Bharat Rakshak Forum Announcement

Hello Everyone,

A warm welcome back to the Bharat Rakshak Forum.

Important Notice: Due to a corruption in the BR forum database we regret to announce that data records relating to some of our registered users have been lost. We estimate approx. 500 user details are deleted.

To ease the process of recreating the user IDs we request members that have previously posted on the BR forums to recognise and identify their posts, once the posts are identified please contact the BRF moderator team by emailing BRF Mod Team with your post details.

The mod team will be able to update your username, email etc. so that the user history can be maintained.

Unfortunately for members that have never posted or have had all their posts deleted i.e. users that have 0 posts, we will be unable to recreate your account hence we request that you re-register again.

We apologise for any inconvenience caused and thank you for your understanding.

Regards,
Seetal

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.
fanne
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2638
Joined: 11 Feb 1999 12:31

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

Postby fanne » 13 Dec 2017 01:23

I am indeed getting old mixing R-77, A-10...
Astra is very good news indeed. Few more variant - passive, extended, dual mode etc. will go a long way. Now if Uttam gets inducted with a family of these missiles, we can truly control our destiny.

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5994
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

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

Postby nachiket » 13 Dec 2017 01:52

fanne wrote:I am indeed getting old mixing R-77, A-10...
Astra is very good news indeed. Few more variant - passive, extended, dual mode etc. will go a long way. Now if Uttam gets inducted with a family of these missiles, we can truly control our destiny.

By passive you mean SARH variant? Why would we need that?

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5994
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

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

Postby nachiket » 13 Dec 2017 01:58

Karan M wrote:It bears remarking the RussAF did deploy R-77 in ME recently. We don't know whether R-77 or R-77SD (newer variant). Its been two decades since development. They could have worked out prior niggles in serviceability.

It would be interesting to see what missiles were purchased for MiG-29 upgrade.

Karan, IAF surely knows that there are newer versions of the R-77 available. Yet we see no new orders for the type despite operating a huge number of aircraft capable of using it. The last order for BVR missiles I remember was actually for the R-27 despite it being virtually obsolete now. WHile the R-77 may have a performance shortfall compared to the newer AMRAAM versions, it would still be better than the R-27's we rely on. Which modern air force still relies on SARH missiles anymore?

This leads me to think the real issue is with reliability (too many duds!) rather than performance. Otherwise the IAF would have still bought more R-77s rather than wait till the Astra is ready (which itself may not match the AIM-120C7 performance till the Mk2 version).

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5125
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

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

Postby Viv S » 13 Dec 2017 02:08

fanne wrote:I have a different question, R-77 was highly regarded during Kargil war, so much so that it kept PAF at bay. What changed?


Image
Image
Last edited by Viv S on 13 Dec 2017 02:24, edited 4 times in total.

fanne
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2638
Joined: 11 Feb 1999 12:31

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

Postby fanne » 13 Dec 2017 02:13

Thanks ViV
What is CAG problem here. Precisely taking account of IAF history, IN ordered grand total of 40 missiles for it's equal number of eventual Mig 29K fleet, a missile per plane. Most likely it was an evaluation batch.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 15015
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

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

Postby Karan M » 13 Dec 2017 02:23

nachiket wrote:
Karan M wrote:It bears remarking the RussAF did deploy R-77 in ME recently. We don't know whether R-77 or R-77SD (newer variant). Its been two decades since development. They could have worked out prior niggles in serviceability.

It would be interesting to see what missiles were purchased for MiG-29 upgrade.

Karan, IAF surely knows that there are newer versions of the R-77 available. Yet we see no new orders for the type despite operating a huge number of aircraft capable of using it. The last order for BVR missiles I remember was actually for the R-27 despite it being virtually obsolete now. WHile the R-77 may have a performance shortfall compared to the newer AMRAAM versions, it would still be better than the R-27's we rely on. Which modern air force still relies on SARH missiles anymore?

This leads me to think the real issue is with reliability (too many duds!) rather than performance. Otherwise the IAF would have still bought more R-77s rather than wait till the Astra is ready (which itself may not match the AIM-120C7 performance till the Mk2 version).


You are right in that new pics of Su-30 only show AA-10 and even HAL test of Brahmos config was with AA-10. Parrikar went to Russia, one of the stated items on agenda was RVV-AE serviceability.

SIPRI however notes 500 RVV-AE were ordered in 2012. Wonder how accurate that is.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3928
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

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

Postby srai » 13 Dec 2017 03:12

Karan M wrote:...
SIPRI however notes 500 RVV-AE were ordered in 2012. Wonder how accurate that is.

Wasn't that for the IN's MiG-29Ks?

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 15015
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

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

Postby Karan M » 13 Dec 2017 08:22

^^ I dont know. IAF MiG-29 upgrade fitment will show the reality.

However, SB430 on IAF 85th AF day did have RVV-AE missiles displayed. Picture as of October 2017. So situation may have improved with a new batch of R-77s.
http://static.dnaindia.com/sites/defaul ... 100917.jpg

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9429
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

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

Postby Aditya_V » 13 Dec 2017 11:51

I think some exaggeration going on, I am sure the AIm-120 C-7 has its share of problems. I think Astra will have a gretaer range than the Aim-120 C-7 and certainly better than the PAf's Aim-120 C5.

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2874
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

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

Postby Cain Marko » 13 Dec 2017 12:32

My understanding is that
derby = mica < r77= c5 = Astra < c7 = derby ER < meteor

Kersi
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 55
Joined: 31 May 2017 12:25

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

Postby Kersi » 13 Dec 2017 12:50

I think R 77 (maybe/ RVV AE ) were also bought with the upgradation of MiG 21bis to MiG 21BISON. The MiG 21BISON has ben dispalyed at AE with R 77

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 18377
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

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

Postby Philip » 13 Dec 2017 13:34

Ck former ACM Raha on why we need more Rafales,costs,etc."Weapons suite superior to earlier case..."
https://blogs.timesofindia.indiatimes.c ... t-for-iaf/

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 15015
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

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

Postby Karan M » 13 Dec 2017 15:59

Philip wrote:Ck former ACM Raha on why we need more Rafales,costs,etc."Weapons suite superior to earlier case..."
https://blogs.timesofindia.indiatimes.c ... t-for-iaf/


My only concern with this deal is the limited number purchased. Wish we had bought at least 54 as a first purchase, three squadrons of 15-16 aircraft each with rest as reserve and for rotation (to even out the lifetime). Along with improvement in serviceability of Su-30 MKI (15% equals 40 airframes) and 123 LCA Mk1/Mk1A order, we could have met our short term requirements, while prepping for a 2nd buy of Rafale later on (say another 40).

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 15015
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

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

Postby Karan M » 13 Dec 2017 16:00

Kersi wrote:I think R 77 (maybe/ RVV AE ) were also bought with the upgradation of MiG 21bis to MiG 21BISON. The MiG 21BISON has ben dispalyed at AE with R 77


Of course, the quotes displayed by VivS are for that specific purchase.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 15015
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

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

Postby Karan M » 13 Dec 2017 16:03

Aditya_V wrote:I think some exaggeration going on, I am sure the AIm-120 C-7 has its share of problems. I think Astra will have a gretaer range than the Aim-120 C-7 and certainly better than the PAf's Aim-120 C5.


AMRAAMs - like most US weapons - are heavily tested, but as you say who can predict reliability issues propping up late. If F/A-18 E/Fs can have hypoxia issues, anything is possible. But US does have a very good mechanism in place for testing weapons reliability. Having said that, its not raw range we need to fix on but the sheer versatility of our own BVR missile and its flexible launch modes plus in-house ECCM capability with indigenous seeker.

Note it says buddy designation in the Astra brochure. That means one Su-30 MKI can guide an Astra fired from another Su-30 MkI. That is a huge step forward for IAF.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 15015
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

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

Postby Karan M » 13 Dec 2017 16:19

This opens up all sorts of new opportunities for the IAF. A typical mission may be like this:

Meteor equipped Rafales take out the patrolling PAF/PRC AEW&C. Low flying Su-30s then move forwards to engage opponent escorts or other aircraft. The Su-30s flying behind the lead pair go active, lighting up the target but in TWS mode. There is no constant CWI screech in the PAF F-16 cockpit. Meanwhile, closer Su-30s fly silent using their IRST for look-up against the F-16s & then use the datalinked radar data from the radar active Su-30s to launch Astras within the NEZ envelope. They launch several Astras per target, culminating in a higher chance of Pk & the seekers go active at the last moment, minimizing the time available for the F-16 SPJs to protect their aircraft.

Even better if a Phalcon directs the whole battle. Then the IAF Su-30s go active at the last moment, and even that awareness will not be there for the PAF.

Interesting times ahead for IAF.

Kersi
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 55
Joined: 31 May 2017 12:25

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

Postby Kersi » 13 Dec 2017 16:23

Is there a need to get Mica AND Meteor AAMs for Rafale ? I guess that Meteor has a longer range than Mica

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 15015
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

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

Postby Karan M » 13 Dec 2017 16:24

Mica comes in IR flavor

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 18377
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

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

Postby Philip » 13 Dec 2017 16:59

You mean ....."interesting times for the PAF!"

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6266
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby brar_w » 13 Dec 2017 17:10

Aditya_V wrote:I think some exaggeration going on, I am sure the AIm-120 C-7 has its share of problems. I think Astra will have a gretaer range than the Aim-120 C-7 and certainly better than the PAf's Aim-120 C5.


On the topic of reliability, no system, eastern or western, 1st generation or 3rd generation, is immune to reliability issues creeping up in large stocks. What you rely on is constant component testing, large volumes, a diverse customer base that, one hopes, routinely tests stock so that any design issues related to reliability are quickly identified, and addressed. Specifically on the AMRAAM, there are now more than 20,000 missiles that have been delivered and even the post P3I delivery volume is at least 8000 missiles based on open source reporting. DT and OT has been quite robust for all P3I and post P3I variants and combat-archer in the USAF still live fires 100-150 AMRAAMs per year (could be more) using regular stock, and front line squadron pilots for both training and to gather data. So while no system is immune to reliability issues creeping up or design issues not being discovered, most like to deal with confidence that can come with very high numbers of units delivered, units tested and the routine practice of launching dozens of missiles per year for training and data collection. Since issues creeping are a matter of when and not if you are also very interested in the team managing the program at the host-country and OEM level to see how quickly they can make changes rapidly to solve any issues that are discovered over its life cycle.

As a general rule, missiles need to be pitted relative to the aircraft and the ECMs the other side fields as opposed to another similar BVR missile, unless there is huge disparity as would occur if one side has an active RF missile while the other air-force fields mostly Semi Active systems. Also, the focus on individual system or even component comparison is too granular and what the focus should be on is how the IAF/IN and the MOD can quickly field 1000s of ASTRAs and how quickly it proliferates to each and every squadron in the IAF and how fast they can begin training for the tactics that maximize its advantages. At the end of the day pilots do the fighting and how much you train, how much you practice and how much of these systems you have access to is what determines how well you perform in battle. Whether the ASTRA is superior to the C5 AMRAAM, or C7 AMRAAM, D AMRAAM, F3R AMRAAM or even Meteor is not of very high importance..what is important is how much better can an IAF pilot get at deploying it as part of a system compared to his/her Pakistani or Chinese counterpart. Israel for example didn't even bother for a data-link and Mid Course Updates to be developed for the Derby..they wanted an indigenous RF missile complement to the AMRAAM and put one out there and later iteratively added capability while their pilots likely spent a considerable amount of time learning and honing in their tactics on how best to deploy the weapon to their advantage.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3928
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

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

Postby srai » 13 Dec 2017 17:38

^^^
It doesn't help that the IAF has different AAM types for almost every fighter platform.

  1. ASRAAM -> Jaguar
  2. MICA IR/RF -> Mirage-2000 & Rafale
  3. Meteor -> Rafale
  4. R-77 -> MiG-29, Su-30MKI, MiG-21 Bison
  5. R-27 -> MiG-29, Su-30MKI
  6. R-73 -> MiG-29, Su-30MKI, MiG-21 Bison, LCA
  7. Derby -> LCA
  8. Python-5 -> LCA
  9. Astra -> Su-30MKI
Miss anything?

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9429
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

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

Postby Aditya_V » 13 Dec 2017 17:49

You are assuming all the Matra Magic II and R 60 missiles have been retired, and Mistral Missiles for Helicopters

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2039
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

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

Postby chola » 13 Dec 2017 17:58

The problem with the R-77 is far more serious than aging rarely tested stocks. CAG reported that homing issues occurred in the tests that were fired. In fact, tests in Russia failed repeatedly due to a chitty seeker. The RuAF might never had even inducted the R-77!

https://medium.com/war-is-boring/russias-most-feared-air-to-air-missile-is-actually-kind-of-a-dud-ebebe8b28f4f



Russia’s Most Feared Air-to-Air Missile Is Actually Kind of a Dud

The Russians may never have acquired production-model R-77s

by TOM COOPER

manjgu
BRFite
Posts: 1502
Joined: 11 Aug 2006 10:33

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

Postby manjgu » 13 Dec 2017 18:17

srai...not so simple. a mix of AAM's is very good... not just 1 or 2 types... different missiles have some different +ve and - ve points.. so enemy is always guessing what is coming his way !

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3928
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

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

Postby srai » 13 Dec 2017 18:24

manjgu wrote:srai...not so simple. a mix of AAM's is very good... not just 1 or 2 types... different missiles have some different +ve and - ve points.. so enemy is always guessing what is coming his way !

Well that may be, but from training and logistics point of view it is the opposite.

manjgu
BRFite
Posts: 1502
Joined: 11 Aug 2006 10:33

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

Postby manjgu » 13 Dec 2017 18:47

u r right..everything has its + and - ....

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5994
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

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

Postby nachiket » 14 Dec 2017 03:37

srai wrote:^^^
It doesn't help that the IAF has different AAM types for almost every fighter platform.

  1. ASRAAM -> Jaguar
  2. MICA IR/RF -> Mirage-2000 & Rafale
  3. Meteor -> Rafale
  4. R-77 -> MiG-29, Su-30MKI, MiG-21 Bison
  5. R-27 -> MiG-29, Su-30MKI
  6. R-73 -> MiG-29, Su-30MKI, MiG-21 Bison, LCA
  7. Derby -> LCA
  8. Python-5 -> LCA
  9. Astra -> Su-30MKI
Miss anything?

Matra Super-530D and Magic-II on the Mirage 2000 (upgrades not done yet and we won't throw anything away).
R-60 on Mig-21s.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4521
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

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

Postby Rakesh » 14 Dec 2017 09:02

Kartik wrote:Maybe the IAF should look at buying the Qatar Emiri Air Force's 12 Mirage-2000-5s now that they're going to have their hands full with Rafales and F-15QAs entering service in the next few years. Dassault is apparently close to a handover ceremony for the first Qatari Rafales. Those Mirage-2000-5s could finally bring the No.9 Wolfpack squadron to its full strength. Sign a contract with Dassault to bring them to a similar standard as the IAF's Mirage-2000I or keep them as a one-off variant. Commonality between the types for most spares must be very high as it is.

With only 12 Mirages, the QEAF must not have more than 20-24 pilots, given an average jet to pilot ratio of 1.5. Some of them would've already gone to France for conversion to the Rafale and now, some of the existing QEAF Mirage-2000 pilots are being ear-marked for Typhoon conversion, even before that contract has been signed, which is not too far away. They won't be needing those Mirages soon enough and a good faith offer from India may well be considered.

+108!!!

https://twitter.com/rotorfocus/status/9 ... 3982964736 --> Put that into perspective, Qatar is buying 36 F-15QA Eagles; 36 Rafales and 24 Typhoons to replace just 12 Mirage 2000s.

Image

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20550
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

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

Postby Prem » 14 Dec 2017 10:33

Karan M wrote:This opens up all sorts of new opportunities for the IAF. A typical mission may be like this:

Meteor equipped Rafales take out the patrolling PAF/PRC AEW&C. Low flying Su-30s then move forwards to engage opponent escorts or other aircraft. The Su-30s flying behind the lead pair go active, lighting up the target but in TWS mode. There is no constant CWI screech in the PAF F-16 cockpit. Meanwhile, closer Su-30s fly silent using their IRST for look-up against the F-16s & then use the datalinked radar data from the radar active Su-30s to launch Astras within the NEZ envelope. They launch several Astras per target, culminating in a higher chance of Pk & the seekers go active at the last moment, minimizing the time available for the F-16 SPJs to protect their aircraft.
Even better if a Phalcon directs the whole battle. Then the IAF Su-30s go active at the last moment, and even that awareness will not be there for the PAF.Interesting times ahead for IAF.

I remember India lobbied with US to degrade ECM capabilities of F16s given to Pak . Something like DRFM was removed per request from India. Paki may have acquired through Turkey route though .

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 18377
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

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

Postby Philip » 14 Dec 2017 11:21

...and upgrade them at the cost of around $70M per bird! Which will serve for just decade + at the most. Might as well buy a new Rafale even though its far more expensive,if French fillies are what the IAF is lusting for.Having gone down the Rafale rd.,a fait accompli,36 being too mingy a number,We'll have to somehow scrape up enough moolah after some v.v. hard bargaining with Dassault and buy another 24.This would give us 3 sqds. with 20 aircraft/sqd. a v. decent figure.With around 120 MIG-29UGs and M2kUGs,we would then possess 180 medium multi-role aircraft a goodly figure when you add about 320 MKIs to the tally,with a large % of them upgraded to SS/BMos std.120 upgraded Jags,120 Bisons (which will be progressively retd. as LCAs arrive) and 120 LCA MK-1/1As will give us 850+ aircraft,42 sqds.Once you start adding FGFAs as they arrive,and more LCAs of MK-2 whatever,we would be able to get to a figure of 900,the magic 45 sqd. figure which is the "holy grail" of the IAF.It will only be around 2030 when the upgraded MIG-29s and M2Ks will require replacing and hopefully by that time the AMCA will be entering serial production while FGFAs locally built from around 2025 onwards,will be replacing legacy aircraft with far more capable birds.

With the 300+ MKIs as the backbone of the IAF,beefing up the no. of med. MR aircraft and increasing LCA production,the IAF isn't in bad shape at all! In all categories,heavy,med. and light,it will have arguably the best contemporary aircraft in each class in the world,the LCA may not be as sophisticated as late model Gripens and F-16s as of now,but is certainly the most cost effective as one can afford two LCAs for just one of its rivals! That factor makes it the best light fighter today.

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3630
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

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

Postby Kartik » 15 Dec 2017 01:05

Viv S wrote:
fanne wrote:I have a different question, R-77 was highly regarded during Kargil war, so much so that it kept PAF at bay. What changed?


Image
Image


Unbelievable!! the IAF must have been in a really desperate state back then with its primary BVRAAM proving to be a total dud. No wonder they went in fully supporting the Astra BVRAAM development.

Specifically which variant of the R-27 did we acquire? R-27R (SARH), R-27T (passive IR), R-27AE (Active radar) or the R-27ER (extended range SARH) or R-27ET (extended range passive IR)

by the way, there was a variant of the R-27, the R-27EP that was a passive radar homing variant. Given its long range, it would be quite a threat for AEWs at long range or radar emitting fighters. Any chance that the IAF acquired any of these variants?


Vympel offers R-27EP anti-radar air-to-air missile
Piotr Butowski

Vympel is offering the R-27EP anti-radar version of its R-27 (AA-10 'Alamo') series of air-to-air missiles on the export market, writes Piotr Butowski. It showed a model of the weapon at the recent FIDAE defence exhibition in Santiago, Chile.

The missile is not a totally new concept. The first test launchings of the original R-27P passive-radar homing missile were made from a MiG-29 testbed in 1984. In 1987, the R-27P missile was adopted for service with what was then the Soviet air force, and in 1991 the Artem factory in Kiev, Ukraine, made a short production run of missiles. These are currently in service with the Russian Air Force.

Until recently, the existence of the R-27P could not be confirmed. Reports described it as being a weapon for use against fighter aircraft, AEW aircraft or standoff jammers. The first direct evidence for the weapon came when the Ukraine company Artem offered it for export.

Production of R-27P ended after the disintegration of the Soviet Union. Although the Artem factory is still offering the R-27P, it is unlikely to be able to deliver these because the homing head - an essential component of the missile - is made only by the CKBA factory in Omsk, Russia.

The R-27P and -EP missile - P for passivnaya (passive) - are equipped with a PRGS-27 (or 9B-1032) seeker developed by CKBA. This operates at centimetric wavelengths, and guides the round to the radar of enemy fighter aircraft. The missile is intended for use against enemy fighters at long range, when the launch aircraft may still be beyond the maximum range of the target's radar. Since the weapon uses passive homing, it will give the target no warning that a launch has been made.

Vympel offers two versions of the missile: the standard R-27P with a maximum range of 72km and the 'energetic' version R-27EP with a bigger rocket motor which gives a maximum range of 110km. This maintains the dual-standard policy set by the original active-radar and infrared-guided versions, which were fielded in medium (R-27R and -27T) and long-range (R-27ER and -27ET) variants respectively. The R-27P and -27EP retain the basic configuration of the earlier members of the AA-10 'Alamo' series, including the novel trapezoidal 'butterfly' control surfaces.

The homing head is capable of detecting a target from a range of more than 200km, but the R-27EP cannot carry out an interception at such distances. The flight time would exceed the operating duration of the missile's onboard power supply. Vympel is working on ways of increasing the operating time of the power supply in order to allow R-27EP engagements at up to 200km.

Series manufacturing of R-27P/EP missiles would be carried out at Vympel's facilities in Moscow. The company does not envisage large production orders for such a specialised weapon, so it would be able to meet the likely demand using its own workshops. At present Vympel is manufacturing small batches of R-77 (RVV-AE) and Kh-29 missiles for export. Annual production of these amounts to only 200-300 examples.

Vympel R-27P/EP anti-radar air-to-air missile specification R-27P R-27EP
Launch weight 248kg 346kg
Warhead weight 39kg 39kg
Length 4,000mm 4,700mm
Diameter 230mm 260mm
Wing span 772mm 800mm
Fin span 972mm 972mm
Maximum altitude of the target 20 km 20 km
Maximum g-load of the target 5.5 5.5
Maximum range 72km 110km
Minimum firing distance 2-3km 2-3km

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3630
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

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

Postby Kartik » 15 Dec 2017 01:18

Philip wrote:...and upgrade them at the cost of around $70M per bird! Which will serve for just decade + at the most. Might as well buy a new Rafale even though its far more expensive,if French fillies are what the IAF is lusting for.


Those Qatari Mirage-2000-5s won't be needing upgrades. They're Mirage-2000-5s. Their standard should be a couple notches lower than the Mirage-2000I, but respectable enough to keep them as is till they retire in another 20 years. Type commonality must be very high anyway.

It makes even more sense now, since we've bought the MICA IR and EM variants for the Mirage-2000I and Rafale fleet. The Qataris had originally offered their stocks of MICAs as well with the sale.

But I don't expect this to happen. Too much common sense, so its just not possible for the MoD to make it happen. I don't hear anything about those Malaysian MiG-29N's anymore either. IAF was supposed to have sent an evaluation team to look at those Fulcrums but since then no news on possibly purchasing them. Those MiG-29Ns would DEFINITELY need an upgrade to the MiG-29UPG standard.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6246
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

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

Postby Indranil » 15 Dec 2017 04:28

Rakesh wrote:Image

Forget everything. Let me take in this beauty. Every line seems to be drawn with a single free flowing stroke.

This is what I mean when I say LCA is not refined. It is functional, but a hotch-potch. An inlet here and an outlet there. A fairing here and a fairing there.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 18377
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

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

Postby Philip » 15 Dec 2017 07:31

Yes the horizontal inlet just before the tail decidedly an afterthought.Even the HF-24 has such graceful lines.The LCA looks a bit shrunk.As there is some ballast in the LCA, would a slight lengthening of the fuselage give it a more aerodynamic profile ( remember the wasp waist designs of yesteryear?) which would also accomodate a larger/ longer more powerful engine?

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4521
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

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

Postby Rakesh » 15 Dec 2017 08:09

:) You mean the 1 metre plug designed for the Mk2?

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6246
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

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

Postby Indranil » 15 Dec 2017 08:23

Have you seen a wasp waist of late on any aircraft? The physics behind the technique is used, not the technique itself.

Manish_P
BRFite
Posts: 1104
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

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

Postby Manish_P » 15 Dec 2017 11:43

<OT>

^ i am a huge fan of deltas. My best looking aircraft list has the Mirage 2000, the SR 71, the F 22, but the list topper will always be this beauty

Image

And i really like the F106 Delta Dart. Mach 2 performance and missiles carried internally.. in 1960!

Image

</OT>

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4521
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

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

Postby Rakesh » 15 Dec 2017 12:13

Manish: You mean the FB-22 and not the F-22?

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2874
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

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

Postby Cain Marko » 15 Dec 2017 23:31

Kartik wrote:
Philip wrote:...and upgrade them at the cost of around $70M per bird! Which will serve for just decade + at the most. Might as well buy a new Rafale even though its far more expensive,if French fillies are what the IAF is lusting for.


Those Qatari Mirage-2000-5s won't be needing upgrades. They're Mirage-2000-5s. Their standard should be a couple notches lower than the Mirage-2000I, but respectable enough to keep them as is till they retire in another 20 years. Type commonality must be very high anyway.

It makes even more sense now, since we've bought the MICA IR and EM variants for the Mirage-2000I and Rafale fleet. The Qataris had originally offered their stocks of MICAs as well with the sale.
.

IIRC, they are only wired for A2A modes unlike the dash 5/9 or the iaf standard. But they would still be a very worthwhile purchase, if available

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5994
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

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

Postby nachiket » 15 Dec 2017 23:42

Cain Marko wrote:IIRC, they are only wired for A2A modes unlike the dash 5/9 or the iaf standard. But they would still be a very worthwhile purchase, if available

If the IAF could modify the older 2000H to drop LGBs during wartime, modifying the upgraded Qatari Mirages during peacetime should be a breeze.

I don't understand though. If they got the plain vanilla -5 upgrade what do you mean by being wired for A2A only? Did they get a different RDY version with A2A only modes?

All academic anyway, if such a proposal goes to the MoD, by the time they take any decision, the Mirages would have either been sold to another country or rusted away in some aircraft graveyard.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: brar_w, Chinmay, darshand, Vinod Ji and 41 guests