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.
Katare
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2298
Joined: 02 Mar 2002 12:31

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

Postby Katare » 06 Aug 2018 21:44

Cain Marko wrote:Btw, these rafales are being compared with the MKI that was inducted 20 years ago, let us see how much of this holds true after the MKI is upgraded, which would be a better Com parison. For instance, if the MKI is plumbed to carry 2000 liter efts like the su35, I doubt range would be anywhere near comparable. The 35 is supposed to have a range of 4500km with 2 x eft.


Agree with you and I made this point too in my post above, MKI needs super 30 upgrades ASAP to bridge some of the gap in avionics and engine.

Katare
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2298
Joined: 02 Mar 2002 12:31

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

Postby Katare » 06 Aug 2018 21:47

Austin wrote:Against which type of target manouvering or non manouvering ? If it is non manouvering then I can believe it


Austin,
These are brochure claims so need to be taken with a lot of caveats.

Katare
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2298
Joined: 02 Mar 2002 12:31

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

Postby Katare » 06 Aug 2018 21:58

tsarkar wrote:
Katare wrote:What is the significance of painting a symbol that looks like a target on once’s own assets.

A round symbol looks the same from any aspect and any angle making recognition easier during dogfights with planes maneuvering like crazy and incorrect identification having fatal consequences. A lot of operational experience goes into military matters - nothing happens by chance.


That makes sense, thanks!

Air Marshal Masand also said that SCALP has 1200Kg of pay load (and 2t as missile weight) which appears to be incorrect. MBDA website states SCALP as 1300Kg with the range of >300KM in datasheet and >250 on main page.

AM Masand probably misspoke but if he did not than is there an ER version or something else that could be 2ton class with 1200Kg warhead at 300KM range? This looks like Physics bending too....

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6978
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

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

Postby Indranil » 06 Aug 2018 22:56

Katare wrote:Quick numeric analysis-
MKI is 80% heavier than Rafale when empty - 10t to 18 ton
MKI lifts 55% more in all up weight than Rafale - 24.5 t to 38 ton
MKI lifts 38% more payload (fuel+weapons) than Rafael - 14.5 tons to 20 tons

So MKI lugs around 2.5 tons on extra dead body weight as compared to Rafale standard. In other words if the airframe was composit and refined like Rafale it would weigh empty at 15.5tons.

That translates to 13.88% aditional dead weight on MKI. Assuming, without any supporting data, that french engines would be 10% more efficient than 1990s designed AL engines and Rafael aerodynamics provide 10% lower drag one could kinda see how Rafale can out range MKIs with their 5 wet pylons in some configurations but would that be efficient use of the plane remains questionable.

Civilian aircrafts have much higher "dead weight" than either of them. Yet they have much longer legs. One doesn't calculate endurance that way.

Having said that, I would have supported HAL trying to fit drop tanks on the Su-30 (It is not easy as it sounds). They will have to redo the fuel system. None the less it is a much better exercise than designing amphibians.

Katare
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2298
Joined: 02 Mar 2002 12:31

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

Postby Katare » 07 Aug 2018 06:40

One has to be a moron to compare transporters to fighters in this way but you sure can compare endurance of two fighters by comparing excess dead weight each carries. Now by no means did i suggest this is the only factor that would impact range or performance but it sure is one of the most important if not the most important factor in fighter plane design.

The 3 factors I mentioned- empty weight, drag and engine fuel efficiency are the main factors that should determine endurance of any fighter aircraft for any given fuel/weapons load out. Rest of the parameters are minor contributors as for as I know.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6978
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

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

Postby Indranil » 07 Aug 2018 11:57

I can guarantee you that I am not trying to make fun of you. I am a little hard pressed for time and this would require a long post. If a medium fighter could do a heavy fighters job then US would not have designed an F-15 with F-16s and F-18s, and Russia would not have designed a Su-27 while having Mig-29 family. And what are heavy fighters better at?

I will have to leave this discussion for later.

srin
BRFite
Posts: 1571
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:13

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

Postby srin » 07 Aug 2018 20:41

Rafale deal: Internal notes flag loss of L1 status if plane was made locally

“By applying a factor of 2.7 on the man hours quoted by Dassault Aviation and EADS, the ratio of Net Present Value (NPV) based total cost of acquisition as on November 2011would have undergone a material change to the extent that Dassault Aviation would have no longer remained L1vendor and would have become L2 vendor,” states the assessment documents on withdrawal of the UPA version of the Rafale deal.


The real Rafale deal scandals (aka how we manage to shoot ourselves in the foot):
- Our broken procurement process that doesn't allow playing off L2 against L1. I'd be interesting to see what'd happen if there was a Swiss Challenge allowed.
- HAL quoting cost multiplication factor 2.7 against French produced Rafale ??? I can understand that tooling and jigs will have cost that need to be amortized but 2.7 times ?

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 63580
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

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

Postby Singha » 07 Aug 2018 21:21

with a MKI type super heavy payload , i believe the rafale would have to use 3 large drop tanks to match the combat radius, leaving just the 2nd pylons free for a 3 pack of bombs each and outboard pylons for aam. only the AASM or SDB might go on these triple-pylons.


https://defense-update.com/20140127_raf ... ation.html

This configuration comprise a full increment of six air-to-air and six air-to-ground weapons. The air-to-ground ordnance includes six Sagem/MBDA Hammer guided weapons (AASM), carried on two triple-ejector racks, designed specifically for the weapon.

The weapons would take less than a third of the fighter’s payload – the rest will be used to carry fuel to sustain the long range missions the fighter is required to perform. The Rafale can carry up to 9.5 tons of payload (21,000 lbs). To support missions at extended ranges the fighter also carries three 524 gallons (2,000 litre) fuel tanks weighing additional 6.7 tons (14,700 lbs) that will top up the fighter’s internal fuel capacity of 4.7 t (10,300 lbs).

this is the heaviest payload shown..if we replace the 4 mica with some aasm/sdb the a2g delivery comes to 10 weapons and 2 wingtip aam.

the twin seater Rafale surely sacrifices some fuel to accomodate the wso as its the exact same size.

Image

the MKI carries all its fuel internally so will not suffer the drag penalty of the 3 tanks, and can continue on its mission without the scrap if a situation leads to drop tanks needing jettison.

it can cart some 18-20 bombs of the same size + 2 aam. ie twice that of the rafale.

Image

a F15E can do the same....these are simply larger wider airframes with room to mount a lot of pylons.

in case of F15E this is carried to extreme with side pylons of the CFTs down to the tailpipes

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 63580
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

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

Postby Singha » 07 Aug 2018 21:24

the flanker uses a cool by fuel distribution and fuel is shifted around to balance the cg and moved through pipes to cool hot areas. drop tank will also need to plug into the same system. OEM support can surely be obtained.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50754
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

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

Postby ramana » 08 Aug 2018 02:46

Katare, You are right, if composites are used SU-30MKI would lose lot of weight.
And as low risk option they can change the non-structural metal parts with composites.
May be shed 5% weight as a minimum.

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3247
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

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

Postby Cain Marko » 08 Aug 2018 05:07

ramana wrote:Katare, You are right, if composites are used SU-30MKI would lose lot of weight.
And as low risk option they can change the non-structural metal parts with composites.
May be shed 5% weight as a minimum.

IIRC, the Su35 as well as the mug 29k and 35 leveraged the use of composites to reduce weight. It would be great if a similar exercise can be done for the mki and thrust increased with the use of the the 117 engines.

Katare
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2298
Joined: 02 Mar 2002 12:31

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

Postby Katare » 08 Aug 2018 06:42

Rafael has 5 wet pylons which could provide it very long range but i don’t think they’ll all be used togather very often but if needed you have the flexibility and the reach. My point is that it can play the role of a heavy fighter but it doesn’t mean that it can replace the heavies.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36072
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

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

Postby SaiK » 08 Aug 2018 06:45

Manish Jain wrote:Any french speakers here? Apparently latest Dassault mag has a special on Indian Rafales here -

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1by-5BD ... L7FEG/view

Courtesy Halloween on key publishing forum.

anyone has a translated version?

Kashi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3030
Joined: 06 May 2011 13:53

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

Postby Kashi » 08 Aug 2018 17:29

Arun Shourie and Yashwant Sinha are stepping in to further muddy the waters in the Rafale acquisition.

One of the points is "Who decided on the figure of 36 when the original requirement was 126"

Seriously!!

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 22035
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

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

Postby Austin » 08 Aug 2018 18:17

With MKI coming for major upgrade they can look at increasing composite content where ever possible.

Also look at plumbing to carry drop tanks , only Su-34 and Su-35 have plumb for drop tanks , if mki can carry 3 drop tanks it’s rang would significantly increase

abhik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2252
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

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

Postby abhik » 08 Aug 2018 22:29

Kashi wrote:Arun Shourie and Yashwant Sinha are stepping in to further muddy the waters in the Rafale acquisition.

One of the points is "Who decided on the figure of 36 when the original requirement was 126"

Seriously!!

Its a perfectly valid question, if I was a congi I'd ask the same.

Katare
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2298
Joined: 02 Mar 2002 12:31

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

Postby Katare » 08 Aug 2018 23:23

The budget made the decision!

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5950
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

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

Postby Rakesh » 09 Aug 2018 00:36

Apparently, the Govt asked the IAF how many aircraft would they need at minimum. 36 was the reply.

V_Raman
BRFite
Posts: 411
Joined: 04 Sep 2008 22:25

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

Postby V_Raman » 09 Aug 2018 01:49

I am beginning to think this is a hit job by USA. They cannot stand that their fighters were not L1 nor not getting any contracts in the future for their fighters. This will die down if an order is placed for the teens.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5950
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

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

Postby Rakesh » 09 Aug 2018 02:38

^^^ If found to be true, that would be a coup! :lol:

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 22035
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

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

Postby Austin » 09 Aug 2018 08:35

I believe it is the conversion of this 36 Rafale for nuclear delivery role that is causing most of the jump in its cost , The Indian specific upgrade refers to this exactly and Vishnu Som too has mentioned so. Also a reason why Rafale was chosen over other fighters because of past association of French fghter ( read Mirage ) for this role

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5950
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

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

Postby Rakesh » 09 Aug 2018 08:58

Click on the link below! :)

https://twitter.com/livefist/status/1027226603238109184 ---> After Reliance Defence breaks its silence in an interview to Manu Pubby on the Rafale deal, the company’s chief Rajesh Dhingra has this to say in response to the scam allegations by Prashant Bhushan & Arun Shourie.

abhik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2252
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

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

Postby abhik » 09 Aug 2018 13:24

Rakesh wrote:Apparently, the Govt asked the IAF how many aircraft would they need at minimum. 36 was the reply.

Minimum for what Saar? Surely we wouldn't be needing MRCA 2.0 if 36 were enough.

Srutayus
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 67
Joined: 29 Aug 2016 05:53

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

Postby Srutayus » 10 Aug 2018 00:50

Minimum for what Saar? Surely we wouldn't be needing MRCA 2.0 if 36 were enough.


Minimum for the urgent requirement, especially with squadron stand-downs looming.
Without having to wait for the MRCA 2.0 drag on and maybe end up with a decision at some indeterminate point in the future...
IAF wants more Rafales. But this larger requirement is related to MMRCA 2.0
And yes, there are budget issues between IAF dreams of a larger Rafale fleet and reality.

souravB
BRFite
Posts: 245
Joined: 07 Jun 2018 13:52

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

Postby souravB » 10 Aug 2018 02:55

Austin wrote:I believe it is the conversion of this 36 Rafale for nuclear delivery role that is causing most of the jump in its cost , The Indian specific upgrade refers to this exactly and Vishnu Som too has mentioned so. Also a reason why Rafale was chosen over other fighters because of past association of French fghter ( read Mirage ) for this role

This specific conversion towards a Nuclear Delivery platform must constitute the extra cost and also the reason GoI cannot present anything before the parliament. Presenting anything before parliament becomes an official confirmation and that means bye bye NSG as it can construed as proliferation.
GoI is not giving a detailed breakup of each ISE components because there will be this unaccounted cost which it cannot disclose the reason for and would mean giving more ammunition to opposition.
France would also like India to be silent about this otherwise it might turn to be a major diplomatic embarrassment for them, ergo the quick reply to Pappu.
This is a very dirty politics that Congress is playing here knowing fully well how the system works. There have been other deals like the nuclear deal which had some hidden costs which were passed by the opposition due to its strategic nature.
what I don't understand is, there are journalists who are constantly fanning the matter having better understanding of the matter than atleast me. Don't they Understand the implications? The strain in India-France relation or the global players putting the picture together? what about the value of our word? In the end whoever wins the battle between these people, Indian strategic interests will lose.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5950
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

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

Postby Rakesh » 10 Aug 2018 03:21

souravB wrote:what I don't understand is, there are journalists who are constantly fanning the matter having better understanding of the matter than atleast me. Don't they Understand the implications? The strain in India-France relation or the global players putting the picture together? what about the value of our word? In the end whoever wins the battle between these people, Indian strategic interests will lose.

Many journos do not give a damn. They are only concerned about their own skin and their channel ratings. They will rake their own nation over the coals, if that gives them Television Rating Points (TRP).

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5219
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

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

Postby ShauryaT » 10 Aug 2018 06:30

Yashwant Sinha, Arun Shourie, Prashant Bhushan: ‘Rafale defence scandal imperils national security’

This is the full text of a statement released by Yashwant Sinha, Arun Shourie and Prashant Bhushan at a press conference on Wednesday.
Posting without judgments made.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19640
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

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

Postby Philip » 11 Aug 2018 17:18

RaGa is ranting right now about the deal on telly.The GOI should refute the allegations with facts and comparative analysis in everyone's interests.YS, AS, belonging to the LKA faction, the " ancien regime", are bitter at being excluded and cast into the wilderness by the current BJP regime.As 2019 draws nearer, allegations and counter allegations will pollute the atmosphere.It will have an effect on finalising urgently required weapon systems , and key decisions may happen only after the elections.

Regarding the India-specific reqs., the GOI can take parties into confidence about sensitive info. through the parliament standing committee on defence, keeping it classified from the general public.In the past, past govts. have done so on classified matters.The GOI could then state to parliament that it has explained the facts to their representatives on the committee.

The only fly in the ointment is if the Cong. say that these were part of their deal earlier and keep harping on the cost factor.This is where the key differences in the 2 deals can clear the air. The media isn't really interested in the real details of the deal only the political bruohaha and channel viewership.I've vastly reduced watching the rival fishmarkets and the fishmonger anchors!

uddu
BRFite
Posts: 1801
Joined: 15 Aug 2004 17:09

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

Postby uddu » 11 Aug 2018 18:49

With the corruption allegation coming from the opposition, this govt will not touch touch Rafale any more. Its a dead end. Even the so called MMRCA 2.0 is a show off. So it's Tejas and it's variants. Extreme case is the Su-30 MKI production at HAL happening. Nothing more will happen.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 22035
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

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

Postby Austin » 11 Aug 2018 18:53

uddu wrote:With the corruption allegation coming from the opposition, this govt will not touch touch Rafale any more. Its a dead end. Even the so called MMRCA 2.0 is a show off. So it's Tejas and it's variants. Extreme case is the Su-30 MKI production at HAL happening. Nothing more will happen.


Hope so , Any corruption in defence deal in IAF is opportunity for indiginous production

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5950
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

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

Postby Rakesh » 11 Aug 2018 19:03

uddu wrote:With the corruption allegation coming from the opposition, this govt will not touch touch Rafale any more. Its a dead end. Even the so called MMRCA 2.0 is a show off. So it's Tejas and it's variants. Extreme case is the Su-30 MKI production at HAL happening. Nothing more will happen.

I am waiting for the CAG report to come out. When they get a clean chit from CAG, then Rafales will be more palatable. Also post Sept-2019, the IAF onlee will make the case for additional Rafales. One thing to test fly an aircraft and read brochures. When the IAF sees the Rafale's performance and capability in actual squadron service, additional Rafales will make wonderful sense at that time.

The only caveat is that the CAG report will come out in the negative for the Rafale. I do not believe it will.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36072
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

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

Postby SaiK » 11 Aug 2018 21:01

abhik wrote:
Kashi wrote:Arun Shourie and Yashwant Sinha are stepping in to further muddy the waters in the Rafale acquisition.

One of the points is "Who decided on the figure of 36 when the original requirement was 126"

Seriously!!

Its a perfectly valid question, if I was a congi I'd ask the same.

It is perfectly a lame question. who decides it has to be 126 from Rafale? why not 126 from Tejas or AMCA? don't talk to me about Shourie's knowledge about aircraft manufacturing or defence needs. His gray hair finds no place in logics nor logistics nowadays.

RoyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5181
Joined: 10 Aug 2009 05:10

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

Postby RoyG » 12 Aug 2018 00:55

Rafale deal was fine overall. We'll proly get another 36 and that's it which will bring total to 72. Add another 40 Su-30 and get those lazy asses at HAL to crank up the Tejas numbers and we're all set.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19640
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

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

Postby Philip » 12 Aug 2018 04:15

The only worry is if the CAG says that as in the Boeing P-8I deal, the L-1 evaluation for the Raffy was tilted in its favour vs the EF. Looking at EF costs and woes currently amongst NATO nations , the Rafale was a better choice and the IAF did a most extensive technical evaluation of the birds contesting. No one has any doubt about the Rafale doing the biz. and its weaponry.The criticism is the cost and whether we should've gone the whole hog for the 126 aircraft.That aspect- local manufacture was the spoke in the wheel as Dassault stated that HAL could not absorb full TOT.If HAL- the sole manufacturer of combat aircraft in India was found inadequate ,then no other pvt. entity would be able to do so.Plus, setting up production facilities, extra line, etc. for the LCA was a top priority as that bird was meant to replace hundreds of retiring MIG-21s. The cost of supporting two production lines was financially v.difficult for the govt.
Hence the limited outright buy.

It's why HAL is now offering ( instead of the new MRCA req.) , 40+ new MKIs at the same current cost since the infrastructure for MKIs already exists and upgrading a large number of the inventory of the 272 aircraft is on the anvil.

PS: Wasn't there an official report which said that bought out MKIs were cheaper than HAL built ones? If the same was found for Rafales, then it would be the same even for the Typhoon or any other type.
Last edited by Philip on 12 Aug 2018 07:11, edited 1 time in total.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36072
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

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

Postby SaiK » 12 Aug 2018 05:10

There is also an option of Super Sukhoi that is India specific with Indian skins and organs - we can reduce it's RCF with Tejas experience/OT.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 22035
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

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

Postby Austin » 12 Aug 2018 07:43

RoyG wrote:Rafale deal was fine overall. We'll proly get another 36 and that's it which will bring total to 72. Add another 40 Su-30 and get those lazy asses at HAL to crank up the Tejas numbers and we're all set.


+ 1 should be the way I think too

The antidote of any more MMRCA , SE etc is just build more Tejas Mk1/2/3 build 600 of those I say , Thats our F-16

rohan1424
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 24
Joined: 18 Sep 2016 11:09

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

Postby rohan1424 » 12 Aug 2018 09:39

uddu wrote:With the corruption allegation coming from the opposition, this govt will not touch touch Rafale any more. Its a dead end. Even the so called MMRCA 2.0 is a show off. So it's Tejas and it's variants. Extreme case is the Su-30 MKI production at HAL happening. Nothing more will happen.


It doesn't make economic sense to limit Rafale numbers to only 36. We have already paid steep amount for India specific enhancements and for base infrastructure.Going for additional 2 squadrons is the ideal option.But in the current scenario that will not be possible.The govt is at fault on two counts:
1.Clearly refuting the charges by providing facts and figures by a senior member. Instead they have relied more of either ignoring the charges or denying allegations.

2.Clarifying the role of Reliance -Adag in the offset contract.

A lot will depend on outcome of 2019 elections to determine in which way the outcome of MMRCA 2,0 will go and also orders for additional Rafales.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 22035
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

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

Postby Austin » 12 Aug 2018 12:24

A gent from a IAF squadron then on deputation with TACDE told me once that the 2nd Batch for a type is ordered after 3 full years of squadron service. That is the time AHQ needs to determine how that type flies in indian condition day in and out , work out the flying tactics/manuals ( done in co-ordination with TACDE ) and maintenance procedure etc. It also gives time for them to fix any known issues that would have gone unnoticed during trails or issues that come up during regular service so that OEM can fix it in 2nd batch.

So I expect Rafale to be ordered in more numbers and it does not matter which government is in power but it will happen post first squadron formation and 3 years of regular flying thats the minimum period.

nrshah
BRFite
Posts: 571
Joined: 10 Feb 2009 16:36

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

Postby nrshah » 12 Aug 2018 16:39

I don't think any explanation by GOI will make RG understand. Not because he can't but he don't want. He is just seeing it from perspective of personal gain in elections, national interest be dammed.

The only way is Modi n Shah launch a counter offensive agressively. Bring out old Bofors, involve Sr. RG and family. Open all gates of coal, 2g spectrum etc...

This is only way to divert.them and make them defensive rather than giving them details and compromise our security. You Don't know even after disclosure and compromise interest, he may keep on saying it is corruption there...

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36072
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

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

Postby SaiK » 12 Aug 2018 23:31

"making economic sense" would be all wrong just looking at one or select few requirements.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Ashok Sarraff, kapio, Shakthi and 36 guests