India selects Typhoon & Rafale for MMRCA shortlist - Part 2

[Taygibay]

To corroborate VivS' post, the Gripen IIRC was the only MMRCA contender
not to bring an AESA version to India for the trials, instead asking your
officials to go to Sweden to check it out.

The reason why lays in the fact that the Gripen NG is still a "paper plane".
The deal with Selex for design of an AESA version date from 2009.
It is still dependent on the actual production of the NG.

By comparison, the work on the AESA version of the Captor is projected
further in time to begin with but with a greater level of certainty.
The EF consortium nations, the UK mainly, get the idea that their ACs,
in order to go through a 25 year + lifespan will need this technology and
since they already have them in service ...

BTW, VivS points to another valuable info, namely that the MMRCA tender
is credited in most specialized publications around the military world as
the turning point from which ALL MAJOR combat AC procurement will indeed
require an AESA equiped fighter
Which in itself justifies the acquisition.

And some think India is not on the forefront, lol.
Some thanks may go to the Chinese on that one since their relative lag in
autonomous development of that tech was picked up by some wise people
as a qualitative force demultiplication factor which would serve to alleviate
the quantitative advantage of the PLAAF until most Indian ACs are locally
produced at a lower ( one could say more reasonable ) cost.

Way to go guys!

Good day all, Tay.

[NRao]

UK held secret briefing for India on missiles in Libyan war

[MarcH]

I think I've got a possible explanation for the difference made between Tiffy and Gripen. Part of the Tiffy tranche 2 standard were changes to the radar and airframe to provide for an AESA upgrade. (more cooling capacity etc.) That is one of the reasons the British thought about retiring their T1 Tiffys early, you can't upgrade them without deeper (and more expansive) modifications to airframe and radar backend.

Saab on the other hand has only one flying tech demonstrator flying, and not dozens of serial standard airframes already produced. Apparantly Eurofighter could convince the IAF, that the antenna upgrade can be done quite easily.

[srai]

The issue of urgency in concluding this deal has been discussed 'n' number of times on BRF.

Do wish they now just get on with it, choose any of the two as quickly as possible and hopefully, at least 18-20 of the Rafale/Typhoon are inducted in the IAF by June (or max. Sept.) 2012.

But the way things have progressed at a leisurely pace in the last few years, makes one doubtful whether the MRCA would be inducted in the IAF anytime before 2014.

According to the original MMRCA plan, the first 18 planes were to be delivered by 2014 and not 2012. If the Eurofighter is selected, the first 18 IAF would get would be from the Tranche 2 production line ... most likely deferred ones from Germany's order (lead contractors for EF for the Indian MMRCA tender) and thus, reduce Germany's commitment for Tranche 2 from 79 to 61 units. This is similar to what the UK did with the Saudi order where they reduced their commitment for Tranche 2 from 91 to 67 units with 24 reallocated to the Saudi.

With Rafale, they would have to ramp up the capacity at their plant for a short duration from 11 units/year to 20 units/year to fulfill both French and Indian requirements.

Eurofighter is in a better position to deliver the first 18 aircrafts to the IAF by 2014.

[srai]

...That is one of the reasons the British thought about retiring their T1 Tiffys early, you can't upgrade them without deeper (and more expansive) modifications to airframe and radar backend.

...

On the RAF retiring the Eurofighter Tranche 1, here are some details on the quantities from RAF's site:

A total of 53 Tranche 1 aircraft were delivered, with Tranche 2 contract provisioning for 91 aircraft. 24 of these were diverted to fulfill the RSAF export campaign, leaving 67 Tranche 2 aircraft due for delivery to the RAF. The Tranche 3 contract has been signed and will deliver 40 aircraft. With the Tranche 1 aircraft fleet due to retire over the period 2015-18, this will leave 107 Typhoon aircraft in RAF service until 2030.

So it looks like the UK completely filled its original quota for 232 units by getting the Saudis to order 72 Eurofighters from its quota. This left the UK with only 160 units commitment. Out of this 160 units, 53 Tranche 1 aircrafts are being retired and no further orders are planned. RAF will only have around 5 squadrons of Eurofighters instead of 12 squadrons it originally planned for.

With all the retirements, RAF, as of today, is down to around 11 fast-jet combat squadrons (5 Eurofighter and 6 Tornado GR4) and will remain there for the foreseeable future ... or even go down to 6 squadrons in 2020 with the Tornado GR4 retirement and only 1 new squadron of F-35 JSF induction occurring in that timeframe. Around 5 JSF squadrons are planned.

[Taygibay]

With Rafale, they would have to ramp up the capacity at their plant for a short duration from 11 units/year to 20 units/year to fulfill both French and Indian requirements.

Eurofighter is in a better position to deliver the first 18 aircrafts to the IAF by 2014.

I'm very sorry to have to tell you this, Srai but that's all wrong.


Primo, the Rafale was on a lesser basis than 11 per year until last year when
the lack of export forced the French govt to keep its word to Dassault.
The Rafale for India would be available right now from the production line.

Secundo, the Rafale does not have standards as per "Tranche" so that the planes
would be at the standard F3+ whereas the Typhoon Tranche 2 are not the same
as those ordered by India which would be Tranche 3.

Tertio and most important, the Rafale's first AESA are being produced and delivered
right now which means that those birds would come ready to use.
By comparison, the EF should get the CEASAR/Captor AESA in 2015 as things stand.

So not only would the Raffy be ready now but it would come in full form
and not in a "to be upgraded later" one as its counterpart.

Let's just wait for the decision anyhow.

Good night all, Tay.

[svinayak]

Recently in the MILITARY CHANNEL they showed F22 in cobat against the most potent combination as of today.
the SU-30MKI and RAFALE together. This also implies IAF could be a challenger to USAF in the future in actual combat

This military scenario is being shown on TV tells something about what is happening in the global aviation market.

It wont be long if few combination will be available to defeat the combined F22 F35 challenge in the future.

[SaiK]

The super sukhois only need superior skins and an advanced radar, along with integration to c2bms. phalcons will play a big role against f22s

[srai]

UK held secret briefing for India on missiles in Libyan war

At a time when NATO forces were destroying the bases of Colonel Muammar Gaddafi, Britain gave a secret presentation to the Indian Air Force (IAF) about the performance in the Libyan war of MBDA missiles, which have been offered to New Delhi.

"A presentation was given to the Indian Air Force two months ago where senior officers including the present chief (Air Chief Marshal N A K Browne) were present, about the performance of the Brim Stone precision guided missile," Frank Morgan, a senior MBDA executive, told a group of Indian reporters here.

MBDA is a four-nation European missile manufacturing consortium and has its facilities spread across Italy, the UK, France and Germany.

The Brim Stone precision guided missile is part of the MBDA's missile package on offer to the IAF for its tender for procuring 126 medium multirole combat aircraft (M-MRCA).

Each Brimstone PGM costs around £105,000 (~US$170,000). For a typical IAF order of 500 units, the total would come to around $85 million.

IAF could integrate it to all its new fighter types (LCA, Su-30MKI, Jaguar, Mirage-2000, MiG-29) along with the MMRCA. It would be very useful in the repeated event of "The Air Battle Of Longewala" where a flight of 3 or 4 aircrafts, each armed with 12 Brimstones with a 20km+standoff ranges, would quite easily stop an attacking armored regiment in its track.

[NRao]

Do not know. But, somehow, Brimstone and mmW sounds rather exciting.

[SaiK]

a brimstone mkized [shall we call it brahmstone?] would be a fantastic deal. tejas needs this tech, and get the know-how applied to nags-mmw as well. an extended range sleek,mean brimstone that take targets from 25-30kms (Maverick range) away could be something increases interdiction, air support and most suitable for lca and lch.

[Yogi_G]

Recently in the MILITARY CHANNEL they showed F22 in cobat against the most potent combination as of today.
the SU-30MKI and RAFALE together. This also implies IAF could be a challenger to USAF in the future in actual combat

This military scenario is being shown on TV tells something about what is happening in the global aviation market.

It wont be long if few combination will be available to defeat the combined F22 F35 challenge in the future.

Acharya ji, I did not see the recent show but I think the military channel show is not a new production and has been around for more than a year and half IIRC. In the show, the f-22 is pitched against squadrons comprising of MKI and the rafale and the MKI goes down in the first shot but the rafale survives to fight longer. Overall the rafale was shown in better light than the MKI. Without doubt it was the IAF they had in mind. Again, one of those Carlo Kopp kind of shows where the effort is to convince the higher-ups that there is no alternative other than the f-22.

I think the rafale's ECW suite was shown as the day-saver for the rafale in that show.

[johnny_m]

Not that excited about Brimstone. AASM Hammer is the real deal, really proved its worth in Libya.

[Neshant]

Just about any guided stand off munition works well these days so its ho hum.

The main focus is the aircraft - its abilities, its future, and its life cycle cost.

[Philip]

Ditto Neshant! There are a host of PGMs available-also new LR ones from the PRC which Pak is obtaining,with greater range than B'mstone.The allround capability of the aircraft,life-cycle costs and ability to be upgraded incrementally so that it remains relevant a few decades from now is what matters.Somehow,I think that these two non-stealthy aircratf will in the medium future find it increasingly difficult to counter stealthier 5th-gen aircraft and stealthy UCAVs which are the future.With our own FGFA JV on course,I would go for the more cost-effective of the two aircraft,as delivering a PGM can be done even by turboprops.

[NRao]

Sure, life-cycle and the like are on the top. However, it is nice to have these ho hum technologies in-house. A small detail, but one that will be of great importance.

[Singha]

maybe the brimstone is cheaper than AASM and permits the triple-racked carriage we seen on tornado GR4. even the French were said to be in talks after seeing it work in Libya.

http://www.defencemanagement.com/news_s ... p?id=16132

not sure how it stacks up in cost vs the AASM250 its nearest match.

[ranjithnath]

from open sources AASM250 cost twice as the basic cost of brimstone.but ofcourse it has more than twice its range and packs 250kg of explosive.it all comes down to requirements.for a CAS type of mission a salvo of brimstone would be ideal.for precission strike against hardened targets with SAM cover,anti radiation role etc AASM 250 would be ideal.ofcourse there is AASM 125 which would be cheaper and more comparable to brimstone.my take - get 500 of both of em !!!

[SaiK]

excellent point ranjithnath.

[Taygibay]

Huh, Singh?????????
That kind of triple racking :

seen here under a Rafale's wing?


Just to make sure everyone gets this right, these two weapons
AASM 250 and Brimstone are complementary more than competitors;
different ranges mainly and Ranjithnath is right to suggest both.
For instance no Brimstone can attack a target at 50-60kms from the top
in a vertical trajectory as the A2SM can.

Good day all, Tay.

[Singha]

I am aware that AASM is 3xracked...just failed to mention it more clearly "brimstone can also"....

the AASM 125 was tested in 2009, are any on order for the France AF?
http://www.defencetalk.com/successful-f ... pon-16611/

[ranjithnath]

@singhaji
there was a discussion in rafale forums a while back about AASM125.it cited that the Armée de l'Air wasnt interested in the 125 version and preferred AASM250 and AASM1000(under development).

[Taygibay]

I have to concur with Ranjithnath, Singha.

The operationals are not very interested in the small version.
The new versions are coming in now.
The IR one was declared FOC on last Thursday ( 13-10-2011 )
and the laser one is being put through its paces.

[MarcH]

Tay, do you have any info about the dicision between Brimstone and those laser guided rockets for Rafale ?

Would be nice to know what the AdlA/MN goes for.

[Rahul M]

Do not know. But, somehow, Brimstone and mmW sounds rather exciting.

nothing that helina can't achieve. I seriously hope we do not opt for brimstone.

[NRao]

^^^^^

Very reasonable thinking.

And, if we are to believe this report, the CAS was at this presentation. Cannot say that it was only about Brimstone, but, certainly something has to be up.

[Cybaru]

Do not know. But, somehow, Brimstone and mmW sounds rather exciting.

nothing that helina can't achieve. I seriously hope we do not opt for brimstone.

+1

We need to develop a whole suite of precision A2G munition. Helina and the Laser guided efforts from DRDO are step in the right direction. Even if a mMW radar is carried as a pod its still so worth it.

[Kartik]

This is big news..I didn't know that the Taurus was on offer earlier..

link to article

European consortium MBDA has offered their 300 km-range Taurus stand-off missile system to the Indian Air Force (IAF) for its fighter jets such as the Su-30MKI.

"We have received a Request for Information (RFI) from the IAF for a stand-off long range missile from the IAF and we have offered the Taurus missiles as we feel that it meets all the desired requirements," Anders Axebark, the business development manager for the missile systems told a group of Indian journalists here.

...

"The German Air Force is also planning to carry out a test-firing of the missile for the IAF in November at one of the field-firing ranges in South Africa," he said.

Axebark said that his company has also briefed the DRDO about the system and is looking for opportunities to co-develop anti-ship, surface to surface and transport aircraft-launched versions of the missile with the research organisation.

The Taurus GmbH is also offering the ground-launched version to the Indian Army.

Don't see why the IA needs the Taurus since the Nirbhay and Brahmos will suffice for their needs. But for the IAF, a shorter ranged cruise missile that can be carried in sufficient numbers and hit hardened bunkers and structures is absolutely needed. A single Brahmos on a Su-30MKI is good, but 2 Taurus on the MRCA gives a huge leap in the IAF's standoff capabilities.

the possibility of DRDO collaborating with MBDA to develop a Taurus anti-ship variant sounds good..

[Singha]

> transport aircraft-launched versions of the missile

taurus is a good weapon, onlee sticking issue in the past could have been it uses Williams P8300-15 Turbofan ie same family of engine as the tomahawk and hence a designated crown jewel not to be shared with indics. attitudes may have changed now after multiple large deals of the C17/P8/C130 variety.

transport a/c launched version of the missile is just what the doctor ordered for Nirbhay, the Taurus even its longer ranged form is not a ideal standoff missile of the boeing ALCM/KH55 variety. but if EADS/Airbus can arrange to show us how to modify vanilla A321 into a bombcat with rotary internal launcher I am all for it to use later

[Kartik]

I know you're just being you Singha, but I don't think that such an idea would even be taken seriously for a moment..Where would you find A320s or 321s to modify to be able to carry ALCMs? I'm afraid there is simply no chance of a civilian A320 or 737 carrying and launching ALCM's. Not without a very very serious effort on developing hardpoints (forget rotary launchers), like those for the Harpoon on the P-8, that too capable of carrying a 1400 kg ALCM, spending millions on that and then testing the effects of such a modification on the aerodynamics of the airplane..and then testing it out in flight to certify it..no way on earth that the DGCA would even permit such changes..

the only civilian derived aircraft I can think of that can be possibly (and yet with a near zero possibility) would be the 737 Rajdoot's ordered from the US for the PM and cabinet. But those too cannot be spared for a mission that other fighters can comfortably carry out, when they are acquired as special mission aircraft with a very specific goal.

[Singha]

what I meant was work with eads/airbus to acquire a dedicated small fleet of mil-grade A321 preferably with rotary launcher or atleast with 4 wing hardpoints and 4 fuselage points for JASSM/nirbhay/taurus sized ALCMs.

some conceptual work must have been done for the aborted A321 MPA proposal like enlargement of fuel tanks, making the fuselage and wings stronger, etc etc ... those files can be dusted off.

by 2025 we will need a strong maritime/ALCM bomber force to match the weapons we are getting and expanding threat of PLAN. either we can invest in the PAKDA if cost/size/scope matches our needs, look at this bombcat A321 option or anything else that can cart 8 ALCMs over a distance of 3000km and return back to base on internal fuel....fighters cannot do that in payload and range.

I would not underestimate the kind of mischief the sino-islamic combine could kick up anywhere in the world. by 2040 we will have to pull our weight and fight expeditionary battles against this TwoTowers combine...perhaps in africa, perhaps in middle east, in ASEAN...who knows...the euros are fading away and so is russia....it might end up being just massa and india having a alliance of convenience to deal with this threat.

[PranoyG]

FHM India this month has a photo spread on the Eurofighter vs Rafale and they posted a photo of a Harrier Jumpjet rather than the Eurofighter

[SaiK]

Thinking about launching ALCMs, can't they be just dropped like bombs, and then engaged? [Context: AWACs platform launch + possibility of carrying them in higher numbers.].

[Singha]

all ALCMs are dropped like bombs and then engine start. no big missile ALCM/ASM flies hot off the pylon itself.

question is how many can you carry and how far and what speed ? rotary internal bay is obviously a massive increase in efficient use of space and advantage of less drag too. thats the reason why all the big boys got themselves toys like b52,b1,tu160,bear to start with.

those who aspire to join the club must either find a way to dislocate the frame of reference and find some other soln ; or bulk up and match meat with meat.

[Viv S]

I think while talking about the complications or expense of a missile carrier we're overlooking the cost of the missile itself.

Cruise missiles are EXPENSIVE and to be used very very selectively. The Brahmos even more so - with its cost and small warhead, its real utility as a land attack missile, would be in breaching very highly defended airspace. The remainder - Taurus, Storm Shadow, Nirbhay et al. can be employed from a host of platforms from the Tejas to the Su-30MKI. Buying and modifying a transport aircraft as a strategic bomber is like buying a machine gun with a six bullets... not enough for the weapon to be used effectively.

With regard to the strategic bombers already in service - they're all set for replacement. Heavy ones like the B-52 are only fit for carpet bombing undefended areas, the B-1B and B-2 are exceedingly hard to maintain and even more expensive to operate. Most countries with a first rate air force are clearly banking upon stealthy UCAVs for their future needs, resulting in the Taranis, NEUROn, Barracuda, X-45, X-47, Skat and now the AURA. The USAF may still need a strategic bomber to maintain parity of influence with the USN , no reason for the IAF to go chasing after such an aircraft.

[Will]

When are the Air Marshal's 10 days going to be up?

[Kartik]

I think while talking about the complications or expensive of a missile carrier we're overlooking the cost of the missile itself.

Cruise missiles are EXPENSIVE and to be used very very selectively. The Brahmos even more so - with its cost and small warhead, its real utility as a land attack missile, would be in breaching very highly defended airspace. The remainder - Taurus, Storm Shadow, Nirbhay et al. can be employed from a host of platforms from the Tejas to the Su-30MKI. Buying and modifying a transport aircraft as a strategic bomber is like buying a machine gun with a six bullets... not enough for the weapon to be used effectively.

With regard to the strategic bombers already in service - they're all set for replacement. Heavy ones like the B-52 are only fit for carpet bombing undefended areas, the B-1B and B-2 are exceedingly hard to maintain and even more expensive to operate. Most countries with a first rate air force are clearly banking upon stealthy UCAVs for their future needs, resulting in the Taranis, NEUROn, Barracuda, X-45, X-47, Skat and now the AURA. The USAF may still need a strategic bomber to maintain parity of influence with the USN , no reason for the IAF to go chasing after such an aircraft.

agree with you completely. the IAF will need a cost effective cruise missile to be used against Pak and against Chinese targets in Tibet in large enough numbers. Maybe a scaled down and little less sophisticated version of the Nirbhay design can be used for shorter range attacks. Let the Brahmos, Nirbhay, Taurus/Storm Shadow/Scalp-EG do the damage initially thanks to sophisticated guidance and command technology and then follow it up with the cheaper cruise missiles to be launched from UCAVs or from ground based launchers.

[Taygibay]

Tay, do you have any info about the dicision between Brimstone and those laser guided rockets for Rafale ?

Would be nice to know what the AdlA/MN goes for.

Sorry for the delay, MarcH. Here it goes :

First, ever since the Rafale's inception, Dassault would have liked
a development plan for them rockets.
You may remember that they made a proposal on their stand as early
as the 2009 Le Bourget Air Show to integrate TDA 68mm rocket pods
on the two unopened underwing stations for A-Stan and the likes.
It is also awise proposition inasmuch as those equip the Tigre helo and
some scale economy would come into play.

For the AdlA, those were wanted but accepted as superfluous or delay"able"
in order to clear budgetary elbow room for more pressing needs.
Very recently, in Lybia, the BPCs deployment showed that when both the
Tiger and Rafale are available, one uses rockets and one AASMs in a sort of
layer-oriented approach. But at the same time in A-Stan, where gun passes
are used rockets could complement CAS nicely.

On top of those delays from old, the recently shift in collaboration from the
UK from an all-American view to a revival of Franco-British partnership means
that equilibrium of efforts, investment and workloads sharing now come into
play as well. That may help the Brimstone get onboard the Raffy!

BAe leads through cell design over Dassault in the Telemos project (very supported
by both governments ) and MBDA should be doing the Future Light Anti-Ship Missile
and the Brimstone may get on the Rafale.
But in that scenario, I would not be surprised to see the same Rafale on the CVF Elizabeth.
because it gets very lopsided otherwise.

Accepting that remote possibility, the cons for the Brimstone would be limited to the fact
that it covers the low-range section of the AASM and such can be seen as redondant to it.
There the rocket pods find their niche.
To show how valid the comparison to the AASM is, the development of a naval version of
the Brimstone for export to Persian Gulf friendlies was immediately met by talks of a
similar adaptation for the AASM which would sort of impinge on the Exocet's potential, lol.

So you see, what was a simple money over time over immediate needs waiting period
where the eventuality was strong may now become a pawn in the Franco-British association.

To be sure, both against tanks and smaller watercrafts, the Brimstone's ability to treat
and counter a swarm of targets remains as useful and impressive.

No definitive decision has been delivered and as shown it may stay that way for a while.

SIGH ..... good nap all, Tay.

P.S. In the case of the Rafale being selected, India may solve that lack
and decide future orientation in the matter?

[sarabpal.s]

agree with you completely. the IAF will need a cost effective cruise missile to be used against Pak and against Chinese targets in Tibet in large enough numbers.
-----
then follow it up with the cheaper cruise missiles to be launched from UCAVs or from ground based launchers.

Well from Indian prospectus we really lag cheap smart weapon or say cheap cruise missiles and in same context china did good job with holding good amount ofold cruise missile (cheap) as well as modern Ripoff..

[Cain Marko]

all ALCMs are dropped like bombs and then engine start. no big missile ALCM/ASM flies hot off the pylon itself.

question is how many can you carry and how far and what speed ? rotary internal bay is obviously a massive increase in efficient use of space and advantage of less drag too. thats the reason why all the big boys got themselves toys like b52,b1,tu160,bear to start with.

those who aspire to join the club must either find a way to dislocate the frame of reference and find some other soln ; or bulk up and match meat with meat.

Damn it, where is my backfire order? capable of carrying about 24000kg payload for insane ranges (7000km ferry ~ 4000km combat), can manage fast and high or fast and low, would cause plenty of takleef in the right places! Panda would be getting mighty nervous around S China Sea fer shore!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nhj8ITvp-pw



CM