India selects Typhoon & Rafale for MMRCA shortlist - Part 3

arthuro · Post by **arthuro** » 21 Jan 2012 02:44

from A&C weekly :

Given to the very good feedback from SPECTRA during Harmattan which led the ADA to continue exploring this way, several dozen Rafale are now equipped with new electronic cards which boost their ELINT capabilities.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 21 Jan 2012 14:54

The Neuron looks fabulous.If the Raffy comes with an opening for joining the Neuron,it would be very attractive.Perhaps why BAe displayed the turbo-prop Mantis at Aero-India.The Neuron is in a diff. league altogether.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 21 Jan 2012 18:50

Has the Neuron been cleared for production?

It was my understanding that both the Dassault Neuron and BAE Taranis (and even the X-45, X-47 and SKAT for that matter) were technology demonstrators rather than to-specification prototypes. I believe a production standard aircraft wouldn't be available till well after 2020.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 21 Jan 2012 18:55

Linking of neuron to this deal is a BR creation!

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 21 Jan 2012 19:02

Philip wrote:The Neuron looks fabulous.If the Raffy comes with an opening for joining the Neuron,it would be very attractive.Perhaps why BAe displayed the turbo-prop Mantis at Aero-India.The Neuron is in a diff. league altogether.

Apples-oranges. The Neuron is intended to be a stealth UCAV and its direct counterpart is the BAE Taranis.

The BAE Mantis on the other is a Medium Altitude Long Endurance UAV tech demonstrator (think Reaper or Rustom). It evolved/is evolving into the Telemos UAV program jointly being developed by BAE and Dassault. Which in turn may end up competing with the EADS Talarion for European orders.

(Its a pain keeping all those name straight.

)

Brando · Post by **Brando** » 21 Jan 2012 19:30

SaiK wrote:Linking of neuron to this deal is a BR creation!

Very True.

To the Europeans (doesn't matter if its the French or the rest), India's selection of the MRCA contract is merely a commercial consideration. No matter how much India or the GoI wishes that this "deal" would give us an inside route into other Euro programs like the NEURON or whatever else, it won't. India will always be an outsider in any Euro-fraternity, it is time to accept this reality and move on.

If the MRCA deal had been with the Americans however, we might have got something worth more than just 125 fighter aircraft and parts.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 21 Jan 2012 19:42

Brando wrote:If the MRCA deal had been with the Americans however, we might have got something worth more than just 125 fighter aircraft and parts.

like what? pl. elaborate this.

Kovy · Post by **Kovy** » 21 Jan 2012 20:52

Viv S wrote: The R-27 has a very long range and a relatively low kill probability. You can simulate the former effectively in an exercise but not the latter without an actual launch.

So, you are implying that EF claimed A2A superiority over a Su-27+R27ER somehow relies on the assumption that the R27ER has a low kill probability.

What about the fact that the simulated R27ER imposes the shooter to engage only one target at a time, with constant lock until the (simulated) impact ? that's a huge disadvantage which should have left plenty of time to the typhoon and its big radar, superior kinetik and multitarget F3 missiles to counter the attacks. Yet they failed....

Comparable RCS (esp in a loaded configuration), similar type of active and passive sensors, comparable MMI and therefore similar situational awareness.

again, yet they fail to demonstrate clear A2A superiority over the Rafale as advertised by Eurofighter Gmbh.

The choice if anything is between the EF's considerably more powerful radar versus Rafale's two extra plumbed heavy hardpoints. Oh and better high altitude high speed performance versus better low speed high AoA maneuverability.

again, why "the EF's considerably more powerful radar and better high altitude high speed performance", isn't enough to defeat a Rafale simulating fox 1 missiles ?

Come now, that's simply rhetoric. One could say the same thing about the Rafale's so far absent HMS.

Does the absence of HMS prevents the Rafale from defeating the Typhoon in BVR combat ?
I think not.

Fact is its the aircraft's configuration and capability in the variant delivered to the IAF that matters not the process of getting there.

As far as the typhoon is concerned, the big question for India is how much time and money will be required to get all the currently missing capabilities.

arthuro · Post by **arthuro** » 21 Jan 2012 21:51

Come now, that's simply rhetoric. One could say the same thing about the Rafale's so far absent HMS. Fact is its the aircraft's configuration and capability in the variant delivered to the IAF that matters not the process of getting there.

Kovy as well answered previous point but I would like to tackle this one : Mica IR+ Rafale > Typhoon+HMS+Asraam.
The rafale can fire its Mica IR well before the merge which gives it a considerable advantage over any aircraft with shorter range IR missiles like the typhoon in case the BVR EM missiles option fails due to jamming for instance. For this reason the HMS within the french air force was not perceived as a priority compared to other items even if it is still a medium term requirement.

This IR BVR capability is an excellent way to maximize your long range kill probability. When a mirage fire a mica IR or mica EM the enemy doesn't know what is the appropriate jamming technique. Last but not least the lack of HMS for the rafale is bogus as it is a standard option in any export campaign.

The fact that the Typhoon lacks a passive shooting capability is a big drawback which might explain why it is underperforming in the Air superiority role compared to the rafale as shown in recent exercises AND foreign evaluation like in switzerland and Netherlands.

arthuro · Post by **arthuro** » 21 Jan 2012 21:57

Neuron unveiling ceremony speech :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8vCJBeakY7k

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 21 Jan 2012 22:36

Rakesh wrote:As excellent as the Rafale is, the Typhoon offers IMHO much better spinoffs to the LCA, AMCA and other programs. Ultimately at the end of the day, what the French are offering in technological offsets would not be comparable IMO to the four nation consortium. This will be one of the key factors if the GoI goes in for the Typhoon. That having being said, if the Typhoon does lose it could mean the GoI would rather deal with France vs the four nation consortium. Can't wait for the decision to come....this is really nail biting!

Rakesh garu, can you be a bit more specific? . Afterall, in terms of spinoffs, isn't EADs as much French as anything else? Secondly, if the spinoffs are dependent upon the main product being sold (in this case the Rafale or Tiffy), I don't see what advantage the Tiffy brings over the Rafale.

In fact, considering the French involvement in programs such as the LCA, and the Kaveri, I'd assume that it is the Rafale that would provide better spinoffs. In fact an uprated Kaveri has been spoken of/ and worked on with the Snecma JV as a possibility for the LCA, AMCA and even the Rafale.

Just because it is a 4 nation consortium does not necessarily mean that they have better ability to provide greater defence related spinoffs vs. France, which has major stakes in big players such as MBDA, Thales, Dassault and Snecma. Even better, Fra does not have any moralistic baggage that Ger. tends to have wrt to India's usage of specific weapons including nukes. I can see a nuke nude nation like Ger. whining if India wants to hardwire the EF for nuke delivery. JMT

CM

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 21 Jan 2012 22:52

From a learning process per se.. who among the three had give us more, and more than that, among whom we have learned more?

1. Russkies
2. French
3. Brit [or the Eu consortium members?]

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 21 Jan 2012 23:31

^ the order you have is pretty correct. We have probly learned most from the Roosies - esp. when we take into consideration their involvement in strategic programs. The french do come in second what with the scorpenes and dassault's involvement in the LCA. Brits come in @ 3.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 22 Jan 2012 00:14

Get up in the morning and visit this thread ................... to find .......................... Neuron ....... in it.

Have the French had a change of heart and decided to give India Neuron technologies?

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 22 Jan 2012 00:58

nope.. but it is getting up people's neurons here.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 22 Jan 2012 02:45

Kovy wrote:So, you are implying that EF claimed A2A superiority over a Su-27+R27ER somehow relies on the assumption that the R27ER has a low kill probability.

I'm saying in a exercise where an actual launch doesn't take place, its more advantageous to be simulating the R-27 rather than the MICA, while that may not apply in actual combat.

What about the fact that the simulated R27ER imposes the shooter to engage only one target at a time, with constant lock until the (simulated) impact ? that's a huge disadvantage which should have left plenty of time to the typhoon and its big radar, superior kinetik and multitarget F3 missiles to counter the attacks. Yet they failed....

How to do you simulate the actions of a launched active missile like the AMRAAM after the platform has been 'killed'? With enough KE and suitable bearing it still remains a lethal threat. Also, its the its older generation radars that were limited to single engagement at a time - it wasn't a characteristic of the missile. In addition, at the time of the exercise, a four ship formation of Rafales required only one emitting aircraft while at the same time a similar flight of EFs required every shooter to self-illuminate the target.

again, yet they fail to demonstrate clear A2A superiority over the Rafale as advertised by Eurofighter Gmbh.

again, why "the EF's considerably more powerful radar and better high altitude high speed performance", isn't enough to defeat a Rafale simulating fox 1 missiles ?

Put the variants of the EF and Rafale on offer to the IAF in actual combat, and I'd venture the result would be less than favourable for the latter.

Come now, that's simply rhetoric. One could say the same thing about the Rafale's so far absent HMS.

Does the absence of HMS prevents the Rafale from defeating the Typhoon in BVR combat ?
I think not.

Please don't lose track of the argument in question. You brought up the supposedly late integration of the capability of passive firing of the AMRAAM, as a poor reflection on the program management. I simply offered up the Rafale's HMS as a similar instance, to emphasize that that wasn't the case.

As far as the typhoon is concerned, the big question for India is how much time and money will be required to get all the currently missing capabilities.

Once again... what missing capabilities? The deliveries are scheduled for 2014-15. The EF will have the Captor-E, an upgraded DASS, PIRATE, HMSS and a full air to ground capability with the Litening III, Reccelite pods and whatever munitions the IAF chooses.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 22 Jan 2012 02:47

SaiK wrote:nope.. but it is getting up people's neurons here.

Ah I see.

Just like the IAF transport thread (where some thing called a IL-476, not even ordered by the RuAF, makes it's appearance). A corrupted thread. When there is an International thread just for such purposes?

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 22 Jan 2012 03:01

Cain Marko wrote:In fact an uprated Kaveri has been spoken of/ and worked on with the Snecma JV as a possibility for the LCA, AMCA and even the Rafale.

Possible but unlikely. For one, the Kaveri despite being a tough but admirable program is unlikely to deliver an engine matching the M88 in the near future. Secondly, the Snecma can deliver an uprated M88 (90kN) relatively easily, the bigger (and more expensive) issue is adapting the Rafale for it.

Just because it is a 4 nation consortium does not necessarily mean that they have better ability to provide greater defence related spinoffs vs. France, which has major stakes in big players such as MBDA, Thales, Dassault and Snecma. Even better, Fra does not have any moralistic baggage that Ger. tends to have wrt to India's usage of specific weapons including nukes. I can see a nuke nude nation like Ger. whining if India wants to hardwire the EF for nuke delivery.

Overall, BAE and Cassidian appear to be more eager to expand into India vis-a-vis Dassault. Also while France is the largest MBDA customer, it doesn't have majority stake in the company. EADS' 37.5% shareholding in MBDA is vested in Cassidian and therefore shared by France and Germany.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 22 Jan 2012 03:21

The FDAEC would be different no? So, interfacing with Rafale means more exchanges on the interfaces. Though it is not impossible, but if Fr agrees, then I see value addition for Snecma-K-95kN.

tejas · Post by **tejas** » 22 Jan 2012 05:20

DRDO already working on a stealth UCAV--AURA.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 22 Jan 2012 06:57

I am concerned if we don't tie up to a non-de-linked program, and go without any charter for Kaveri, then it would lose its oomph. People need more support to enable the kaveri technology be it for Rafale, AURA or AMCA. De-linking from LCA is a set back actually.. but porting the older 75kN wala on the prototypes, should bring some cheer.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 22 Jan 2012 07:05

To add to everyone's "neurosis",I thought that Taranis was taboo and "strictly come dancing" for Brits alone.In fact,if TOT,offsets and leveraging the deal to acquire cutting edge tech,acquiring stealth tech for UCAVs would top my list.It would help enormously with our very own AURA UCAV programme and offered earlier! Would this be the tipping edge? I quite here a Feb. Livefist report:

India's UCAV To Be A Neuron Clone?
http://livefist.blogspot.com/2011/02/in ... clone.html

India's indigenous stealth UCAV programme, AURA, could borrow a lot of design from the European Neuron UCAV technology demonstrator. The image above, (snapped helpfully with a cell phone off a doc I hope to see a full version of soon) could be another glimpse into how the programme is thinking, and it sure looks like the Neuron to me. Interestingly, the AURA team has in fact been offered a technology partnership by the Neuron's programme leader Dassault Aviation, though the offer may not have anything directly to do with the Neuron programme itself. Incidentally, the AURA started out as a secret defence project (like India's SSBN programme), though the establishment has not only acknowledged its existence, but begun to talk quite a bit about it. Hope to get some real juice at Aero India though. Maybe a model too? Unlikely, but you never know.

member_22516 · Post by **member_22516** » 22 Jan 2012 13:54

Just a word about simulated A2A firing.
When you train in A2A combat, the participants' trajectories and shoots are stored during flight and gathered at landing to be put together for full debrieffing. So you can check that the simulated shooting of a missile done by fighter A has really reached fighter B by computing missile trajectory, fighter A datalink with its missile (radar), and fighter B manovers to avoid it.
And you have the final result, which limitation is only that if missile is close to the target then this one is considered destroyed. And these simulations don't really take stealth caracteristics and missile is supposed to see the target from time its in its detection sector. And you don't really simulate flares, shafts or jamming effects on the missile sensor.
(So EF a2a resultst against R27 could be cross-checked that way.)

When you play in Red Flag or so, you have specefic pods that transfer your real time position and shoots and missiles firing are intantaneously computed to officially shoot down the fighter B or not.
And final debrieffing will present the results, where each AF can contest with its own computing or ECM effects.

kelesis · Post by **kelesis** » 23 Jan 2012 00:34

http://business-standard.com/india/news ... et/462574/

Samtel poised to take off with air force fighter fleet
Ajai Shukla / New Delhi Jan 23, 2012, 00:26 IST

After bagging a euro 1.47 billion (Rs 9,600 crore) contract for upgrading the Indian Air Force's fleet of 51 Mirage-2000 fighters, French defence electronics giant Thales is now an 800-pound gorilla on the Indian defence scene. And, its Indian partner, Samtel Display Systems (SDS), is emerging as a company to watch as it swoops alongside Thales on to India's burgeoning aerospace market.

Thales' offset liability from the Mirage upgrade contract amounts to euro 441 million (Rs 3,000 crore). That induces Thales to source from SDS a significant share of the avionics (aviation-electronics) for upgrading the Mirage-2000. SDS, with whom Thales has a joint venture company, Samtel Thales Avionics, is poised to meet that requirement. SDS already supplies Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL), India's sole aircraft manufacturer, with cockpit displays (multi-function displays, or MFDs) for the Sukhoi-30MKI fighters that are built at HAL's Nashik plant. The Ghaziabad-based company is also competing to build avionics for the IAF's forthcoming Sukhoi-30 MKI upgrade.

And, if the Rafale fighter — built by Dassault with a large avionics component from Thales — is chosen by the MoD as the IAF's new medium multi-role combat aircraft (MMRCA), SDS could benefit enormously from another wave of offset-driven orders for display systems and other avionics in the 126 MMRCA.

"We are looking at a turnover growth from Rs 60 crore in 2011-12, to about Rs 500 crore in 2015-16," Puneet Kaura, executive director of SDS, told Business Standard.

Samtel Thales Avionics (Thales 26 per cent; Samtel 74 per cent), incorporated in 2008, is Thales' only joint venture in India. The French company is currently setting up another JV with Bharat Electronics Ltd for manufacturing radar components.

"Thales wants to build on our maturing relationship to make us a major supply source for avionics. They are looking at India very seriously, given the size of the deals they have signed or are contemplating," says Puneet Kaura.

Thales shares Kaura's optimism. Eric Lenseigne, who heads Thales India, says India is a key market, both in defence and in the civilian areas of transportation, signalling, communications and automatic fare collection systems. Thales’ fare collection systems are installed on the Delhi Metro rail system.

"We are keen on growing our joint venture in India, Samtel Thales Avionics. Samtel has key capabilities, and the capability to grow. We do not rule out their becoming a part of our global supply chain… provided they develop the way that we would like them to develop," says Lenseigne.

So far, SDS's key technological breakthroughs, such as the Su-30MKI displays, have been achieved indigenously. But as it progresses to cutting-edge avionics the company requires technology infusion. For this, Samtel Thales Avionics, is a key vehicle.

An example of the futuristic avionics that SDS hopes to supply is the Infra Red Search and Track (IRST) System, standard kit in the Rafale as well as the Eurofighter Typhoon. This passive sensor detects enemy aircraft at ranges of 60-70 kilometres through the heat (infrared) they emit. Unlike a fighter's airborne radar, which gives away one's own position by emitting an electronic beam, an IRST is entirely stealthy, since it emits nothing.

Thales plans to offer the IRST to the IAF on a ‘Buy and Make (Indian)’ basis. This category of procurement (specified in the Defence Procurement Procedure of 2011, or DPP-2011) requires an Indian partner to absorb critical, high-end technologies and develop capabilities within India. Thales has told the IAF that Samtel Thales Avionics would do 50 per cent of the design and development work in India.

Both Samtel and Thales told Business Standard they would enhance Thales' share of the JV, if the foreign direct investment (FDI) limit is raised from the current 26 per cent. "If the FDI cap is raised to 49 per cent, we have agreed that Thales' holding in the JV will go up to 49 per cent, while we will come down to 51 per cent. This is not a written agreement, but we have an understanding," says Kaura.

This article gives us a good idea of how the French want to implement offsets. And it is clear that Thales will play a key role.

Badar · Post by **Badar** » 23 Jan 2012 00:50

tejas wrote:DRDO already working on a stealth UCAV--AURA.

Unfortunately, the current state of DRDO capabilities is such that it leads to the question : "with whom?".

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 23 Jan 2012 02:49

Philip

it will make life simple if you take anyting Aroor says with a ton of salt. Boy has spent way too much time with Sengupta

Kovy · Post by **Kovy** » 23 Jan 2012 08:33

Viv S wrote: I'm saying in a exercise where an actual launch doesn't take place, its more advantageous to be simulating the R-27 rather than the MICA, while that may not apply in actual combat.

I don't think so.

1 - The R27 needs continous target illumination from its initial point to impact : Thus the radar of the shooter must be in STT mode so that continous targeting and enough reflected energy can be collected by the small antenna of the missile during the last phase of the inteception.
If the radar lock is interrupted the missile goes balistic and become useless against a fighter.

2 - off course, as you can guide only one R27 at a time in the final phase, you can only engage one target at a time with this missile.

How to do you simulate the actions of a launched active missile like the AMRAAM after the platform has been 'killed'? With enough KE and suitable bearing it still remains a lethal threat.

If the amraam was still in its inertial phase and not active, it is lost
if it was active (within the missile radar range which is about 15km) then it is autonomous and simulated as such.

Also, its the its older generation radars that were limited to single engagement at a time - it wasn't a characteristic of the missile.

no it's a mssile limitation. As said above, a R27 needs all the radar energy of the shooter to be concentrated on a single target during the final phase of the interception because the the collecting capability of the missile antenna is limited due to its size and because the missile guidance relies only on the reflected radar waves of the shooter.

In addition, at the time of the exercise, a four ship formation of Rafales required only one emitting aircraft while at the same time a similar flight of EFs required every shooter to self-illuminate the target.

I doubt that

Put the variants of the EF and Rafale on offer to the IAF in actual combat, and I'd venture the result would be less than favourable for the latter.

We all wait for the typhoon to demonstrate its superiority...

Please don't lose track of the argument in question. You brought up the supposedly late integration of the capability of passive firing of the AMRAAM, as a poor reflection on the program management. I simply offered up the Rafale's HMS as a similar instance, to emphasize that that wasn't the case.

The difference being that the list of fubctions/capabilities not implemented yet in the EF is very very long
The lack of such an important BVR function for an air superiority fighter serving as such in 5 countries does rise some question on the program management.

Once again... what missing capabilities? The deliveries are scheduled for 2014-15. The EF will have the Captor-E, an upgraded DASS, PIRATE, HMSS and a full air to ground capability with the Litening III, Reccelite pods and whatever munitions the IAF chooses.

who gonna pay for all that ?
and when will it actually be operational ? 2014-2015 seems very very optimistic to me

Mort Walker · Post by **Mort Walker** » 23 Jan 2012 09:49

I didn't see this posted, but it looks like this story from PoliticsParty.com about MMRCA on 13 JAN 2012 is still worth noting:

http://www.politicsparty.com/INDIA_AIR_FORCE.php

Some key points:

1. The 2 bids are within 2% of each other and India will go with the lowest.
2. The Obama administration is angry about the elimination of American companies, but convinced there was no foul play in the elimination.
3. Russians are sadly delighted that the Americans were knocked out.
4. Sweden blamed Bofors for elimination.
5. Sarkozy is happy.
6. India will buy 189 planes total for $16-18 billion USD or Rs. 80,000 crores.

member_22516 · Post by **member_22516** » 23 Jan 2012 11:49

In case the price difference is only 2%, it is obvious that the best choice is the aircraft which has already the maximum compliance with mmrca requests.
Because you never know how much it'll really cost for development (and always more expensive than planned!).
So there's no hesitation: let's go for Raffy which is already multirole A2G and aleady has AESA radar and IRST passive seeker.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 23 Jan 2012 12:41

arthuro wrote:Kovy as well answered previous point but I would like to tackle this one : Mica IR+ Rafale > Typhoon+HMS+Asraam.
The rafale can fire its Mica IR well before the merge which gives it a considerable advantage over any aircraft with shorter range IR missiles like the typhoon in case the BVR EM missiles option fails due to jamming for instance. For this reason the HMS within the french air force was not perceived as a priority compared to other items even if it is still a medium term requirement.

If we're talking of BVR ranges than the MICA-IR needs to be compared to the AMRAAM and R-77, not the ASRAAM and IRIS-T. And skeptical as I am about a dedicated IRST's efficacy at medium to long ranges, I am even more skeptical about an IR missile seeker's capability. If IR seekers had resolutions comparable or even near comparable to active radar seekers, the R-27T wouldn't be the only other BVR missile with an IR seeker.

Last but not least the lack of HMS for the rafale is bogus as it is a standard option in any export campaign.

No one is saying that the IAF wouldn't get a HMS if it required one. The issue was the timeline of integration and point was that not having one in operation right now doesn't mean the program was poorly managed.

The fact that the Typhoon lacks a passive shooting capability is a big drawback which might explain why it is underperforming in the Air superiority role compared to the rafale as shown in recent exercises AND foreign evaluation like in switzerland and Netherlands.

It didn't have that capability at the time of the DACT exercise. It does today and has for the last three years.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 23 Jan 2012 12:42

Kovy wrote: I don't think so.

1 - The R27 needs continous target illumination from its initial point to impact : Thus the radar of the shooter must be in STT mode so that continous targeting and enough reflected energy can be collected by the small antenna of the missile during the last phase of the inteception.
If the radar lock is interrupted the missile goes balistic and become useless against a fighter.

2 - off course, as you can guide only one R27 at a time in the final phase, you can only engage one target at a time with this missile.

Why? The tracking information required by the missile has to be independent of the radar's capability. What prevents the RBE2 PESA from having a resolution in TWS or MTT mode rivaling that of the N001 in STT?

How to do you simulate the actions of a launched active missile like the AMRAAM after the platform has been 'killed'? With enough KE and suitable bearing it still remains a lethal threat.
If the amraam was still in its inertial phase and not active, it is lost
if it was active (within the missile radar range which is about 15km) then it is autonomous and simulated as such.

But that's not how events will play in combat. The exercise cannot accurately account for 'spoilers'. With an early salvo at beyond the missile's NEZ, the pilot can force his adversary to take evasive action and possibly break lock (for a SARH missile in particular) when his MAWS goes off. But in the absence of an actual launch those conditions can't be simulated. (Well you can, but you'd need a high degree of networking, a large complex telemetry system on the ground as well as an AEW&C loitering in range.)

In addition, at the time of the exercise, a four ship formation of Rafales required only one emitting aircraft while at the same time a similar flight of EFs required every shooter to self-illuminate the target.
I doubt that

Well.. I suppose we'll never know without access to details about the RoE.

We all wait for the typhoon to demonstrate its superiority...

As far as the MMRCA competition is concerned, it doesn't really matter anymore since the balls in the bureaucratic/political court now.

The difference being that the list of fubctions/capabilities not implemented yet in the EF is very very long
The lack of such an important BVR function for an air superiority fighter serving as such in 5 countries does rise some question on the program management.

But what this very long list of capabilities comprise of? And the AMRAAM can be employed by the EF in a passive mode today. Whether its late is a matter of opinion.

Once again... what missing capabilities? The deliveries are scheduled for 2014-15. The EF will have the Captor-E, an upgraded DASS, PIRATE, HMSS and a full air to ground capability with the Litening III, Reccelite pods and whatever munitions the IAF chooses.
who gonna pay for all that ?
and when will it actually be operational ? 2014-2015 seems very very optimistic to me

Well except for the Captor-E, I believe all the rest is included in the P1E upgrade than concludes next year. As far as the Captor-E's schedule goes, the IAF appears satisfied with the proposal - 'Eurofighter too test-flew a prototype AESA radar for the IAF evaluation team, convincing them that it would be ready by 2014-15.' (link). The timeline for integration of munitions is subject to the IAF's choices - JDAM, Paveway and AMRAAMs will be easily available, while something like the SDB or SLAM-ER would require some work.

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 23 Jan 2012 12:51

BAE shrugs off spending slump

BAE Systems is Britain's largest player in the industry - and a number of announcements over the next few weeks could be important for sentiment. One of these is a looming decision by India on a fighter- jet contract that is potentially worth about $10bn (£6.4bn). Indeed, the Asian country, which is already a significant customer of BAE, plans to spend about $50bn upgrading its Soviet-era defence systems over the next five years. BAE is involved in the Eurofighter project and the consortium is down to the last two in the bidding process, alongside France's Dassault. A total of 126 jets are likely to be ordered.

It cannot be stressed enough that this potential contract would not lead to an inflow of billions of pounds into BAE's coffers. Analysts have calculated that a win would boost the company's earning per share by a modest 1pc to 2pc. However, what it will do is improve sentiment surrounding the shares and be a big vote of confidence in the Eurofighter. The contract is expected to be unveiled within the next few weeks, reports from India suggest.

Over the longer term, BAE's other territories, such as India, are likely to continue to grow, with US spending unlikely to slump as much as had been feared. Once the situation becomes clearer, this should be reflected in sector valuations

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 23 Jan 2012 13:32

did the ground control room we saw in les chevaliers du ciel wherein fighters and inflight missiles were shown in graphical formal for real?

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 23 Jan 2012 14:21

Singha wrote:did the ground control room we saw in les chevaliers du ciel wherein fighters and inflight missiles were shown in graphical formal for real?

Doubt it. Except for the breathtaking aerial footage of the Mirages, little in that film looked real.

Jaybhatt · Post by **Jaybhatt** » 23 Jan 2012 15:04

A little relief that the discussion has moved from real life to reel rife, at least for a short time.

I am surprised that Nachiket found most of the film "Les Chevaliers du Ciel" unreal.

In the case of films, as also in other art areas, it is for the beholder to form his / her opinion on the work of art that he / she is viewing. However, as far as this film is concerned, the extended interviews with the Director, Gerard Pires, and the Producer, available on most DVD recordings, make it clear that the French Air Force (L'Armée de l'Air Française) gave substantial assistance to the film crew on all technical issues. The Armée de l'Air Française has a very efficient media department called SIRPA that deals with these matters.

Therefore, it would hardly be surprising if the control room sequence is real - after all, there were few state secrets that were disclosed in these scenes. The Orange air base, where the action scenes were filmed, has had a number of visits from senior IAF officers. I am sure most of them were also given a guided tour of the control room.

All I can say is : Allez les Bleus.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 23 Jan 2012 15:12

from 2:00 onward the MFDs on this E3 taking part in "operation red flag" seem able to track 100s of a/c and fired AAMs graphically too, with trailing motion lines to show direction ...

I assume this is real and used for red flag. not sure if it needs the ac to carry anything special.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p9vaibmyDHA

for a big a.c the F15 has a superb raised bubble canopy, giving the pilots a great view even to the rear.

member_22516 · Post by **member_22516** » 23 Jan 2012 17:58

Singha wrote:from 2:00 onward the MFDs on this E3 taking part in "operation red flag" seem able to track 100s of a/c and fired AAMs graphically too, with trailing motion lines to show direction ...

I assume this is real and used for red flag. not sure if it needs the ac to carry anything special.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p9vaibmyDHA

for a big a.c the F15 has a superb raised bubble canopy, giving the pilots a great view even to the rear.

I assume that it is as real as in "Les Chevaliers du Ciel" : only fake. It's only an advert for Red Flag or Awacs staff.
For instance, at the first part of the 'big scenario' all the blue forces and red forces are going straight forward in parallel lines ... it's completely not the way things go in such exercices :
-first awacs and tankers are on cap waiting for refuelling fighter,
-the fighters are divided in strike and a2a formations,
-fighters are scheduled on different targets, strike ones refuelling before crossing the battle front
-once radar contact, the aim is not to go too close but to practice BVR fight as much as possible, where the 4 aircraft of a blue formation will seperate and do some kind of hot and cold manovers to divide red agressors or to take them away from the corridor of the strike formation

But it is acknoledge that the Red Flag's brieffing/debrieffing room and real time follow-on is based on big screens displaying hundreds of aircraft with missiles shoots and kill resultst (but it's not onboard the Awacs).

member_22330 · Post by **member_22330** » 23 Jan 2012 18:46

Singha wrote:from 2:00 onward the MFDs on this E3 taking part in "operation red flag" seem able to track 100s of a/c and fired AAMs graphically too, with trailing motion lines to show direction ...

I assume this is real and used for red flag. not sure if it needs the ac to carry anything special.

Yes, each Red Flag participants carry an AIS (Airborne Instrumentation Sub system) pod (wing tip).Data from AIS is fed to NACTS(Nellis Air Combat Training System), this ~~data~~ picture is available to ground and air controllers (AWACS) in real time.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 23 Jan 2012 20:24

I thought so. the E3 probably uses this in training mode for such exercises only to give mission operators a feel for the craft and co-ordination of large scale formations.

Kovy · Post by **Kovy** » 24 Jan 2012 00:52

Singha wrote:did the ground control room we saw in les chevaliers du ciel wherein fighters and inflight missiles were shown in graphical formal for real?

AFAIK, 100% fake

from 2:00 onward the MFDs on this E3 taking part in "operation red flag" seem able to track 100s of a/c and fired AAMs graphically too, with trailing motion lines to show direction ...

I assume this is real and used for red flag. not sure if it needs the ac to carry anything special.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p9vaibmyDHA

for a big a.c the F15 has a superb raised bubble canopy, giving the pilots a great view even to the rear.

the awacs displays in operation red flag are also fake (the HUD views too)
BTW, have you noticed that the boss of the agressor which is supposed to fly a F-16 is actually seating in the backseat of of F-15 during incockpit view