VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
hemant_sai
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 56
Joined: 13 Dec 2018 12:13

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby hemant_sai » 23 Jun 2020 19:32

Honestly I don't understand emergency logic here. I don't have anything against Rafales. But this emergency consignment we are expecting after 2023? Also we loose the negotiation edge in emergency case. I would rather prefer to get them immediately from operational fleet and same would return once ongoing 36 delivery is complete.
Also on contrary - I would prefer to get Mig29K - around 60- I am sure, Mig29UPG n Mig29K are sufficient to take care of pakijaan. Rest n Best can focus on eastern.
Delivery can start 2021 end by 2024 end we will get all 60. 36Hal+24Russ. Also by 2024 - IAF fleet will be out of emergency - hopefully :-).
Same 60 Mig29K will be ported to Vikrant/Vikramaditya/Andaman by 2024 or before.

Google shows Mig29K unbelievably cheap - what would be real cost today for India?
I am sure it won't cost more than 2 billions.
I would support emergency Rafale purchase only if it comes with cancellation of mmrca else we are being fooled in the name of emergency.

hemant_sai
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 56
Joined: 13 Dec 2018 12:13

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby hemant_sai » 23 Jun 2020 20:20

This is my wildest wish - it has obvious flaws but it has sense to get out of that pit of reducing squadrons n other strategic sttuff of which I m no expert.
Let go for 40 units of each Rafale, Mig29/35, GripenE, SuperHornet. With compulsion of Uttam Radar?? Let hold payments till Uttam is successful :-) Will they help?
We will get 160 aircrafts in 3 years? If started 2022 by 2025 all 160.

Correction - if 21mig+12 Sukhoi deal is going ahead - then consider same instead of separate 40migs.

So much of diversity an issue? Supply chain issues?
Out of 4 only 2 are new so effectively only 80 planes.
By the time supply chain issue will be there - we will be standing strong on our feet?
Only major drawback is payment installment. It will be 4 times bigger but total payout will be almost same.

We have not respected TIME, some one needs to find a formula to know it's cost.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9773
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby Rakesh » 23 Jun 2020 20:53

hemant_sai wrote:Honestly I don't understand emergency logic here. I don't have anything against Rafales. But this emergency consignment we are expecting after 2023?

Acquiring fighter aircraft is not like baking cookies in the oven. It takes time. Modern fighter aircraft are complex, state-of-the-art machines and cannot be assembled in like one hour.

hemant_sai wrote:Also we loose the negotiation edge in emergency case.

A small follow on Rafale order - like the rumoured 44 aircraft batch - will fit right into both airbases at Hasimara and Ambala. Both air bases can house two squadrons each of the Rafale. There is no negotiation to do. Also if the tweet is correct, 44 Rafales will reportedly cost $5 billion. That works out to ~$113 million per bird.

hemant_sai wrote:I would rather prefer to get them immediately from operational fleet and same would return once ongoing 36 delivery is complete.

Indian Rafales have ISE (Indian Specific Enhancement) kits on board. Not financially feasible to operate different variants of the same aircraft. Best to have all of them at the same standard.

hemant_sai wrote:Also on contrary - I would prefer to get Mig29K - around 60- I am sure, Mig29UPG n Mig29K are sufficient to take care of pakijaan. Rest n Best can focus on eastern.
Delivery can start 2021 end by 2024 end we will get all 60. 36Hal+24Russ. Also by 2024 - IAF fleet will be out of emergency - hopefully :-).
Same 60 Mig29K will be ported to Vikrant/Vikramaditya/Andaman by 2024 or before.

Google shows Mig29K unbelievably cheap - what would be real cost today for India?
I am sure it won't cost more than 2 billions.
I would support emergency Rafale purchase only if it comes with cancellation of mmrca else we are being fooled in the name of emergency.

The MiG-29K has had a sordid story with the Indian Naval Air Arm. Do read up. And delivery will not start in 18 months (2021 end).

Right now, the only thing to do is to increase the serviceability rate of the aircraft presently in service.

The real (and painful) cost for the MiG-29K can again be looked up with the Indian Naval Air Arm.

hemant_sai wrote:This is my wildest wish - it has obvious flaws but it has sense to get out of that pit of reducing squadrons n other strategic sttuff of which I m no expert.
Let go for 40 units of each Rafale, Mig29/35, GripenE, SuperHornet. With compulsion of Uttam Radar?? Let hold payments till Uttam is successful :-) Will they help?
We will get 160 aircrafts in 3 years? If started 2022 by 2025 all 160.

Lets keep your wildest wish as wish onlee :)

No more phoren fighters please. Focus on Tejas.

hemant_sai wrote:Correction - if 21mig+12 Sukhoi deal is going ahead - then consider same instead of separate 40migs.

So much of diversity an issue? Supply chain issues?
Out of 4 only 2 are new so effectively only 80 planes.
By the time supply chain issue will be there - we will be standing strong on our feet?
Only major drawback is payment installment. It will be 4 times bigger but total payout will be almost same.

We have not respected TIME, some one needs to find a formula to know it's cost.

The 12 Su-30MKIs are only attrition replacements.

The 21 MiG-29s will complement the three squadrons in service right now and will allow a MiG-21 unit to retire.

The 36 Rafales is the only new set of phoren aircraft being acquired.

What needs to be done is to place the order for the 83 Tejas Mk1As and hopefully order 1 - 2 units more.

If this is done, squadron shortage (in the short term) will be over.

idan
BRFite
Posts: 105
Joined: 21 Jun 2020 00:19

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby idan » 23 Jun 2020 21:11

hemant_sai wrote:Honestly I don't understand emergency logic here. I don't have anything against Rafales. But this emergency consignment we are expecting after 2023? Also we loose the negotiation edge in emergency case. I would rather prefer to get them immediately from operational fleet and same would return once ongoing 36 delivery is complete.
Also on contrary - I would prefer to get Mig29K - around 60- I am sure, Mig29UPG n Mig29K are sufficient to take care of pakijaan. Rest n Best can focus on eastern.
Delivery can start 2021 end by 2024 end we will get all 60. 36Hal+24Russ. Also by 2024 - IAF fleet will be out of emergency - hopefully :-).
Same 60 Mig29K will be ported to Vikrant/Vikramaditya/Andaman by 2024 or before.

Google shows Mig29K unbelievably cheap - what would be real cost today for India?
I am sure it won't cost more than 2 billions.
I would support emergency Rafale purchase only if it comes with cancellation of mmrca else we are being fooled in the name of emergency.


In all honesty India has the best option of buying cheap atleast 40 F16 C/D Barak which Israel Air Force has recently retired (due to F35 Adir) and is looking for buyers. They even have F16 A/B Netz for sale as trainer option. There is enough life left in those air-frames for the next decade while our Tejas/AMCA programme stabilises. This should take care of China and Pakistan worries to some extent for the next 10 years. All Israeli F-16s are fitted with custom Israeli electronics and Elta's EL/L-8240 ECM. Weapons wise offers a wide choice from local Israeli Python, Popeye & Spice AGM's to American AIM-9 Sidewinder and AIM120. Similarly Greece has many F16 variants to sell. We have familiarty with Israeli systems and alse relationship with their OEMs.

Image

Republic of Taiwan recently upgraded their Block 10 domestically to Block 50/70 (https://www.defensenews.com/air/2018/10 ... n%20Friday). The Taiwan F16 A/B upgrade includes AN/APG-83 Scalable Agile Beam Radar, an active electronically scanned radar, new mission computers etc. Other F-16 operators Singapore and South Korea are upgrading their respective 60 and 134 aircraft to the F-16V standard, along with Bahrain and Greece.

Image

If we go for the domestically produced 'make in India' F21 in future, then this gives a decent entry point and very fast induction. In the interim convert an IAF BRD to F16 rebuild factory.

Cyrano
BRFite
Posts: 694
Joined: 28 Mar 2020 01:07

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby Cyrano » 23 Jun 2020 22:48

Unrealistic, India will not want one more aircraft type in its inventory. It will take years to master type certification for its pilots, support crew, maintenance, logistics, evolve and perfect tactics... to reach the high bar of operational readiness set by IAF.

We are already doing it for Rafale. Can't do for yet another new type of aircraft.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9773
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby Rakesh » 23 Jun 2020 23:50

https://twitter.com/TheWolfpackIN/statu ... 31047?s=20 ----> First test firing of IAF's new SCALP-EG ALCM from Rafale combat aircraft likely to take place soon after deliveries of Rafales to India begins. With it's stealthy design and long range and high accuracy, it will be by far the most potent SOW in the IAF's arsenal.

Image

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5346
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby Kartik » 24 Jun 2020 00:18

Rafale BS005

Image

Image credit - Teo Poublanc Guillot

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5346
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby Kartik » 24 Jun 2020 00:21

BS002

Image

RB003
Image

RB006
Image

Image credit - Alain Berthin

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5346
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby Kartik » 24 Jun 2020 00:23

BS005

Image

Image

Image Credit- Julie Reynes

fanne
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3544
Joined: 11 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby fanne » 24 Jun 2020 01:03

In total how many iaf Rafale flying?

Nihat
BRFite
Posts: 1265
Joined: 10 Dec 2008 13:35

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby Nihat » 24 Jun 2020 01:21

amar_p wrote:Unrealistic, India will not want one more aircraft type in its inventory. It will take years to master type certification for its pilots, support crew, maintenance, logistics, evolve and perfect tactics... to reach the high bar of operational readiness set by IAF.

We are already doing it for Rafale. Can't do for yet another new type of aircraft.


Which is why it makes so much sense to order a further 36 aircrafts to make it a well rounded four squadrons.

2 each facing China and Pakistan. The only reason it seems we have not done this is finances and the political controversy surrounding it. I'm very certain that a further order will be placed on due time.

Our original requirement was for 126 MRCA and if we can fulfill 72 of those via rafale, then the remaining numbers can get well be made up using a combination of lca mk. 2 and additional mki

abhik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3090
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby abhik » 24 Jun 2020 01:48

This is the right time to be placing orders for Rafales (makes much more sense than Mig-29) if we want a continuous delivery, its existing order book (exports) is coming to a close in a couple of years so we can ask for faster delivery too (from current 12/year).

idan
BRFite
Posts: 105
Joined: 21 Jun 2020 00:19

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby idan » 24 Jun 2020 01:57

If we need fighters tomorrow Israeli F16 Baraks are the best option. At $25 mil a piece (and favourable payment terms) and fully loaded it can become operational in 6 - 12 months while retraining pilots. This can buy us peace for next 10 - 15 years while we sort out domestic production rates and new product/platform definitions. In any case we have flown many DACT missions with foreign airforces flying F16s - so not entirely unknown. Rafales too expensive proposition to counter Paki and Chinese reengineered Russian clones.

vishvak
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 5836
Joined: 12 Aug 2011 21:19

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby vishvak » 24 Jun 2020 02:03

Rakesh wrote:A small follow on Rafale order - like the rumoured 44 aircraft batch - will fit right into both airbases at Hasimara and Ambala. Both air bases can house two squadrons each ..

Considering that Rafale are expensive and have enough fuel it is perhaps better to place the fighters a bit further from border regions.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9773
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby Rakesh » 24 Jun 2020 02:07

idan wrote:If we need fighters tomorrow Israeli F16 Baraks are the best option. At $25 mil a piece (and favourable payment terms) and fully loaded it can become operational in 6 - 12 months while retraining pilots. This can buy us peace for next 10 - 15 years while we sort out domestic production rates and new product/platform definitions. In any case we have flown many DACT missions with foreign airforces flying F16s - so not entirely unknown. Rafales too expensive proposition to counter Paki and Chinese reengineered Russian clones.

Flying against the F-16 and operating the F-16 are two different things. In the former, the other side (visiting AF) bears the cost. In the latter, the IAF has to set up the infrastructure to support the aircraft. It is not just about the unit cost of the plane, but everything else that comes with it. Definitely doable, but the IAF thinks otherwise.

After all that has happened against China, the IAF has gone in for attrition replacements for the Su-30MKI, another squadron of MiG-29s and now a rumoured buy of 44 Rafales. None of them will come tomorrow and getting Israeli F-16s in 6 - 12 months will also not help.

Why is the Rafale an expensive proposition to counter Paki and Chinese re-engineered Russian clones?

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9773
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby Rakesh » 24 Jun 2020 02:09

vishvak wrote:
Rakesh wrote:A small follow on Rafale order - like the rumoured 44 aircraft batch - will fit right into both airbases at Hasimara and Ambala. Both air bases can house two squadrons each ..

Considering that Rafale are expensive and have enough fuel it is perhaps better to place the fighters a bit further from border regions.

Hasimara and Ambala are the two airbases where the infrastructure for the Rafales are being built.

If any further Rafales are being acquired, they will go to those two airbases.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9773
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby Rakesh » 24 Jun 2020 02:11

Nihat wrote:Which is why it makes so much sense to order a further 36 aircrafts to make it a well rounded four squadrons.

If that tweet turns out to be true, it will be 44 aircraft. Better than just 36 to make up for attrition replacements.

idan
BRFite
Posts: 105
Joined: 21 Jun 2020 00:19

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby idan » 24 Jun 2020 02:36

Rakesh wrote:
idan wrote:If we need fighters tomorrow Israeli F16 Baraks are the best option. At $25 mil a piece (and favourable payment terms) and fully loaded it can become operational in 6 - 12 months while retraining pilots. This can buy us peace for next 10 - 15 years while we sort out domestic production rates and new product/platform definitions. In any case we have flown many DACT missions with foreign airforces flying F16s - so not entirely unknown. Rafales too expensive proposition to counter Paki and Chinese reengineered Russian clones.

Flying against the F-16 and operating the F-16 are two different things. In the former, the other side (visiting AF) bears the cost. In the latter, the IAF has to set up the infrastructure to support the aircraft. It is not just about the unit cost of the plane, but everything else that comes with it. Definitely doable, but the IAF thinks otherwise.

After all that has happened against China, the IAF has gone in for attrition replacements for the Su-30MKI, another squadron of MiG-29s and now a rumoured buy of 44 Rafales. None of them will come tomorrow and getting Israeli F-16s in 6 - 12 months will also not help.

Why is the Rafale an expensive proposition to counter Paki and Chinese re-engineered Russian clones?


First of all Rafales could be an overkill vis-a-vis bulk of Pak/Chinese re-engineered clones and some very old first generation F16s. If our Mig21 can shoot down those first gen F16s then definitely Rafale is an overkill. Platform is one factor but a pilot’s skill and readiness equally matters. Now in any aerial combat no fighter jet is invincible. Any tragic loss of Rafale due to multiple reasons including malfunction pitted against Soviet tin cans is expensive loss. Finally, Rafale follow-on order would take another 5 years to get inducted and at say $100-120 mil a piece against a vastly inferior skill wise and numerically superior headcount wise sounds expensive. Finally, for peace to prevail there is a cost to it. With dwindling squadron strength it creates more pressure on combat ready aircraft in the inventory and we fly more ad-hoc missions To fill in gaps draining our exchequer. In case of Israeli F16 Baraks they have been upgraded recently to Barak2020 standards, available as of yesterday (only needs a nod from Trump), fully loaded with familiar weapon and ECM, most Israeli vendors are anyway working with us. Logistics, training and operating protocols can be fast-tracked if there is a will. We can be rest assured for at least 10 years and by such time our Tejas, AMCA line will be producing in bulk.

DACT mission is not just about proximity flying of dissimilar airframes but also operational aspects, strengths, limitations, weaponry etc all combined.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8225
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby Indranil » 24 Jun 2020 03:14

I am waiting for the day when we say we are going to buy LCAs and LCHs in emergency mode!

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4699
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby srai » 24 Jun 2020 04:06

^^^
Well put! Requires a paradigm shift to think local.

pandyan
BRFite
Posts: 472
Joined: 31 Jul 2006 05:12

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby pandyan » 24 Jun 2020 04:13

yes! it is amusing to see several posters hawking foreign products for emergency purchase.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9773
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby Rakesh » 24 Jun 2020 05:09

Indranil wrote:I am waiting for the day when we say we are going to buy LCAs and LCHs in emergency mode!

It looks that wait will be for a long time.

If you could kindly provide some (any!) updates on the 83 Mk1A order in the Tejas thread, that would be most appreciated.

I see files moving at breakneck speed for phoren maal (Su-30 and MiG-29), but no movement on local maal. Kindly advise.

ldev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2006
Joined: 06 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby ldev » 24 Jun 2020 05:18

I am quite sure that if the IAF was given the domestic product that they wanted and asked for they would have gone for an emergency purchase of it. I am talking about the Tejas with the Thales RBE-2 radar and the Meteor missile. In 2016 when HAL floated the AESA radar tender for the LCA, besides Thales, ELTA responded and one more supplier. HAL chose ELTA for reasons best known to them. The IAF wanted the Meteor on the LCA but that was possible only if HAL chose a European radar, already approved by the 6 nation consortium. MBDA wrote to the IAF Deputy Chief to that effect in 2018, that they will not be able to integrate the Meteor with a non European radar. Maybe yes to an Indian radar but Uttam was far from ready then and it is still an estimated 2 years away. I believe that if the Thales radar-Meteor missile combination was integrated with the LCA, that the IAF would have gone in for emergency LCA purchases today, because the LCA would have had the missile that the IAF wants. And that would have actually been the fastest supply of any fighter aircraft. The procurement system is it's own biggest enemy so there is no point in crying that the IAF does not go in post haste for domestic aircraft when against the IAF's wishes and desires, HAL does what it wants.

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8098
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby nachiket » 24 Jun 2020 05:39

ldev wrote:I am quite sure that if the IAF was given the domestic product that they wanted and asked for they would have gone for an emergency purchase of it. I am talking about the Tejas with the Thales RBE-2 radar and the Meteor missile. In 2016 when HAL floated the AESA radar tender for the LCA, besides Thales, ELTA responded and one more supplier. HAL chose ELTA for reasons best known to them. The IAF wanted the Meteor on the LCA but that was possible only if HAL chose a European radar, already approved by the 6 nation consortium. MBDA wrote to the IAF Deputy Chief to that effect in 2018, that they will not be able to integrate the Meteor with a non European radar. Maybe yes to an Indian radar but Uttam was far from ready then and it is still an estimated 2 years away. I believe that if the Thales radar-Meteor missile combination was integrated with the LCA, that the IAF would have gone in for emergency LCA purchases today, because the LCA would have had the missile that the IAF wants. And that would have actually been the fastest supply of any fighter aircraft. The procurement system is it's own biggest enemy so there is no point in crying that the IAF does not go in post haste for domestic aircraft when against the IAF's wishes and desires, HAL does what it wants.

Um, so the LCA is now unacceptable because the Meteor cannot be integrated? Why come up with ludicrous theories like this when the IAF itself has not claimed anything of the sort? No aircraft in IAF service including the 270 Su-30's, 60+ Mig-29's plus the 21 more being sought or the IAF's favorite M2k's can carry the Meteor and will not do so in the foreseeable future.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19836
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby Karan M » 24 Jun 2020 05:41

Even if we had purchased the RBE-2, MBDA could have found some new excuse not to integrate the Meteor. Why will they agree to hand over their USP to a potential rival that can scupper Rafale sales? India claims Rafale is excellent because of AESA + Meteor + low signature + EW + payload/range. For LCA Mk1A you can get all the above at a fraction of the cost of a Rafale, bar payload/range which too can be partly addressed via IFR.

Folks who have been in business, should know better. No country will sabotage its own exports by handing over its USP to be easily integrated on a product that can supplant it in a crucial export market.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9773
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby Rakesh » 24 Jun 2020 05:42

@ nachiket: This has been explained to ldev in detail by many. I don't why the disconnect still exists.

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8098
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby nachiket » 24 Jun 2020 05:43

This Meteor fetish that some members here seem to have is unseemly. The Meteor is an expensive missile and even for the small Rafale fleet the main air-to-air weapon available in significant numbers will be the MICA. And we already have an indigenous alternative superior to the MICA available in the Astra Mk1 which can be easily integrated with all versions of the LCA.

And guess which aircraft will not be able to use the Astra Mk1 or the upcoming Mk2...our shiny new Rafales which will rely on the more expensive imported Meteors.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19836
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby Karan M » 24 Jun 2020 05:54

The Meteor offers us a very good counter to what will eventually arrive in theater - the PL-15. It also outranges the AIM-120 C5 the PAF has. So, yes, great to have. But the basic problem is as mentioned above by Nachiket - is its expensive at around euro 2 Mn per round, (and we dont know its carriage hours) implying building up a stock of even a 500 missile inventory split across Rafale and LCA would be over a $Billion. But more to the point, why would they allow you to integrate Meteor to a 3rd party, non French fighter which is not a NATO system and is competing for orders with your expensive European planes like both the Rafale and Gripen? Will the US give us AMRAAM AIM-120D either? Just apply logic.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9773
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby Rakesh » 24 Jun 2020 05:54

nachiket wrote:And guess which aircraft will not be able to use the Astra Mk1 or the upcoming Mk2...our shiny new Rafales which will rely on the more expensive imported Meteors.

And guess which aircraft will be able to use the Astra Mk1 or the upcoming Mk2....our falsely-maligned Su-30MKIs and MiG-29s :mrgreen:

Need to look beyond Rafale, arm Su-30, Mig with indigenous Astra missiles: IAF Chief Bhadauria
https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/n ... 2020-02-28
28 Feb 2020

Image

ldev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2006
Joined: 06 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby ldev » 24 Jun 2020 06:10

Karan M wrote:Even if we had purchased the RBE-2, MBDA could have found some new excuse not to integrate the Meteor. Why will they agree to hand over their USP to a potential rival that can scupper Rafale sales? India claims Rafale is excellent because of AESA + Meteor + low signature + EW + payload/range. For LCA Mk1A you can get all the above at a fraction of the cost of a Rafale, bar payload/range which too can be partly addressed via IFR.

Folks who have been in business, should know better. No country will sabotage its own exports by handing over its USP to be easily integrated on a product that can supplant it in a crucial export market.


That is why a smart procurement system would have tied the Rafale purchase done in 2016 when Modi went to France with the HAL radar tender which was also issued at the same time. Package deal. Would they have agreed, maybe. It would have been complicated, Dassault, Thales, MBDA, India all agreeing. But nothing ventured, nothing gained. Buy 36 Rafale and get another 72 or 108 LCA with the Meteor. Something like that. But the timing was correct. MBDA would have got sales via the Rafale and incremental sales via the LCA. What is there not to like about it. But for that there has to be coordination between the HAL tender and the 36 Rafale purchase and I doubt that the 2 were on the same page.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9773
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby Rakesh » 24 Jun 2020 07:46

idan wrote:First of all Rafales could be an overkill vis-a-vis bulk of Pak/Chinese re-engineered clones and some very old first generation F16s. If our Mig21 can shoot down those first gen F16s then definitely Rafale is an overkill. Platform is one factor but a pilot’s skill and readiness equally matters. Now in any aerial combat no fighter jet is invincible. Any tragic loss of Rafale due to multiple reasons including malfunction pitted against Soviet tin cans is expensive loss. Finally, Rafale follow-on order would take another 5 years to get inducted and at say $100-120 mil a piece against a vastly inferior skill wise and numerically superior headcount wise sounds expensive. Finally, for peace to prevail there is a cost to it. With dwindling squadron strength it creates more pressure on combat ready aircraft in the inventory and we fly more ad-hoc missions To fill in gaps draining our exchequer. In case of Israeli F16 Baraks they have been upgraded recently to Barak2020 standards, available as of yesterday (only needs a nod from Trump), fully loaded with familiar weapon and ECM, most Israeli vendors are anyway working with us. Logistics, training and operating protocols can be fast-tracked if there is a will. We can be rest assured for at least 10 years and by such time our Tejas, AMCA line will be producing in bulk.

There are some glaring misconceptions in your post above;

Misconception # 1 ---> Rafale is an overkill against Pak and Chinese planes.
The Rafale was the choice of aircraft in MMRCA 1.0 and that is what is coming, albeit in a smaller quantity (36 vs 126). It is not India's issue that the Rafale is technologically ahead of what China and Pakistan currently operates. And the IAF did not buy the Rafale to only engage Pak F-16s and Chinese clones in the air, but rather to provide a capability to strike HVTs inside enemy territory from a stand off distance. Then there is the nuclear role. Another key factor is to get away from one supplier (i.e. Russia).

Misconception # 2 ---> Pak operates first generation F-16s.
The first 40 batch of PAF F-16s have all been upgraded to a MLU standard. Same with the ex-Jordanian Air Force F-16s they operate. They also have 18 F-16 Block 50/52s, deliveries which started in 2010 I believe. This fleet provide the PAF with a good strike and air defence capability. The PAF F-16 fleet is anything but first generation (the Block 15 variant, which the PAF got in the early 80s).

The shooting down of the F-16 by the MiG-21 was a great achievement by Wing Commander Abhinandan Varthaman, but that is not going to happen each & every time a Bison engages a F-16 in the sky. Going by that logic, retire all the Su-30MKIs, Mirage 2000s and MiG-29s and just re-open the MiG-21 line. Will that work? MiG-21 Bisons will be even cheaper than ex-Israeli Air Force F-16s upgraded to the Barak2020 standard.

Misconception # 3 ---> Loss of Rafale is Expensive.
The IAF could potentially lose a Rafale(s) or even far worse, lose the pilot(s) as well. But this is air combat, not pizza delivery. Losses of aircraft and aircrew are part and parcel in this line of work - in peacetime and in wartime. All air forces factor and estimate losses into their calculations. Look up the IAF post-analysis of Ex Gagan Shakti. That is not an argument to not buy the Rafale. Unfortunately there is no facepalm icon on this forum, because that is what I feel like right now.

Misconception # 4 ---> Follow on Rafale will take 5 years.
If additional Rafales are ordered today, the first batch will arrive in 2023. And if the MoD is willing to pay Dassault to increase the production capacity, then they will come even sooner. The Dassault line at Mérignac can churn out 33 birds a year, provided the customer is willing to pay for that increased delivery schedule. Right now, it is producing one third of that i.e. 11 aircraft a year.

Misconception # 45 ---> Ad-hoc missions.
Every time, an IAF plane goes into the air...it is for a certain task or mission. The IAF does not operate with ad-hoc goals, but with purposeful missions to accomplish. Fighter, Transport or Helicopter...pilots operate in mission mode. What you are suggesting does not happen, unless you can provide some concrete examples to suggest otherwise.

idan wrote:DACT mission is not just about proximity flying of dissimilar airframes but also operational aspects, strengths, limitations, weaponry etc all combined.

Thank you for that, but how does this help the IAF if and when the balloon goes up tomorrow?

Rather than waste money on used F-16s, it would be better to process the order for the 83 Tejas Mk1As.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9773
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby Rakesh » 24 Jun 2020 08:15

ldev wrote:That is why a smart procurement system would have tied the Rafale purchase done in 2016 when Modi went to France with the HAL radar tender which was also issued at the same time. Package deal. Would they have agreed, maybe. It would have been complicated, Dassault, Thales, MBDA, India all agreeing. But nothing ventured, nothing gained. Buy 36 Rafale and get another 72 or 108 LCA with the Meteor. Something like that. But the timing was correct. MBDA would have got sales via the Rafale and incremental sales via the LCA. What is there not to like about it. But for that there has to be coordination between the HAL tender and the 36 Rafale purchase and I doubt that the 2 were on the same page.

Your dates are incorrect and thus everything that you have said post that, is also wrong.

Negotiations for 36 Rafale aircraft started in April 2015 and the deal was signed in Sept 2016. I am sure a simple google search will revel that info to you. The tender for AESA radar for the 83 Tejas Mk1A was issued in December 2016 and the winner was selected in December 2018. Both dates are well after the deal for the 36 Rafales were signed. Therefore any possibility of a package deal would not have materialized.

But here is the real clincher ---> Thales had no radar to place on the Tejas in Sept 2016 when the deal for the 36 Rafales was being signed. See the link below and take special note of the source and date of that link.

Successful flight tests for the active array radar offered by Thales to HAL for its Tejas Mk1A LCA
https://www.thalesgroup.com/en/india/pr ... s-mk1a-lca
16 Oct 2017

Thales has developed an active array radar that meets the specific needs of HAL, to equip the 80 TEJAS Mk1A multirole LCA operated by the Indian Air Force. The radar has successfully completed an initial flight test campaign designed to measure its performance level.

It is not like they could take the RBE2 aboard the Rafale and just plug it into the nose cone of the Tejas. Thales had to develop one. So had a smart procurement system tied the Rafale purchase done in Sept 2016 with the HAL radar tender (a tender which did not exist in Sept 2016), it would have resulted in an outcome of making a venture into the unknown and gaining nothing. Instead of "something like that" it would have been something amounting to nothing.

Unless HAL forced the GOI's hand and told them to wait till Dec 2018 (date of the HAL tender winner) to sign the deal for 36 Rafales, which would have delayed the Rafale even further. All things considered, it is better that Elta won the tender. The Derby will be a great missile for the Tejas, along with the homegrown Astra Mk 1 and the follow on Astra Mk 2.

ldev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2006
Joined: 06 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby ldev » 24 Jun 2020 09:51

Rakesh wrote:
ldev wrote:That is why a smart procurement system would have tied the Rafale purchase done in 2016 when Modi went to France with the HAL radar tender which was also issued at the same time. Package deal. Would they have agreed, maybe. It would have been complicated, Dassault, Thales, MBDA, India all agreeing. But nothing ventured, nothing gained. Buy 36 Rafale and get another 72 or 108 LCA with the Meteor. Something like that. But the timing was correct. MBDA would have got sales via the Rafale and incremental sales via the LCA. What is there not to like about it. But for that there has to be coordination between the HAL tender and the 36 Rafale purchase and I doubt that the 2 were on the same page.

Your dates are incorrect and thus everything that you have said post that, is also wrong.

Negotiations for 36 Rafale aircraft started in April 2015 and the deal was signed in Sept 2016. I am sure a simple google search will revel that info to you. The tender for AESA radar for the 83 Tejas Mk1A was issued in December 2016 and the winner was selected in December 2018. Both dates are well after the deal for the 36 Rafales were signed. Therefore any possibility of a package deal would not have materialized.

But here is the real clincher ---> Thales had no radar to place on the Tejas in Sept 2016 when the deal for the 36 Rafales was being signed. See the link below and take special note of the source and date of that link.

Successful flight tests for the active array radar offered by Thales to HAL for its Tejas Mk1A LCA
https://www.thalesgroup.com/en/india/pr ... s-mk1a-lca
16 Oct 2017

Thales has developed an active array radar that meets the specific needs of HAL, to equip the 80 TEJAS Mk1A multirole LCA operated by the Indian Air Force. The radar has successfully completed an initial flight test campaign designed to measure its performance level.

It is not like they could take the RBE2 aboard the Rafale and just plug it into the nose cone of the Tejas. Thales had to develop one. So had a smart procurement system tied the Rafale purchase done in Sept 2016 with the HAL radar tender (a tender which did not exist in Sept 2016), it would have resulted in an outcome of making a venture into the unknown and gaining nothing. Instead of "something like that" it would have been something amounting to nothing.

Unless HAL forced the GOI's hand and told them to wait till Dec 2018 (date of the HAL tender winner) to sign the deal for 36 Rafales, which would have delayed the Rafale even further. All things considered, it is better that Elta won the tender. The Derby will be a great missile for the Tejas, along with the homegrown Astra Mk 1 and the follow on Astra Mk 2.


OK no package deal if you must. But a deal for the supply of a Thales radar for the Tejas? They bid for the Tejas radar contract and at least as of October 2017, a full year before Elta was awarded the contract there is an excerpt from a newsreport:

Press Trust of India | New Delhi
Last Updated at October 16, 2017 21:04 IST

French defence firm Thales has developed a radar with an eye on the specific needs of the state-run aerospace firm Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) to equip the Tejas light combat aircraft.

"The radar has successfully completed an initial flight test campaign designed to measure its performance level," Thales said in a statement.


It said the radar meets the specific needs of HAL to equip the 80 Tejas Mk1A multi-role aircraft operated by the Indian Air Force.

"In order to meet the needs of the Indian manufacturer HAL, Thales is offering a lightweight, compact active array radar," it said.

Thales said the radar reflects its expertise in active array technologies as demonstrated by the RBE2 radar installed on Rafale jets.

It said tests on the radar were carried out recently at the Cazaux air base in France.

Philippe Duhamel, Executive Vice-President, Defence Mission Systems activities of Thales, said the radar was compliant with the requirement of HAL and had a high degree of operational reliability
.


In the meantime in the one year between Thales having an AESA radar suitable for the Tejas and the award of the contract MBDA wrote 5 letters to the IAF saying that HAL must choose any European radar which had been approved by the 6 nation consortium for the Tejas if the IAF wanted the Meteor missile integrated with the Tejas.

In its letters to the IAF, MBDA has cited technology security concerns that integrating the Meteor with Israeli radar would endanger secret source codes and technologies. MBDA, a consortium of firms from six European countries, also believes getting clearances from six capitals would be complicated. In a February 19, 2018 letter to the IAF chief, Air Chief Marshal B S Dhanoa, MBDA pointed out that the Meteor “has already been successfully integrated with 3 major European platforms and sensors… The risks inherent to such a demanding Tejas integration programme will be significantly minimised by the selection of a European radar, similar to those with which we have already qualified Meteor”.

On May 17, 2018, MBDA wrote again to the IAF chief that with six nations involved in MBDA, clearing the Meteor’s integration with a non-European radar would be complicated. “Therefore, from a purely technical point of view, and considering the required clearances, Meteor on LCA may only be considered with a European radar,” stated MBDA.

On May 29, 2018, MBDA wrote yet again to the IAF chief, stating: “As design authority and OEM (original equipment manufacturer) of the Meteor missile, we wish to confirm to you that integration of this missile can only be possible with a European radar and our proprietary data link.”

Ruling out any possibility of the Israeli firm carrying out the integration, MBDA categorically stated: “No other mode of integration is possible and any other suggestion from third parties is misinformed.”

In yet another letter to the IAF deputy chief on June 21, 2018, MBDA wrote: “MBDA will not be able to offer Meteor for (Tejas) LCA, if a non-European radar is chosen for that platform — we will not be able to gain 6 Partner Nation clearance. Furthermore, the integration of Meteor is only possible using MBDA’s proprietary datalink technology. No other 3rd party is capable of carrying out Meteor integration.”

Then, in response to an IAF query whether the Meteor could be integrated onto the Uttam AESA radar the Defence R&D Organisation (DRDO) was developing, MBDA gave conditional acceptance on July 13, 2018. Writing to the deputy chief, MBDA wrote: “integration would be perfectly feasible (provided) this DRDO ‘UTTAM’ radar would need to be shown to be completely indigenous.


And yet inspite of Thales having demonstrated a perfectly workable AESA radar with the Tejas and MBDA having expressed its inability to integrate with a non European radar on multiple occasions to the IAF, on October 26, 2018, HAL signed an agreement with Elta for the Elta 2052 radars thereby ruling out the Meteor for the Tejas.

It is my understanding that the current Rafale deal includes integrating Brahmos NG and the Astra with the RBE-2AA. If that is indeed the case then it could also have been negotiated with Thales to integrate the Astra and the Brahmos NG with the Thales radar on the Tejas had it been chosen.

The only reason IMO that Elta 2052 was chosen was pricing because the Elta 2052 was already being priced out with upgrading the Jaguars. This is a perfect example of being penny wise and pound foolish. How much more expensive would the Thales have been. Double the price? Even if the Thales radar had cost Euro 15 million more per unit for integration, IMO it would have been more than worth it for the benefit of having the Meteor without losing the ability to integrate Astra, Asraam and Brahmos NG. A total of 80 Rafale and 216 Meteor equipped Tejas would have made the IAF formidable without even considering the SU-30 upgrades. There would have been no need for any further MMRCA.

IMO, HAL the IAF and the MOD babus who were dealing with Dassault were completely out of sync and out of touch with each other and
the result is a dysfunctional procurement policy.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4699
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby srai » 24 Jun 2020 10:10

^^^
Ask yourself, why are the Europeans insisting on a Euro radar for Meteor? Next thing they will ask for Euro built plane only ;)

If they really wanted to (and purely from commercial angle), they could integrate with any radar, computer and aircraft with the customer footing the bill. But they are putting up barriers to adoption for specific internal reasons.

ldev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2006
Joined: 06 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby ldev » 24 Jun 2020 10:30

srai wrote:^^^
Ask yourself, why are the Europeans insisting on a Euro radar for Meteor? Next thing they will ask for Euro built plane only ;)

If they really wanted to (and purely from commercial angle), they could integrate with any radar, computer and aircraft with the customer footing the bill. But they are putting up barriers to adoption for specific internal reasons.


Naturally, Elta will want it's radar sold, Thales will want it's radar sold, Leonardo will want it's radar sold, Northrop Grumann will want it's radar sold. HAL and the IAF working in tandem have to figure out which combination of radar and missiles will provide the most lethal combination to the Tejas to neutralize the PL-15s of the PLAAF and the AMRAAM C5 of the PAF. And the fact is that the RBE-2 AA or the variant developed for the Tejas coupled with the Meteor will outdistance both of those missiles. And Thales has agreed to integrate India's PGMs to the RBE-2AA AFAIK for the Rafale. So why not the same deal for the Tejas. Until Uttam comes along, Tejas will use a foreign radar. Why not get one that will turn Tejas into the most lethal platform possible? And will more or less guarantee an IAF buy in into the Tejas wholeheartedly.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4699
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby srai » 24 Jun 2020 10:39

^^^
Ok ... will let you keep dreaming about Meteor :D

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19836
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby Karan M » 24 Jun 2020 11:04

ldev wrote:
Karan M wrote:Even if we had purchased the RBE-2, MBDA could have found some new excuse not to integrate the Meteor. Why will they agree to hand over their USP to a potential rival that can scupper Rafale sales? India claims Rafale is excellent because of AESA + Meteor + low signature + EW + payload/range. For LCA Mk1A you can get all the above at a fraction of the cost of a Rafale, bar payload/range which too can be partly addressed via IFR.

Folks who have been in business, should know better. No country will sabotage its own exports by handing over its USP to be easily integrated on a product that can supplant it in a crucial export market.


That is why a smart procurement system would have tied the Rafale purchase done in 2016 when Modi went to France with the HAL radar tender which was also issued at the same time. Package deal. Would they have agreed, maybe. It would have been complicated, Dassault, Thales, MBDA, India all agreeing. But nothing ventured, nothing gained. Buy 36 Rafale and get another 72 or 108 LCA with the Meteor. Something like that. But the timing was correct. MBDA would have got sales via the Rafale and incremental sales via the LCA. What is there not to like about it. But for that there has to be coordination between the HAL tender and the 36 Rafale purchase and I doubt that the 2 were on the same page.


Wait what. You want the IAF to hold up its Rafale purchase for something the French may never agree to? Who gains here? The Chinese, as we are left bereft of even the Rafales.

idan
BRFite
Posts: 105
Joined: 21 Jun 2020 00:19

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby idan » 24 Jun 2020 12:37

So with one squadron of LCA Tejas operational, are we flying any Tejas CAP missions in Ladakh today armed with Astra BVRs? Can we go to combat with Tejas today? Now is the need for flexing muscles ... are we there with our first squadron of indigenous fighter? That will send a loud message to foreign vendors and citizens alike ... this is 2020 or are we are still talking about 2025, 2030 for a fully combat ready indigenous platform? If the latter be the case then therein lies the fallacy. Whenever we have an external crisis or threat we go shopping for foreign products!

Nihat
BRFite
Posts: 1265
Joined: 10 Dec 2008 13:35

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby Nihat » 24 Jun 2020 12:44

I'd suggest reading up on the interview with the chief test pilot of the LCA tejas program in Hush kit.

The LCA is fully combat ready but at the same time it's still an evolving and maturing platform. It's armed with astra and derby as a2a missiles and capable of undertaking CAP and limited penetrative ground strike missions including delivery of precision weapons.

As far as pushing it into the current crisis goes, if necessary it will be deployed but given that it's training and tactics are still evolving, this is not the most optimum option currently.

idan
BRFite
Posts: 105
Joined: 21 Jun 2020 00:19

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby idan » 24 Jun 2020 12:55

Nihat wrote:I'd suggest reading up on the interview with the chief test pilot of the LCA tejas program in Hush kit.

The LCA is fully combat ready but at the same time it's still an evolving and maturing platform. It's armed with astra and derby as a2a missiles and capable of undertaking CAP and limited penetrative ground strike missions including delivery of precision weapons.

As far as pushing it into the current crisis goes, if necessary it will be deployed but given that it's training and tactics are still evolving, this is not the most optimum option currently.


Or shall we say perpetually evolving not just training and tactics but the platform itself when the enemy is knocking at the doors. It is high time we rethink national interest and priorities first and be self critical. Tejas is meant to be frontline fighter replacing our ageing Mig 21s ... if a border war breaks out today then where are they now?


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: venkat_r and 49 guests