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.
Cain Marko wrote:One regret I do have about not buying the Super Hornet (Intl version of course) - the US seems to be the only powerhouse that can supply frames really quick - Dassault might struggle to do this. Let us see.
CM
CM, Dassault has scaled down production to keep acquisition costs lower for the French govt.- but they are on record as having stated that they could easily scale up production to double the output (11 fighters per year) currently being made at their Marignac plant. Besides, they only have to make deliveries of 18 in fly-away condition. The French govt. would be only too happy to shift some of the Adl'A airframes to IAF in order to keep up to the required schedules while also saving themselves some money on their yearly purchase. That will help stagger their own production run further, which will suit them a lot.
Afterwards, its all SKD and CKD kits to be supplied to HAL for a first few batches and that will go on for 5-6 years, and there will be adequate lead time for Dassault's suppliers to spool up production rates.
SaiK: I highly doubt considering the finicky nature of the four nations involved in the Typhoon program. That is Typhoon's achilles heel. Rafale wins on that point hands down.
I still consider the US made Boeing F/A-18 and Lockheed Martin F-16IN the best. And if I were asked to select between Eurofighter and Dassault Rafale, I would go for Rafale. - A Former Chief of the Air Staff on the condition of anonymity.
Rakesh wrote:SaiK: I highly doubt considering the finicky nature of the four nations involved in the Typhoon program. That is Typhoon's achilles heel. Rafale wins on that point hands down.
I'd disagree there. Dassault may be able to ramp up production of aircraft and spares but as things stand its annual output of 11 aircraft pales in comparison to the 51 units produced by the Eurofighter stables in 2010.
In the Indian context, the entire production line will be progressively setup in India. If the EF members or export customers decide to source their requirements from HAL due to reasons of cost, that's just an added advantage. It would be erroneous to assume we'll be running after Italy to setup production of the right wing and Spain to source the left wing.
So, Viv S, do you say Ef would be comparable to Rf on cost? Do you think they would have reduced the costs to match Rf? Having come so close to lose to Rf in final round for a fist full of $ would be pretty bad. what are your thoughts on Ef pricing and other cost?
India, emerging as a fast-growing economic powerhouse in the new millennium, is faced with increasing security challenges, especially from its belligerent western neighbour Pakistan and increasingly assertive China in the north. In trying to make up for the 'lost-decade' of the 1990s and to adequately safeguard its interests, India is embarked upon a massive modernisation programme for its armed forces running into many billions of dollars in the coming decades. At the same time, India seeks to favourably engage not only the US but all major power blocs as a bulwark against growing Chinese challenge. What better way to achieve this than to spread the 'defence gravy' equitably amongst all its powerful friends, who are also the manufacturers of state-of-the-art defence equipment. According to Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), India has become the largest arms importer in the world, receiving nine per cent of the global arms transfers in 2006-10, overtaking China in the process. Even a casual glance at India's recent defence deals would indicate that the procurement sources have been well diversified whether it is the Russian Federation, Europe or for that matter even the US. The Russian Su-30 MKI, PAK-FA, Admiral Gorshkov, etc; the British Hawk, the French Scorpene and the upcoming Mirage 2000 upgrade are just a few cases to prove the point.
So, if pak-fa falls through, would US sell raptors without cismoa etc? couple of squadrons of raptors can chill out our neighborhood for a long time to come... raptors are the only pure breed 5th gen a/c available.
SaiK wrote:So, if pak-fa falls through, would US sell raptors without cismoa etc? couple of squadrons of raptors can chill out our neighborhood for a long time to come... raptors are the only pure breed 5th gen a/c available.
No, the US won't sell the F-22 to anyone. Australia begged for it and was denied. Japan kept pushing for it too and got nowhere.
Of course the whole issue is moot since the line is in the process of shutting down anyways.
In the Indian context, the entire production line will be progressively setup in India.
For Rafale, in due time, yes.
For EF, in due time, No. India would be a one of five partners and therefore will be assigned some components. What components that India does not manufacture will come from the other work-share partners.
The enticing news WRT the EF is the design shop they have either already set up or intend to do so.
The Brits have been given the Hawk order,the Germans can be kept happy with U-boat upgrades and extra U-214s to eventually replace all the U-209s.All things being equal,I would prefer the proven Rafale as we have had an excellent experience operating French aircraft.The 4-nation consortium might pose acquisition/support problems.Check out the problems user nations are experiencing with the EF.The FGFA will also arrive shortly after the MMRCAis iunducted and will ensure our qualitative/dominant edge over the sub-continent's airspace.
China is a rising power that is investing in all three branches of its military. The U.S. is itself in the midst of a debt crisis and will likely cutback on defense spending. As such, we may need our allies more than ever. The F-22 Raptor, America’s fifth-generation fighter built for total air dominance, would give our allies a distinct advantage over adversaries. In the past, we have not sold the F-22 Raptor for a multitude of reasons, including national security. It might be time for the U.S. to consider changing this policy in order to further expand our influence and power and ensure a favorable military situation for us and our allies.
Any "export-variant" of the Raptor will be an inferior version. Any classified information or technology used in the F-22 will almost certainly be replaced when sold to foreign buyers. This plane would still be remarkably advanced, but these small changes would allow the U.S. to continue to have an advantage in air combat for the foreseeable future.
This version of the F-22 would not be sold at random to nations, but only to those very close allies who have expressed interest, specifically Israel and Japan.
I have a question. The more I look at Rafale, the more it indicates to me that the nose cone and the depression before the jet intakes appear from the front as a DSI bump made famous by F-35.
Further with the depression on the side of the jet and the jet intake tucked into it, the frontal RCS of Rafale will be definitely less. Also the it does appear to have a smoother overall airfoil. Compared to EF, Rafale appears sleeker. EF to me appears like a wing body mounted on a jet intake and that is a design which is so 80s.
what do you mean wing body mounted on a jet intake? Frontal RCS of Ef is definitely comparable to Rf, if you do consider how the radar wave might return back to source.
furthermore, next generation stealth/RCS reduction need be based on deflection alone, but it could be internal absorption (more so) as well.
BBC has got the audacity to say about Gripen still hoping for MMRCA deal, while their own EADS Ef is sidelined, which is actually been selected for the final two.
Please take a moment and give some piece of your mind to such news craps and add your own thoughts on it, before blindly linking it here.
SaiK wrote:BBC has got the audacity to say about Gripen still hoping for MMRCA deal, while their own EADS Ef is sidelined, which is actually been selected for the final two.
Please take a moment and give some piece of your mind to such news craps and add your own thoughts on it, before blindly linking it here.
Just want to use "our time" effectively.
did you have a fight with your loved ones in the morning..? why so serious..? i just thought of sharing an AV component of something we all are fond of .. military hardwares..etc.. since these videos are hard to come by.. i thought of sharing and since i thought the most relevant thread will be MRCA .. I shared it here... these is an archived video... probably made before MRCA down-select and published after ...
are you really that immaculate about everything that you do in your own life..?
It is not about me or you, it is about what value addition you are making to this discussion or making many others to come by this thread, and get some information about what is happening. BTW, you may want to review the first post, first page of this thread.
SaiK wrote:It is not about me or you, it is about what value addition you are making to this discussion or making many others to come by this thread, and get some information about what is happening. BTW, you may want to review the first post, first page of this thread.
checked...but since then people have continuously debated beyond the two... ..any way apologies....i provided the short description of the video in the link...if it does not interest you...kindly ignore from next time before flaming
SaiK wrote:what do you mean wing body mounted on a jet intake? Frontal RCS of Ef is definitely comparable to Rf, if you do consider how the radar wave might return back to source.
furthermore, next generation stealth/RCS reduction need be based on deflection alone, but it could be internal absorption (more so) as well.
Sorry Saik, you correct - it is jet intake attached to the wing body
We do not know the actual RCS of both EF and Rafale and may never know. It is just my impression that Rafale has a sleeker wing-body-intake design and *may* result in a lower RCS than EF.
Prithvi, it would be good if you could add your comments or thoughts along with the post, is what I am saying. BTW, why do you think I am "flaming"?
--
disha [pl don't apologize], sure sleeker and reduced size matters as well for reduced signature. But, that would be from a perspective of not using any advanced materials.
The Raptor's phenomenal cost is a deterrent enough for any non-superpower,non-cash rich air force.Moreover,the number of weaponry it can carry in its internal weapons bay makes it vulnerable to mass attacks.It will have to break off once its missiles are expended.There are also intense anti-stealth R&D taking place which will mature in the future,adding to the Raptor's vulnerabiliy.
The Gripen's hopes are dificul to fathom,unless they have some insider info.If the cost of the two shortlisted aircaft are exorbitantly expensive,plus further delays in the LCA MK-2 arriving,forcing the GOI/MOD review the entire deal and taking a holistic look at the IAF's requirements,the Gripen might stand a chance,but certainly a twin-engined aircraft is far more suitable for the IAF especially when dealing with a Sino-Pak combined threat.
Philip wrote:The Brits have been given the Hawk order,the Germans can be kept happy with U-boat upgrades and extra U-214s to eventually replace all the U-209s.All things being equal,I would prefer the proven Rafale as we have had an excellent experience operating French aircraft.The 4-nation consortium might pose acquisition/support problems.Check out the problems user nations are experiencing with the EF.The FGFA will also arrive shortly after the MMRCAis iunducted and will ensure our qualitative/dominant edge over the sub-continent's airspace.
Philip - there is a counter argument here - aimed at you and all other Rafale fans. (Mind you I think the Rafale is great too, but I make the counter argument nevertheless )
I believe that unspoken competition between France and the UK made the Jaguar deal good for us. Imagine a future scenario in which say Britain backs out of EF for some reason. Then Germany and Italy will have to go it alone and they have the industrial resources to do that. So the interplay between the countries involved in EF may actually aid us with a good deal that guarantees us supplies.
What will clinch the deal will be he individual nuts an bolts of Rafale or EF and whether Indian industry is able to absorb the particular technologies that we have to absorb in order to make the stuff here.
EADSs lively chief executive Mr Louis Gallois presented a bullish view of the company’s prospects, for the year ahead, highlighting the Eurofighter consortium’s battle against Dassault’s Rafale to win the 126 medium multi-role combat aircraft contract from India as one of its major priorities. “We must become faithful citizens of these countries,” he said Saturday.
“I feel we are in a very good position for an additional reason that not only do we have a good aircraft but it is an aircraft in the development phase…it offers Indian companies participation in the development programme…” said Stefan Zoller, the head of Cassidian, the EADS division.
More and More I compare Rafale and Eurofighter, the more I am tilting toward the Rafale. If we are having spares issue with Russia today, I shudder to think how it will be in the 4 Ring circus of Eurofighter.
EFT has a problem, there are some 3+ countries involved in it. After suffering through Russian equipment supplies and over runs, are we ready, to relive the entire story, this time with european countries? Moreover certain Middle eastern countries already fly EFT, countries which have a high probability of having Pakistani mercenary pilots flying these planes.
Please note that I do consider the EFT, compared to Rafael, to be the most appropriate for IAF. But we should not be blind to its weakness too.
I don't understand the fear.. Eu is more consistent than Russia, if you consider the stance they have taken so far. I don't think they have initiated sanctions (that is the only thing we can measure now), but only have been forced to follow through via khan super power politics, and not entirely taken decision all by themselves.
Once, India has chartered on an independent policy of having to exchange business deals with all countries, then one can't be having the same level of fear pre-MRCA (ie, we were importing only from Russia 70% and France).. the all eggs in one basket does not exists anymore.. so.
I don't see any problems with respect to spare either from Fr or from EADS consort.
--
PS: Even the hawk deal, they have been on correction mode rather contention mode.
SaiK wrote:disha [pl don't apologize], sure sleeker and reduced size matters as well for reduced signature. But, that would be from a perspective of not using any advanced materials.
Saik Sar, please re-read my comment. It was tongue-firmly-planted-in-cheek apology.
if chaiwaala says so, then it is Ef.. normally when we give out a deal ahead of another, we actually stage and plan in such a way we expect the balance maintained.
SaiK wrote:I don't understand the fear.. EU is more consistent than Russia.
I don't see any problems with respect to spare either from Fr or from EADS consort.
Sai, anticipating future problems and planning for it is an integral part of statecraft and strategic planning. It is naive to think there is no issue with FR or EU, what makes you so smug... maybe the degree of risk might be less than Russia. but it is not non-existent. Even among Fr-Dassault AND EU-EADS, the risk is more with the EU bird because of the involvement four countries... Germany, Spain and Italy would put WKKs to shame. Ukistan has this major lovefest with Pakis inspite of all the pain given to them. France has in inherent antipathy to Islam from it Algeria days... so all these need to get mixed into the equation.
SaiK wrote:if chaiwaala says so, then it is Ef.. normally when we give out a deal ahead of another, we actually stage and plan in such a way we expect the balance maintained.
I disagree, is Chaiwaala's say it is Rafale, Rafale it is... particularly if it is going to be packaged with the M2K deal.
Here is a controversy that could affect the Rafale's chances.The M-2000 upgrade.The ET report carried in BR says that to upgrade our M-2000s will cost the same as buying a new aircraft and take 9 years to deliver,while taking only 6 for full delivery of the MMRCAs! In addition,though israel offered to do the same for "half the price",the MOD's "only OEM can do the job" policy flies in the face of its open tender for legacy Russian aircraft!.
IAF officers also noted that Israel had also offered to upgrade the Mirages, but at half the price. But the defence ministry quoted an old policy that only OEMs could carry out an upgrade.
"The same ministry has called for competitive bids in recent months for equally complex fighter aircraft, particularly those from Russian or erstwhile Soviet stable," they said.
The decision is no going up to the cabinet.The top brass is said to be split over this and more anti-upgrade voices are being heard.The French are being terribly stupid.They should've offered to take back the old M-2000s and replaced them with new Rafales at a discount."Old lamps for new".This might've been acceptable.Similarly,i we can upgrade legacy Russian aircraft by open tender,we should do the same for the Mirages.Is there a significant "Mirage lobby" in the MOD that sees an opportunity in a terribly expensive upgade deal?!
Katrina's Sister Isabella mounting her - 
)