India selects Typhoon & Rafale for MMRCA shortlist - Part 2

Jaik · Post by **Jaik** » 30 Jul 2011 02:41

SaiK,

at the recent southport air show, the typhoon guys were respectfully confident.... One of the guys participated in the MMRCA trials(in what capacity I am not sure), said, our air force wass very professional and very demanding as far as trials go. looks like SDRE folks pack a steel fist, bu are quiet about it! Jai ho, for what its worth!

Ranveer · Post by **Ranveer** » 30 Jul 2011 03:32

The dassault Rafale stole the RIAT Fairford airshow .Eurofighter display was good but the Rafale was amazing in the air.Though they say Rafale was loaded with only 2 sidewinders while the Eurofighter was totally decked up with its full payload and thats what made it fly slower in the air.The only issue that might make the IAF go for the Eurofighter is the full partnership offered in its development and the more advanced AESA that is being still to be manufactured.The Rafale would fare well in a dog fight but perhaps future engagements would be 'beyond visual' once and dogfights would be very rare to indulge in.Anyways whatever IAF chooses, it would be the best as both Aircrafts are the best in the lot.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 30 Jul 2011 06:52

indeed, Rafale
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=znyxa8BASIE

Ef2k, loaded!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OsjrBD99-iQ

both are quality 1080p videos

manum · Post by **manum** » 30 Jul 2011 07:37

SaiK wrote:I am taking the counter productive stance the eurofighters took to bashing MKI. Now, any logical reasoning would say, stop it before it reaches the media. If they have done it, me thinks they are confident of beating the rafales in L1. no?

If they are proven cheaper platforms, nothing will matter what has been said in press...defence chiefs do say these things, like ours.

karan_mc · Post by **karan_mc** » 30 Jul 2011 08:50

United Arab Emirates (UAE) finds Rafale combat jet too expensive

Even Arabs find them expensive

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 30 Jul 2011 09:03

karan_mc wrote:United Arab Emirates (UAE) finds Rafale combat jet too expensive

Even Arabs find them expensive

Maybe expensive for an off the shelf purchase. But combine with offsets and transfer of knowhow to a non Arab nation that is capable of absorbing tech - then the price could become attractive. India's situation cannot be compared with that of some Ay-rab states.

vivek_v · Post by **vivek_v** » 30 Jul 2011 10:51

Off the shelf should actually be cheaper than TOT. We would need to account for setting up a production plant , resources and the cost markup added by the manufacturer for the technology which he is transferring as he might lose out on maintenance or up gradation aspects , i cannot really see how it can be any cheaper than the UAE offer. The question is that whether we have asked for the same kind of spec with UAE has asked (upgraded engines , avionics ...etc) or we are just going for the F3 model which would decide on the final cost.

manum · Post by **manum** » 30 Jul 2011 11:09

vivek_v wrote:Off the shelf should actually be cheaper than TOT. We would need to account for setting up a production plant , resources and the cost markup added by the manufacturer for the technology which he is transferring as he might lose out on maintenance or up gradation aspects , i cannot really see how it can be any cheaper than the UAE offer. The question is that whether we have asked for the same kind of spec with UAE has asked (upgraded engines , avionics ...etc) or we are just going for the F3 model which would decide on the final cost.

Actually its been in news for while, that we'll be buying Typhoons in form of shell i.e. airframe and skin, and engine, rest we'll fit LCA parts in it...This is why it'll fall cheaper after the TOT of metal cutting to make airframe and TOT of how to use advanced riveting . as we are already in process of setting up LCA facilities, Typhoons will be accommodated as well.

Arabs don't have LCA like indigenous fighter you see.

vivek_v · Post by **vivek_v** » 30 Jul 2011 11:57

manum wrote:
vivek_v wrote:Off the shelf should actually be cheaper than TOT. We would need to account for setting up a production plant , resources and the cost markup added by the manufacturer for the technology which he is transferring as he might lose out on maintenance or up gradation aspects , i cannot really see how it can be any cheaper than the UAE offer. The question is that whether we have asked for the same kind of spec with UAE has asked (upgraded engines , avionics ...etc) or we are just going for the F3 model which would decide on the final cost.
Actually its been in news for while, that we'll be buying Typhoons in form of shell i.e. airframe and skin, and engine, rest we'll fit LCA parts in it...This is why it'll fall cheaper after the TOT of metal cutting to make airframe and TOT of how to use advanced riveting . as we are already in process of setting up LCA facilities, Typhoons will be accommodated as well.

Arabs don't have LCA like indigenous fighter you see.

I have not really read an reports on LCA components being used in EF if we buy the same but my reply was intended for rafale.

Anyways , it is not really possible to pick and replace components between aircrafts unless and until it is made by the same manufacturer and even then it is difficult. Sure all might use a some kind of VME backplane and cPCI cards but that is the start and end of commonality. For example the IO's which goes into a backplane would vary, power budgeting would vary, weight would vary, protocols would vary (i am referring to protocols running above the 1553B Bus..ie S/W protocols) , if you replace a whole thing like Radar , the Mission computer should be programmed to be able to communicate with the same, weight would vary which would force the FBW to be tweaked. Engine would give you much bigger headache's in integrating. One can rather make a new aircraft than struggling with all the bugs and niggles.

Actually forget about replacing any major component , even replacing the testbench used to test components is not possible even with all the SRC and Schematics.. i have seen some testbench's still running on Commodore64 and Scientific basic because of the headache of revalidation if they are replaced with a new.

TOT for all its uses is mainly useful if you want to integrate non standard weaponry which the manufacturer does not support.

As far as the cost , the manufacturer would also need to keep his markup for the 50% offsets requirement, the end result is not going to be cheaper than what UAE got.

manum · Post by **manum** » 30 Jul 2011 12:38

Last comment I was just kidding.

I'll go simpler...The cost is not in doing yourself, cost one pays is to live in comfort. I've to build a factory for myself and I am myself a contractor, why would I give it to another contractor, if I know where the cost can be cut. If I'll buy equipment of construction they'll be used in further construction somewhere else...

but even after buying the construction equipment I'll save a huge amount.
Like I can negotiate the construction material costs, and buy them in bulk after a whole lot of market research. I can control the pace of work as my need be. The hired contractor takes around 50% profit margin, lets say if each square feet expenditure is x, then he charges 2x for services...

but to save all this you need to have know how of the business and you must know where one earns, to bargain it...and best way is to take control of things where you loose more money.
It can backfire too and I think many times it has backfired on us, but slowly we have learned how to create systems once we have decided to do it ourselves.

uddu · Post by **uddu** » 30 Jul 2011 12:50

vivek_v wrote:Off the shelf should actually be cheaper than TOT. We would need to account for setting up a production plant , resources and the cost markup added by the manufacturer for the technology which he is transferring as he might lose out on maintenance or up gradation aspects , i cannot really see how it can be any cheaper than the UAE offer. The question is that whether we have asked for the same kind of spec with UAE has asked (upgraded engines , avionics ...etc) or we are just going for the F3 model which would decide on the final cost.

The comparison by UAE, may be for F-16 and the Rafales. Not between Rafale and the Typhoon.
May be we can compare our own Tejas and the Rafale.

vishnu.nv · Post by **vishnu.nv** » 30 Jul 2011 12:50

Now regarding the UAE finding the rafale too expensive, The arabs wants their rafale's to be fully loaded, uprated Engine, more advanced radar and other customizations which is skyrocketing the price. If the UAE get the version which is in service with french much cheaper. But they want to have something much better than what saudi's have and what Israel is having currently. The talk with LM is just to push the french to reduce the cost, we will finally see the UAE will go for the Rafael. The Mirage 2000 had a splendid service with UAE air force than their F-16' s.

manum · Post by **manum** » 30 Jul 2011 13:06

Problem is that there are other sub contractors who quote their own prices and so on and they don't reduce their price...for example the workers won't reduce their salaries. so the only margin that can be reduced is dessault reducing its profit margin, because there is no other innovative way UAE can offer to reduce the price.

so after a while Dessault won't be able to reduce the price...but if you rearrange the calculations by offering what India is offering and also flexibility of increasing the no. of fighter offered, you can reduce the price, secondly you can impose your own clause which will be unacceptable in other conditions...

This is the profit you get of being India so huge and finally becoming richer and technologically confident in handling most complex projects...there are some nice benefits of being India and not UAE.

vivek_v · Post by **vivek_v** » 30 Jul 2011 13:13

manum wrote:Problem is that there are other sub contractors who quote their own prices and so on and they don't reduce their price...for example the workers won't reduce their salaries. so the only margin that can be reduced is dessault reducing its profit margin, because there is no other innovative way UAE can offer to reduce the price.

so after a while Dessault won't be able to reduce the price...but if you rearrange the calculations by offering what India is offering and also flexibility of increasing the no. of fighter offered, you can reduce the price, secondly you can impose your own clause which will be unacceptable in other conditions...

This is the profit you get of being India so huge and finally becoming richer and technologically confident in handling most complex projects...there are some nice benefits of being India and not UAE.

I not really sure what percentages one hope's to reduce by having local manufacturing since i am not really clear what is going to be manufactured in the first place.

For example say you take some avionics, say an imaging card. Lets assume for a moment that the manufacturer gives us the schematics , source code with binaries, FPGA codes and the BOM (Bill of materials) along with place and route sheet (to be used by the soldering machine).

What level are we going to manufacture ? Can we make the PCB's ? Sure we can but aviation grade light weight PCB manufacturing is costly and anyways would cheaper to be made in Taiwan , making it a better option to just order those bare PCB's in bulk and keep it in the inventory which is exactly what Thales would be doing already.

Can we make the Processors and Chips in the hardware ? Not really since no one would give the chip backend and anyways it is not really cost effective to make just 100 chips or so...which has to be ordered form outside. What about the FPGA's ? Just directly order the same also. Can we at-least make the connectors ? Again cheaper to just buy the connector's off the shelf.

Finally all we would do is solder all the those and make the board which anyways is done by a soldering station machine only. How much cost savings are you really expecting out of the same ?

Note that you would have a establishment cost in establishing to do all these things in the first place. End of day this cost would eat up whatever markup the main vendor has kept in the first place.

All TOT helps us is to have a bit of independence from the Vendor. In care of war and sanction's , one can at-least maintain the fleet with the available knowledge. If with MMRCA we got all those uber cool manufacturing process (in the mechanical side) , i would be happy.

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 30 Jul 2011 18:40

Eurofighter Typhoon and Dassault Rafale fight to be India's next fighter jet
NDTV

At the Royal International Air Tatoo - the world's largest military air show in Fairford, UK - the two competitors slugged it out. The Eurofighter Typhoon, - manufactured by a consortium of four European nations- tried to make the point that they have the world's finest fighter jet. The Typhoon is currently seeing action over Libya.

Chris Boardman, Managing Director, Combat Air Military, BAE Systems says, "I think the Typhoon would be a wonderful acquisition for India, not just for the IAF. It is the best fighter aircraft in the world today that goes without saying. From India's point of view it builds stronger political ties between four European nations and the government of India.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 30 Jul 2011 20:52

when it comes to biji-nuj tuck-ticks, the deal size and market actually drives the price. So, no pricing or sales that happen to other countries can be compared to this mega one.

while Ef2k or Rafale may charge eye-rub states to ass chewing cost of lac dollars each, the same to desh could be half the price, on economies of scales, and acquiring a strategic long term partnership.

the fact that the fighter consortium courts us for a tie up, means a lot. At the same, we have to ensure what we get is per the requirements, and then all aspect analysis of offers and takes.

life cycle cost is still fogged somewhere at 100ft visibility.

sohels · Post by **sohels** » 30 Jul 2011 21:00

Broadsword: MMRCA contract falling through?

I'm getting increasingly skeptical about the survivability of the MMRCA tender. Is it going to fall through this year?

I think it very well might.

Will post an article outlining why I think so... tomorrow!

I suspect Hillary Clinton's visit must have something to do with this.

S_Prasad · Post by **S_Prasad** » 30 Jul 2011 21:10

sohels wrote:Broadsword: MMRCA contract falling through?

I'm getting increasingly skeptical about the survivability of the MMRCA tender. Is it going to fall through this year?

I think it very well might.

Will post an article outlining why I think so... tomorrow!
I suspect Hillary Clinton's visit must have something to do with this.

If that happens we will make a fool of ourselves.
The probability of it happening is very remote.
Colonel saheb must be sleep blogging

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 30 Jul 2011 21:52

MMRCA will only fail if there are credible allegations of scam/corruption , something along the lines of Bofors and that would be self-defeating.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 30 Jul 2011 22:18

we can't afford to fall through.. find those scamsters and send them to jail now.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 30 Jul 2011 22:27

SaiK wrote:we can't afford to fall through.. find those scamsters and send them to jail now.

Who ... GOI

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 30 Jul 2011 23:19

make it so!

suryag · Post by **suryag** » 31 Jul 2011 01:50

Hefty Rs 42,000 crore bill for combat aircraft may rise

six years down the line, these conditions have changed. Prins now points out that, with Lockheed Martin set to build 20 fighters per month, i.e. 240 per year, “we could be in a position to supply India with its first F-35s by 2016, contingent upon many additional factors including US governmental approval that would affect this timing.”

Wow how do they manage that manufacturing output, HAL does 20 fighters/year

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 31 Jul 2011 01:58

Self deleted

GeorgeWelch · Post by **GeorgeWelch** » 31 Jul 2011 03:18

The KC-30 contract was terminated after it won the competition without any allegations of wrongdoing, so anything is possible.

I do agree that India might need to alter is procurement process. You cannot evaluate bids without at least some consideration of price earlier in the process.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 31 Jul 2011 04:47

With 10 assembly lines, even HAL could produce right? Or this could be a factory with high degree of parallel processing and automation.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 31 Jul 2011 06:47

suryag wrote:Hefty Rs 42,000 crore bill for combat aircraft may rise
six years down the line, these conditions have changed. Prins now points out that, with Lockheed Martin set to build 20 fighters per month, i.e. 240 per year, “we could be in a position to supply India with its first F-35s by 2016, contingent upon many additional factors including US governmental approval that would affect this timing.”
Wow how do they manage that manufacturing output, HAL does 20 fighters/year

The US, Britain, Germany and Japan - even in the 1940s had already set up industrial production lines that produced an insane number of aircraft - as much as 10,000 a month (in the US) at its peak. The US does not run its aircraft production lines like HAL, which as a public sector (government run) factory where every employee is a government employee, cannot be fired, gets a time linked raise in salary and gets a pension. If the US has orders for extra aircraft the production lines stay open. If there are no orders the people lose their jobs.

In India aircraft factory employees are not fired. They remain employed whether there are orders or not. Imagine a HAL that can produce 20 aircraft a month. This mythical HAL would produce India's requirements in less than a year and for the next decade, 200,000 workers would be going to the factory every day with no work to do, and still get paid. That is how India has built its system and that is why India can afford to produce only a few aircraft a year.

pkudva · Post by **pkudva** » 31 Jul 2011 08:23

I Must say former chief of Air Staff has done a great job when he was in office as a Air Chief. Many of the aquisition Plans has been fast tracked and he has pushed the Govt to get the Deals Done.

Miraage , additional Phalcon, C-17, Akash SAM's are the examples.

Cheers to him and all the best to the new Air Chief as he has a daunting task ahead of him in finalizing the Heavy Lifters, Air to Air Refuelling, Attack Helis and MMRCA.....he has to push the govt to get it done as soon as possible....

Cheers.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 31 Jul 2011 11:04

It never fails to amaze me how the US so asininely touts its JSF as if we Indians are ignoramuses.We are told that by "2016" we will get the JSF.This is such a blatant untruth that it beggars the imagination that the IAF which has just conducted the world's most strenuous evaluation for the MMRCA will be fooled by such touting.

All official reports emanating out of the US and serious aviation publications say that there is now a "two year" delay in the US commissioning the aircraft.The earliest date mentioned,as of now is 2018.This has made allies/client states like SoKo (and Oz) planning to induct their FX-3 -competition between the JSF,F-15SE and EF,look at upgraded versions of what they already possess (F-15s and F-18s respectively). Tye actual cost of a JSF is also an unknown qty.,and Britain has abandoned the STOVL version for its future carrier and cut the numbers from 170+ to just 50+.Moreover,by 2017,we should also be on the brink of inducting our very own Indo-Russian FGFA stealth fighter,whose prototypes are already flying.This will also come in at around $100 million as against the current est. cost of the JSF,$130 m,whose price seems to be on an upward trend.

There is however a very important point being made about the cost of the MMRCA.Pak is getting "50" free JF-17s from China-Gilani's last Beijing visit saw this promise,plus upto "250" of the same which it is building at a goodly rate of 15-16 per year.The J-10 is also on the cards,talks onging.Now the price of these JF-17s is just $15-20 million per piece according to ASWT/DTI.Therefore,in the near future,Pak will have a very healthy air force numbers wise,a fact that we must not forget which saw us in good standing in '65 and '71.It is a pity that the LCA which was to have been our "cost-effective" fighter is yet to be inducted,that too in its inferior avatar,with the MK-2 prototype yet to fly.It will be impossible for the IAF to buy large numbers of MMRCAs at such high prices when superior Super Flankers being planned which can carry B'Mos too,will coem in at the same or lesser price.The MOD/IAF while drooling and lusting after over the two "Euro-models" Typhoons and Rafales must spare a thought for the lowly and demure LCA, which if the project is pursued with single-minded vision and focus,will be the key to the health of our indigenous aircraft industry and provide the IAF with the extra numbers that we also need to counter both Pak and China.The progress being made in the naval version is a happy advent though.

Can the nation afford such a huge investment which will be detrimental to our own indigenous aircraft projects-FGFA,AMCA and LCA? Even the air forces operating the Typhoon openly that they "do not know" what the life-cycle costs will be! The two EU nations must be told that if their wares come in too expensive, then India already has an alternative,simply buying more Flankers/Super Flankers at cheaper prices and one hopes perfecting the LCA MK-2 asap.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 31 Jul 2011 11:33

Above post contd:

Here are some juicy numbers of the "priciest" arms purchase programme,the JSF!

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... 385bn.html

'There is no plan B': Marines defend $385bn cost of F-35 fighter jet programme
By Daily Mail Reporter

30th July 2011
Hailed as the Pentagon’s priciest arms purchase programme, the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter project has proved highly controversial.

The commandant of the U.S. Marine Corps on Friday defended the short take-off version of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, insisting the aircraft's test performance is improving and that it is critical to the Marine's military future.
General James Amos was speaking as a pilot conducted a short take-off and vertical landing of a F-35B in front of reporters at Patuxent River Naval Air Station in Maryland.
He said there was no Marine fall-back plan for the F-35 if Congress decided to terminate production as part of efforts to reduce the $1.4trillion U.S. deficit.
Scroll down for video

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... z1TfC3XDmI

Some more quotes:

Former Defense Secretary Robert Gates put the Marine Corps version of the F-35 on probation last year because of cost overruns and schedule delays, saying it would be cancelled in two years unless Lockheed could fix the plane's test problems.

Mr Obama has asked the Pentagon to find $400billion in cuts over the next 12 years, but lawmakers and analysts have warned that more may be needed from defence, with some calling for $800billion to $1trillion.

A recent report by the Center for American Progress in Washington suggested retaining the Air Force version of the F-35 while cancelling the Navy and Marine Corps variants, saying those services could buy F/A-18 Super Hornets instead and save $16.4billion by 2015

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 01 Aug 2011 05:56

Finally got round to reading an article about Super Etendard and Rafale carrier ops in the latest (now a month old) issue of Vayu. First off the Rafale had to operate along with Etendard because the Rafale was not fully ready for air-ground ops. In 2007 the Rafale had to use a software trick where air-to air symbology was adapted to release air to ground weapons in a less than ideal situation. This is better now and "is due to get even better" in future. The Rafale will receive its AESA in 2-3 years.

The point really is that even the Rafale is far from being a fully developed and mature platform and while I have little info about the air to ground capability of the EF - it will stil be a close race with no clear winner at this stage.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 01 Aug 2011 12:54

Shiv,you're quite right.We are being taken in by the propaganda exercise mounted by both Euro-canards.Neither has been fully perfected in their GA/strike roles.I now wonder whether the sudden dash to bomb Libya was in part also a need to test out both aircraft and "prove" their capabilities with the Indian and other contests in mind.Rafale in Afghanistan certainly was in part an exercise to test the aircraft in a challenging environment and convince everyone about its sub-continental capability.The IAF's requirement for UCAVs ,the popular option these days in prosecuting terrorist entities et al appear to be UCAVs.One wonders when the IAF will have its first operational UCAV sqd.,or even sync. UCAV ops with manned fighter sqds.

Neshant · Post by **Neshant** » 01 Aug 2011 13:10

what's there to test in Libya if the country has no airforce and non-existance air defence.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 01 Aug 2011 13:47

GA/strike,not air combat as mentioned.Both aircraft have yet tobe perfected,Shiv's post EF Tranch-3 yet to arrive in full mettle.

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 01 Aug 2011 17:21

India given choice to pioneer naval Typhoon jet
EconomicmTimes

According to the BAE Systems officials, the Typhoon, which is a shore-based combat jet, has the potential to be a carrier-borne aircraft, provided a few modifications are made to the aircraft itself, essentially in a ski-jump take-off configuration due to the thrust-vectoring 90 kN (kilo Newton) engine that powers it.

Among the changes, it identifies strengthening of the undercarriage of the aircraft to assist in hard landings on a carrier's deck, fitting a carrier hook for arrested landings, and a good paint coating to help it withstand the vagaries of nature at sea.

The choice of the Typhoon for the Indian Navy the officials said, will complement the experience of operating the British Sea Harrier vertical-landing carrier-borne aircraft on board its lone aircraft carrier, INS Viraat, for over two decades now. Of the nearly 30 Harriers India had got for INS Viraat, only about 10 are left in service, with the rest lost in air crashes.

The offer has been made keeping in mind the Indian Navy's request for information issued in 2009. But the Indian Navy itself is not very amused with the offer.

First, according to officials, the Indian Navy plans to induct the Russian-built Admiral Gorshkov or INS Vikramaditya in the next couple of years. This warship will deploy Russian MiG-29K naval fighter jets and for this, the vessel is being reconfigured into a ski-jump take-off but arrested landing (STOBAR) mode at the Sevmash shipyard in Russia.

The same aircraft will be operated from the flight deck of India's indigenous aircraft carrier, under construction at the Cochin Shipyard, when it is inducted in the middle of this decade. Hence the Indian Navy has placed a total order for 45 MiG-29Ks for the two carriers from Russia.

For the future, the navy wants the Defence Research and Development Organisation's Tejas light combat aircraft's naval variant to fructify. If it does, then it may be the future carrier-borne aircraft of the navy for its two more indigenous aircraft carriers planned for construction at the Cochin Shipyard. But that decision is a long shot as it stands today, according to senior naval aviation officers.

But here is where the EADS, and BAE Systems in particular, is hopeful and is pitching the Typhoons as a powerful STOBAR platform for the future indigenous aircraft carriers of India.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 01 Aug 2011 21:42

So, why are the consortium not taking JSF vtol design head on? is it that proven not viable?

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 02 Aug 2011 03:00

Ganesh_S wrote:
Please expand on it. This is interesting and would also help other BRF members who are questioning the rational for not choosing US birds.
I did not conclude US will act in pakistans favour as i do not have any thoughtful explanation to do so. IMO if this decesion may signify denial of leverage to US against pakistan there will be other strategies being played by india as it would seek to exploit the favour given to PAK which for the moment happens to be a damsel in distress courtsey US. Alternatively if the platform has been chosen on merit these strategies simply wouldnt exist.

This is good.
Just by the decision India cannot be used for regional policies by US policymakers. This is an important thing.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 02 Aug 2011 07:52

Neshant wrote:what's there to test in Libya if the country has no airforce and non-existance air defence.

The Vayu article says a lot of interesting things in the lines and in between the lines.

The naval Rafale was not fully integrated with the new Damocles pod and needed the Etendard to pass information. The Etendard itself found that the Damocles pod, using IR based sensors was more effective at night. In the daytime, with less IR contrast the older ATLIS visual/laser pod was far more effective and was used in Afghanistan. And presumably Libya

For over the ocean missions, the Etendard had a good air-sear radar to pick up ships and them slew the targeting pod on to the ship. But that information needed to be passed to the Rafale which had a better resolution sensor for positive identification.

For the French navy the Etendard-Rafale combination makes perfect sense until the Rafale becomes fully capable. How this incapability of the Rafale will translate in Indian conditions is unknown to me. Why the French fly out in pairs/teams s clear from this. But I bet the Typhoon too has its issues.

I guess that if you look at it this way the F/A 18 was definitely the most capable fighter in terms of a fully integrated AESA and air to ar and air to surface capabilities. No wonder the US was surprised at its elimination. But the IAF was clearly looking for something different and not what was on offer from the US or what was not not offer from the Eurocanards.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 02 Aug 2011 09:40

shukla wrote:India given choice to pioneer naval Typhoon jet
EconomicmTimes

The surest way of killing the NLCA. On a secondary note when the Naval Rafeal already exists then what is the need of considering the Naval Typhoon, which is on the drawing board and will require more work thne the NLCA in terms of structural modifications.

sohels · Post by **sohels** » 02 Aug 2011 13:05

shiv wrote:I guess that if you look at it this way the F/A 18 was definitely the most capable fighter in terms of a fully integrated AESA and air to ar and air to surface capabilities. No wonder the US was surprised at its elimination. But the IAF was clearly looking for something different and not what was on offer from the US or what was not not offer from the Eurocanards.

400 mature and combat proven F/A 18s definitely seem more reassuring than 200 developmental Typhoons/Rafales. If taking off from Leh is an issue, can't they be based at other airfields at lower altitudes? How far would these be from the border - around 50-100 additional kms or more?

Eurasia Review: Hillary Clinton’s Hits And Misses In India – Analysis

Clinton is understood to have made a strong pitch for more US military sales to India, especially in the wake of American companies recently losing out in the race for a $ 10.4 billion order by the Indian Air Force for 126 fighter aircraft. She expressed her country’s willingness to sell state-of-the-art F 35 warplanes to India at “unbelievable” prices. The Americans are understood to have asked the Indian government to open its purse strings for the Lockheed built fifth generation super stealth F-35 Lightning the basic model of which is being made available to India for $ 65 million apiece. The Indian defence establishment would naturally find the offer too good to be true as much inferior fourth generation French Rafale is priced at $ 85 million and Eurofighter Typhoon (also a fourth generation aircraft) at $ 125 million apiece. The American offer signals American desperation for capturing a big pie of the highly lucrative Indian defence market, especially after two top American fighter aircraft manufacturers – Lockheed (F-16) and Boeing (F-18) – got eliminated in the recent Indian MMRCA deal worth $ 10.4 billion. More clarity would have to emerge on the proposed F 35 Lightning sales to India.

Any thoughts on F-35 at $65 million apiece (if true)? Also, why the extreme urgency to induct these fighters? Yes, depleting fleet strength is a concern, but ties with China are stable and are normalizing with Pakistan. I just don't see a full scale war breaking out with either country in the next decade, given the nuclear angle.