apr 2011 18:45

Which fighter will the Indians choose?
Russian perspective..favours Mig-35 (no surprises there)

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 05 Apr 2011 12:21

IAF set to seal $ 10 bn combat aircraft deal
IBN News

The Eurofighter Typhoon is in combat for the first time over Libya and the Indian Air Force is watching with deep interest. The aircraft is one of six competing for the medium multi-role combat aircraft (MMRCA) tender. And recent reports give the Eurofighter and the French Rafale the edge in the competition.

Air Marshal PK Barbora, Ex Vice Chief of Air Staff said, "The Air Force is not looking at price. That's not our area of concern. What we want is QRs are focussed on technical aspects, latest technology. Lot is available in the market and there is potential for future growth."

The EuroFighter and the Rafale are relatively new aircraft and in that sense, state of art. The Eurofighter entering service with six air forces in the last few years. And the Rafale in service with the French Air Force.

Subtle weaknesses could rule out some of the contenders. Boeing's F18 is huge and the IAF isn't keen on planes that heavy. Sweden's Gripen is deadly but India's Light Combat Aircraft could be improved to match it. Lockheed Martin's F-16 is also flown by Pakistan. But, India urgently needs more fighters. The new planes will take ten years to come, even after the deal is signed. An offer for second hand planes, over and above the new ones being negotiated, could sweeten the deal. The crucial element now, is political capital. How India can leverage the world's biggest fighter aircraft tender for larger gains.

nkumar · Post by **nkumar** » 05 Apr 2011 20:15

shukla wrote:Which fighter will the Indians choose?
Russian perspective..favours Mig-35 (no surprises there)

A guy called, Robert A. Fritts, whose facebook page http://www.facebook.com/people/Robert-A ... 1850363295 says

United States Army
Cavalry/Special Forces/Civil Affairs · Jun 1980 to present
Team Leader in operations in Africa, Middle East, and Central America. Director Civil Affairs Central America (Joint Task Force Bravo) 1998-2000

posted the following comment to the above article.

As a American Officer just my 2 cents, but it is widely accepted by the US Navy and Air Force that the Rafale is not welcome at US exercises, because it dominates F-18, F-16 and F-15. It actually holds it own against the F-22. The F-22 super stealth fighter was not able to ID the much smaller Gripen until the it was close enough to negate any advantage the Raptor had in stealth and BVR weapons. With the F-35 still a fragile pipedream, there are many good choices that can be made. Since the Indian MOD left the F-16, Mig-35 and Gripen off its short list for this competition, last year, this appears to be a poorly researched and lazily written article.

I am not well verse in military affairs, but felt sharing the above comment.

Craig Alpert · Post by **Craig Alpert** » 05 Apr 2011 20:58

shukla wrote:
Subtle weaknesses could rule out some of the contenders. Boeing's F18 is huge and the IAF isn't keen on planes that heavy. Sweden's Gripen is deadly but India's Light Combat Aircraft could be improved to match it. Lockheed Martin's F-16 is also flown by Pakistan. But, India urgently needs more fighters. The new planes will take ten years to come, even after the deal is signed. An offer for second hand planes, over and above the new ones being negotiated, could sweeten the deal. The crucial element now, is political capital. How India can leverage the world's biggest fighter aircraft tender for larger gains.

[/size]Intersting.. Seems like France's offer to allow India to operate Rafale or even the existing Quatar Mirage's could be tied into this.. Interesting times ahead for Rafale & France if they play their cards right!

Edited later: thanks to LMji for correcting the country of origin of the Mirages.

VikramS · Post by **VikramS** » 05 Apr 2011 21:14

nkumar wrote: A guy called, Robert A. Fritts, whose facebook page http://www.facebook.com/people/Robert-A ... 1850363295 says

United States Army
Cavalry/Special Forces/Civil Affairs · Jun 1980 to present
Team Leader in operations in Africa, Middle East, and Central America. Director Civil Affairs Central America (Joint Task Force Bravo) 1998-2000

posted the following comment to the above article.

As a American Officer just my 2 cents, but it is widely accepted by the US Navy and Air Force that the Rafale is not welcome at US exercises, because it dominates F-18, F-16 and F-15. It actually holds it own against the F-22. The F-22 super stealth fighter was not able to ID the much smaller Gripen until the it was close enough to negate any advantage the Raptor had in stealth and BVR weapons. With the F-35 still a fragile pipedream, there are many good choices that can be made. Since the Indian MOD left the F-16, Mig-35 and Gripen off its short list for this competition, last year, this appears to be a poorly researched and lazily written article.
I am not well verse in military affairs, but felt sharing the above comment.

If I remember that briefing after Red Flag, the US officer was quite dismissive of the French. He said something like that the French were just there for snooping and not interested in too much aggressive action. So there is something between the US and the French, especially when it comes to Rafale.

Original Article wrote:For example, Paris has promised New Delhi the latest RBE-2AA radar equipped with an active PAA (not yet delivered even to the French Air Force) and has thrown in a promise of complete on-board radar codes for good measure

pkudva · Post by **pkudva** » 05 Apr 2011 21:23

The Euro Fighter looks to be the a/c which IAF will finally choose.....its very good aerodynamically as well as range, weapon pay load capability as well.

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 05 Apr 2011 21:32

Craig-ji, do you mean Qatari mirages?

Craig Alpert · Post by **Craig Alpert** » 05 Apr 2011 22:19

^^ Oops, Yes sir! I stand corrected. Thank you for pointing that out.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 06 Apr 2011 00:01

A humble question to the gurus.

If we presume that the two eurobirds - the EF Typhoon and the Rafale are the two shortlisted ones for the bid, which one is the superior bird of the two.

The IAF says that it will select the best bird - cost is currently not a factor (other than life cycle costs / operating costs).

Which bird do the gurus think is better of the two?
TIA

Muppalla · Post by **Muppalla** » 06 Apr 2011 00:15

It may be EF Typhoon so that India will have more leaverage to customization.

Gurneesh · Post by **Gurneesh** » 06 Apr 2011 00:25

The teens would have had a big advantage if second hand planes are being considered. As US has a number of reserve fighters that though not as good as the current MMRCA are decent in performance. But then F-18 seems to be too heavy and F-16 has a paki connection.

I guess even the eurofighter can get a squadron or two of aircrafts which could come from existing inventories (which many would be pleased to reduce) or even new ones that were scheduled to be built but were canceled.

Similarly, Rafale is being made at significantly lesser rate than Dassault can make it. They could provide additional planes by the time Indian production starts (which is expected to have delays).

But i donot know how the IAF sees the whole Mirage upgrade fiasco.

Gripen in too close to LCA.

Cybaru · Post by **Cybaru** » 06 Apr 2011 00:55

We just need 40-50 gold plated growlers. Forget TOT, local production crap. Order more 40 MKI's and 40 LCA Mk-1's. This will be a huge game changer for us.

Multatuli · Post by **Multatuli** » 06 Apr 2011 02:08

The Typhoon has a larger user base then the Rafale, also the EF consortium wants India as a partner.

I also think that we should punish France for the cost escalation with the Scorpene and Mirage 2000 upgrade.

Gurneesh · Post by **Gurneesh** » 06 Apr 2011 02:21

Cybaru wrote:We just need 40-50 gold plated growlers. Forget TOT, local production crap. Order more 40 MKI's and 40 LCA Mk-1's. This will be a huge game changer for us.

40-50 'gold plated' growlers will be nice to have. But without signing CISMOA and other stuff the only thing that India can have is 'chrome plated' ones (growler light). And even after signing CISMOA and other stuff, IAF will have to go to the manf to make any small changes in the software. Not to mention the revealing of radar signatures of the other a/c in our inventory for IFF purposes.

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 06 Apr 2011 02:27

Defence offset policy to be changed to help MMRCA process.
Financial Express
(posting full)

New Delhi: With the government seeking revised offset proposals from the six contenders for the medium multi-role combat aircraft (MMRCA) deal by April 15, a comprehensive defence offset policy is in the offing and is likely to be released early next month.
“The new policy will seek to do away with any ambiguity currently there,” say defence ministry sources.

According to industry sources, “A letter has been sent by the government to all the vendors seeking revised offset proposals on Monday evening. This is an indication that the things are back on track.”

The detailed policy is expected to concretise the opening of the civil aviation and internal security in more certain terms, so that there will be no room for confusion, added sources. The defence offsets policy is likely to bring in $10 billion during the 11th Five-Year Plan period (2007-11).

Talking to FE, sources said, “The changes are likely to provide invitations to offer offsets proposals to be issued to only those vendors who are validated as technically qualified by the respective service. The shortlisted vendor will be invited for opening of their respective commercial bids.”

Currently, both technical and commercial offsets proposals need to be submitted by all vendors competing in a tender. Under the current policy the technical offsets proposals are examined and validated by the Technical Offsets Evaluation Committee, and the commercial offsets are submitted as sealed proposals, to be opened only when the respective commercial offer for the vendor is opened.

According to sources, the changes are being designed to help the MMRCA tender process, which is governed by the Defence Procurement Procedure (DPP) 2006 and plans to seek a legal route for approval to implement the revision with retrospective effect.

Nidhi Goyal, director, Deloitte in India, said, “In a medium multi-role combat aircraft deal for the supply of 126 state-of-the-art fighter jets to the Indian Air Force, the selected supplier would require to meet offset obligation of 50% of the foreign exchange component of the value of the total deal of $10.8 billion. Out of which an estimated offset business to an extent of $ 4 billion is likely to be generated for the Indian industry.”

Adding, “It is expected to stimulate growth in the Indian defence industry which should be able to absorb the cutting edge technologies to acquire domain expertise in aerospace manufacturing and defence electronics. Further, with other big ticket procurements such as maritime aircrafts, helicopters, sea-hawks, anti-submarine warfare in military aerospace segment, business for the Indian i ndustry atleast to the tune of $8 billion is likely to flow over a period of 5-10 years.”

Also, discussions are going on between the government agencies as well as industry bodies about the eligibilty of a wholly-owned subsidiary of a foreign company, though India registered, for offsets. It would need to modify its share holding pattern and bring it to 74% Indian Holding for it to be eligible for offsets, unless special dispensation to it is permitted by the government.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 06 Apr 2011 04:10

why not slightly old typhoons from existing users, who are interested more in tranche-3 etc... while we wait for the the tranche-3. Now that makes it more interesting in the sense, like how fms route allows existing planes and parts be supplied, similar arrangements but more on the lines of second hand purchase. I would not pay more than 60M per second hand typhoons or 70m with full stores, and later we could convert them to tranche-3 standards.

--

something interesting from this link (off drdo thread)

http://s188567700.online.de/CMS/index.p ... &Itemid=47
The F-18E/-F ‘Super Bug’ at AERO-INDIA was by the way the first ‘morphing jet’ ACIG has seen on any flightline. While first being a standard F-model from USN VFA-113 Sqn. - Indian industrialist Ratan Tata (74) flew in it - the next day it has changed into an unmarked ‘Silent Bug’ with Boeing test-pilot Ricardo Traven explaining the ‘Super Hornet International Road Map program’. Of course, the new additions like conformal fuel-tanks, laser-warners, an IRST-set intergrated below the nose and a ‘stealthy’ centreline armament-pod are not for real (yet), just mock-ups described as not offered within the MMRCA-bid. These improvements would be generally available for international customers like maybe Japan. (The later might have other problems in the meantime...)

Advertised in India this time by French AF-Cdr. Gen. Palomares, it is being ‘100% French’ and provides Dassault an edge on the issue of technology-transfer. It claims that the Rafale has an advantage over the ‘Typhoon’ or the ‘Gripen’ because unlike them it has no US-components built-in and is not subject to the mentioned US ITAR restrictions. The French government has cleared full technology transfer to India, including that of the RBE2-AA Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) radar and the transfer of software source-codes which would allow the IAF to re-programme any sensitive equipment if needed.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 06 Apr 2011 08:17

the Rafale seems to have flown CFTs (though not seen yet in Libya ops). EF did test wind tunnel model in 2002, but does not seem to have followed through on it.

the 1st image is from 2001 air show
http://www.b-domke.de/AviationImages/Mi ... s/3971.jpg
http://www.airforce-technology.com/proj ... fale_9.jpg

the two huge drop tanks + CFT would give it a huge strike radius for A2G DPSA missions, and still retain 6 x A2SM/sudarshan and 2 self-defence Mica IR + damocles pod.

I dont know if CFTs are preferred for A2A - maybe they keep it empty and use drop tanks instead which are ditched if a fight begins.

we also need to feature silent eagle type internal AAM bays on Tejas Mk2 to keep up with the crowd
http://defense-update.com/images_new2/s ... le_cft.jpg

GeorgeWelch · Post by **GeorgeWelch** » 06 Apr 2011 09:14

Gurneesh wrote:Not to mention the revealing of radar signatures of the other a/c in our inventory for IFF purposes.

That's not how IFF works . . .

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 06 Apr 2011 09:29

I believe US has some blanket ban on export of certain stuff like MAD gear? boeing had to second source it for our P8I from a canadian co....or maybe the P8A skips the MAD stinger.

stuff like top-end EW kit will be highly classified by US Govt. Growler-lite alone is highly unlikely unless the MRCA goes the F-18 way. Growler-platinum or gold is certainly NOT for sale.

GeorgeWelch · Post by **GeorgeWelch** » 06 Apr 2011 10:33

Singha wrote:I believe US has some blanket ban on export of certain stuff like MAD gear?

No

Singha wrote:or maybe the P8A skips the MAD stinger.

Yes

Ravi Karumanchiri · Post by **Ravi Karumanchiri** » 06 Apr 2011 10:45

GeorgeWelch wrote:
Gurneesh wrote:Not to mention the revealing of radar signatures of the other a/c in our inventory for IFF purposes.
That's not how IFF works . . .

Gurneesh,
GeorgeWelch is right. IFF is a microwave comm system (requiring line of sight) whereby an 'interrogator' sends a signal to an a/c, and the on-board 'squak box' transponder responds with an encrypted ID.

IFF can positively identify a friend, but it cannot positively identify a foe.
RADAR signatures have nothing to do with IFF systems.

vcsekhar · Post by **vcsekhar** » 06 Apr 2011 11:06

VikramS wrote: If I remember that briefing after Red Flag, the US officer was quite dismissive of the French. He said something like that the French were just there for snooping and not interested in too much aggressive action. So there is something between the US and the French, especially when it comes to Rafale.
Original Article wrote:For example, Paris has promised New Delhi the latest RBE-2AA radar equipped with an active PAA (not yet delivered even to the French Air Force) and has thrown in a promise of complete on-board radar codes for good measure

Since someone brought up the Red flag video topic, i have something interesting to share.
I was speaking to one of our active fighter pilot recently and this topic came up in some other context, he had no idea about this at all. So of course I took out my laptop and showed him the video that I had saved. (He had not heard the media coverage and did not know about this incident).
He watched it intently and then asked me "What was wrong about what he said?" He was dead serious.
He said that he was perfectly right about the Bison "It is a small fighter, difficult to spot visually, small RCS after IAF modifications, really good jammer"
About the MKI... "It is a huge machine, very easy to spot from over 10nm visually, huge RCS, and if you have the right tactics, easy to beat in WVR, depending upon the weapons being simulated in the exercise"

I know that this may start a flame war on me, but, I took the risk thinking that it would still be better to share this info.

cheers...

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 06 Apr 2011 14:00

+1 to that.

if they had followed through on things and funded it on a cold-warish level from 2000 onward it would have been a great bird today to play with, with full spectrum capabilities equal or better than the F18/Rafale while retaining its superior a2a airframe and allegedly higher tech engine.

but the partners are running it as a extended limited capability thing kinda like the Chinese faux-FOC some bird and then put in the stuff over 15 years!

Rafale seems only game in town at the moment.
pros - no US style "issues" , good family of weapons already integrated, works for A2G, works for A2A, well regarded "spectra" EW, can be used from IN carriers as well, ..... only con would be its smallish F-16 sized nose and resultant smaller aperture of AESA radar.
that and meteor(which anyways affects EF / gripen too). IRST/TV is already onboard though could use some funding for modernization.

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 06 Apr 2011 14:56

vcsekhar,
No doubt that MKI has the biggest RCS. But tell me how that matters? It seems that you have friends among IAF pilots. You may ask them the "effective" ranges at which BVR missiles are fired (especially R-77). He may or may not give you the exact figures, but he will tell you that "all" fighters get detected before they start approaching the BVR range. And more importantly, MKI detects "any" IAF fighter "much before" it detects it. MKI may be a huge fighter, but it more than compensates it by having a even bigger and powerful radar. When people say that MKI is almost a mini AEWAC, they are not kidding. Add to that the awesome networking capability of MKI, it is not one to be taking lightly.

vcsekhar · Post by **vcsekhar** » 06 Apr 2011 15:01

Singha wrote: Rafale seems only game in town at the moment.
pros - no US style "issues" , good family of weapons already integrated, works for A2G, works for A2A, well regarded "spectra" EW, can be used from IN carriers as well, ..... only con would be its smallish F-16 sized nose and resultant smaller aperture of AESA radar.
that and meteor(which anyways affects EF / gripen too). IRST/TV is already onboard though could use some funding for modernization.

Unfortunately the Rafale was considered for the IN, however, it was ruled out as we did not have the catapult technology and the US was not willing to sell us one. France does not have it and they too bought one from the US. Russia does not have it and uses the ski jump like us. Part of the reason why the Mig29K was chosen rather than the Rafale.
This problem still holds for us with regards to the Rafale, however, if it was determined that the Rafale could ski jump off our carriers then it would be a great addition to the IN.
For the IAF the rafale would be a great option as it seems to be most mature of the lot apart from the teens. A2A, A2g, EW everything seems to be ready to go unlike the EFT and the paper Gripen and the Mig35.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 06 Apr 2011 15:08

If the ex-IAF chief says money is not a problem , then we should just zero in for Rafale or Eurofighter both are great fighter in their own way , Since Rafale dont not have too many cooks it is a wiser choice in the long run.

One never know how an individual countries in the future could delay spares/support for Eurofighter if the wind gets blowing in the wrong direction , Rafale seems to be more ready for multirole task then Typhoon is today so thats a big plus.

One big plus I could think of buying French Rafale is in Nuclear role , the french will not do much fuss on hardwiring these aircraft for Nuclear delivery while the Eurofighter countries and America might just end up being dead against it , something best avoided at the initial stage.

Any idea where our good old Philip is these days don't see him posting much ?

vcsekhar · Post by **vcsekhar** » 06 Apr 2011 15:16

Gaur wrote:vcsekhar,
No doubt that MKI has the biggest RCS. But tell me how that matters? It seems that you have friends among IAF pilots. You may ask them the "effective" ranges at which BVR missiles are fired (especially R-77). He may or may not give you the exact figures, but he will tell you that "all" fighters get detected before they start approaching the BVR range. And more importantly, MKI detects "any" IAF fighter "much before" it detects it. MKI may be a huge fighter, but it more than compensates it by having a even bigger and powerful radar. When people say that MKI is almost a mini AEWAC, they are not kidding. Add to that the awesome networking capability of MKI, it is not one to be taking lightly.

What you say is true, my points below....
1. If you detect the bogey before it detects you, you have an advantage in terms of tactics. think about staying out of the other aircrafts radar cone.
2. You are correct, the actual ranges are classified and I do not even ask.
3. The radars are not used full time as the transmitting aircraft is visible to anyone with a decent RWR, so the radars are only switched on when in search mode and used very sparingly in conjunction with the jammers.
4. My point was not that the MKI is not a great a/c (it is when used well), my point was that the stuff that the good Col. was making in the video was valid (according to someone who knows the a/c well) and the Col was talking about the WVR regime.
5. I am sure that the MKI is very good at BVR, otherwise the IAF would not be continuously making investments in the MKI and buying even more of them.

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 06 Apr 2011 17:36

vcsekhar,
I agree with what you are saying. Some of what the Col said was vaild but I think you would agree that he was very selective in his description of Su-30. Also, his mistakes, which include his description of RWR and datalink among other things, have been well documented.

Regarding WVR, well that is a very fragile topic.

The opinion of general public on that subject is very rigid and I think you know that as well as anyone.

But all that aside, no one can argue against MKI being the most potent "multi role" 4gen fighter out there.

vcsekhar · Post by **vcsekhar** » 06 Apr 2011 17:51

Gaur wrote:vcsekhar,
I agree with what you are saying. Some of what the Col said was vaild but I think you would agree that he was very selective in his description of Su-30. Also, his mistakes, which include his description of RWR and datalink among other things, have been well documented.

Regarding WVR, well that is a very fragile topic. The opinion of general public on that subject is very rigid and I think you know that as well as anyone.

But all that aside, no one can argue against MKI being the most potent "multi role" 4gen fighter out there.

The guy who saw the video did not focus on the other stuff, said it is easy to such mistakes as these are not easy to remember. They will know the performance characteristics very well but not necessarily know the names. Its like if Indian pilots were asked about the details of any F15 they would not be able to rattle off the names and numbers of the RWR and the Radar and stuff.
I know about the WVR issues discussed here

, all the guy said was that the Col was not wrong in his assessment of the MKI, he made very valid points and some people in India also feel that way after exercising with the MKI in WVR. Size makes a huge difference in visibility and weight makes a huge difference to the management of energy. So a bison is capable of giving the MKI a very hard time.

All that aside, todays air war will be a combination of AWACS, BVR and WVR so the man with the best situational awareness and cockpit automation will prevail and as of now that would be the MKI. And like i said earlier, if the IAF felt that it was not the best, it would not be buyign 230 of them.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 06 Apr 2011 17:59

I think the libyan operation has ++ed Rafale, while EF2K on +0. We have to see more of A2G from the typhoons.