Rafale & MMRCA News and Discussions-9 August, 2014

tushar_m · Post by **tushar_m** » 01 May 2015 08:33

Meteor missile fired from Rafale fighter jet for first time

The Directorate General of Armaments (DGA) announced the first launch of a guided air-to-air missile MBDA Meteor long-range, from a Rafale fighter. This test firing took place April 28, 2015 in the missile test area Biscarosse. The two-seater Rafale CEAM (Center for Airlines Experience Military) took off from the air base in Cazaux with a Meteor missile placed rear side spot (From the film unveiled to the press).

The device then joined the shooting area, then detected a target drone fired the missile that hit the target. The Meteor has followed its classic phase implementation. The missile was thrown from his point of carrying, then its “booster” is started, enabling it to reach sufficient speed to trigger the ramjet.

To test firing, the missile was not equipped with a warhead. It was replaced by a measurement box containing equipment to record data related to theft. According to the DGA that first shot is “very proud”. Other missile launches are planned for the Rafale. Indeed the missile is already qualified and it is now validated its integration on the Dassault fighter.

All carriage of points will be tested and different cases of shooting will be reproduced. The Meteor was developed by MBDA since 2003 to provide several European hunters (Gripen and Typhoon will be equipped) long range solution for air combat.The tender documents provided missile interception capability of an enemy plane flying at 3,000 meters above sea level, at a distance of 100 km in the rapprochement. The DGA does not communicate on the real scope of Meteor.

The Meteor is integrated on the Rafale in the development of the F3-R standard of the aircraft. The implementation of the new long-range missile is directly related to the integration of radar RBE2 active antenna whose Rafale is now fitted as standard. The Meteor and RBE2 will revolutionize air to air capabilities of the Rafale, which is currently limited by the range of the missile Mica (about 60 km). The first Meteor to be delivered to the Air Force and the Navy from 2018.

SOURCE: Air and Cosmos

tushar_m · Post by **tushar_m** » 01 May 2015 08:36

Qatar only have 12 Dassault Mirage 2000 as a fighter in their air-force.

Even if they sell their only fighters it will be only after 2018 when they start getting Rafale.
By the time we will be receiving rafale/LCA/FGFA???? .So its of no use for IAF.

srai · Post by **srai** » 01 May 2015 08:48

^^^

Rafale purchase has been drastically cut to 2 squadrons plus maybe one more squadron as an option. The IAF's original requirement for MMRCA was for 6 squadrons plus 3 more as options. Even if the Rafales start to arrive in 2018, it will take the IAF another couple of years to achieve full operational capability with it.

The biggest crunch for the IAF will be felt in the next 7 years when all of the MiG-21/27s retire. Current planned acquisitions will not match these retirements. A good substitute to fill in numbers somewhat "cheaply" would be more of existing types, such as Mirage-2000s and MiG-29s. They can make use of existing support infrastructure.

pragnya · Post by **pragnya** » 01 May 2015 09:10

srai wrote:^^^

Rafale purchase has been drastically cut to 2 squadrons plus maybe one more squadron as an option. The IAF's original requirement for MMRCA was for 6 squadrons plus 3 more as options. Even if the Rafales start to arrive in 2018, it will take the IAF another couple of years to achieve full operational capability with it.

by 2018, atleast one sq of LCA would be available based on a conservative prod schedule -

HAL is supposed to deliver 4 SPs by the end of the year.

2015-16 - 4
2016-17 - 6
2017-18 - 8
2018-19 - 12
2019-20 - 10 . total 40 (2 sq)

and by the time Rafales achieve full operation status, both the LCA sq should be part of the IAF.

there definitely would be at least another 36 order for Rafale post present 36 delivery - post 2020 IMO.

The biggest crunch for the IAF will be felt in the next 7 years when all of the MiG-21/27s retire. Current planned acquisitions will not match these retirements. A good substitute to fill in numbers somewhat "cheaply" would be more of existing types, such as Mirage-2000s and MiG-29s. They can make use of existing support infrastructure.

best way is to order atleast another 2/3 sq of LCA post FOC. this will not only keep the assembly line buzzing, streamlined, HR skills, QCs can be improved besides being 'resdy' for Mark 2.

LCA is more than good replcement for the Mig 27s besides 21s.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 01 May 2015 15:45

Prag,one presumes you are advocating MK-1s with whatever improvements are made. A big Q whether Mk-2 will be in series prod. from 2020. If the IAF also get at least 0ne sqd. of fast tracked FGFAs and additional/upgraded MKIs,BMos capable,the situation will be much healthier.As Srai said,another sqd. of bought out Rafales appears to be the planned option when affordable.

pragnya · Post by **pragnya** » 01 May 2015 16:42

Philip wrote:Prag,one presumes you are advocating MK-1s with whatever improvements are made.

all these would be FOC certified.

A big Q whether Mk-2 will be in series prod. from 2020.

right. that is why 2/3 sq of LCA 1 will cushion the IAF. while giving operational squadrons at a fraction of the cost of imports. also remember LCA is a single engined with high MTBO so expect a vastly reduced maintainence cost. this also allows HAL to master and hone the skills of personnel@prod, eliminate all hiccups even for a smooth future changeover to Mark 2. capital acquisitions being as they are - highly cost/time consumptive, no airforce can afford all imports. the bulk is made of low cost, single engined ones. with LCA @the cusp, it would be foolish to ignore the fact.

besides quoting RV, 8 sq would be needed between 2015-22.

a. Phase 1 (2015-2022)

i. Mig-21bis: 1
ii. Mig-21M/MF: 4
iii. Mig-27ML: 3
Total: 8 squadrons.

by 2020 as per my previos post, 4 sq (2 LCA+2Rafale) would be in place. i also expect 2 sq order for Rafale post 2020 after the present delivery. so another 2/3 sq of LCA 1s which are way much superior to Mig 27/21s will take care of the situation by 2022.

If the IAF also get at least 0ne sqd. of fast tracked FGFAs and additional/upgraded MKIs,BMos capable,the situation will be much healthier.As Srai said,another sqd. of bought out Rafales appears to be the planned option when affordable.

FGFA is a red herring atleast till 2020. even MP said it will take 10-15 years from now and even IAF is not very happy and has questioned some aspects of FGFA.

SU 30MKI availability, upgrade would be the key rather than another dose of import. they need 2 pilots when IAF is crying short of pilots. besides the engines are troubling even before their MTBO - already low 1000hrs - 'forcing' the IAF to sending them for overhauls even before the MTBO, adding to cost and questions wrt availability. AFAIK this is being addressed but will take time.

member_23891 · Post by **member_23891** » 01 May 2015 19:58

Philip Saar, please promote PakFA as FGFA has no future w/o Indian currency. I even doubt PakFA for it's capabilities & it's future looking at the state of russian economy. We can not afford to finance Russians R&D at the cost of our own prospective aerospace MIC. Now Russians are unreliable entity to deal with for any joint collaboration as Russians are now in bed with Chinese playing skillful mistress only. What a shame!

LCAs must come now as block format and firm order of 200+ be commited for the establishment of bigger production line of 24 LCAs/year to start with as viable solution. MOD must ensure the consensus between IAF, ADA & HAL to meet eachothers expectations for common cause of fighting capability as well as domestic aeropace developement. Import & imported assembly lines are no viable solutions for IAF.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 01 May 2015 20:11

Successful Meteor firing
http://rafalenews.blogspot.ca/2015/04/s ... iring.html¸

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 01 May 2015 20:12

Dassault on the Qatar deal
http://rafalenews.blogspot.ca/2015/04/d ... -deal.html

This is is the third Rafale order in 3 months for a total of 84 aircrafts.
Egypt : 24 aircrafts (Announced on 2015/02/12 ; contract signed 2015/02/16)
India : 36 aircrafts (Announced on 2015/04/10 ; contract still to be signed)
Qatar : 24 aircrafts (Announced on 2015/04/30 ; contract to be signed on 2015/05/04)

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 03 May 2015 15:17

Defence sources said such a step will not only allow the French firm to ramp up its production rate but will help it to meet offset obligations in India

Rafale deal: Dassault likely to enter into JV with Indian firm

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 03 May 2015 16:02

So production of the Rafale in India with a pvt. partner without TOT at what cost/aircraft? Talk about (India) snatching defeat from the jaws of victory!

Thakur_B · Post by **Thakur_B** » 03 May 2015 17:15

Austin wrote:Defence sources said such a step will not only allow the French firm to ramp up its production rate but will help it to meet offset obligations in India

Rafale deal: Dassault likely to enter into JV with Indian firm

That Ambani funding for election campaigns for both parties must have come in handy.

Raveen · Post by **Raveen** » 03 May 2015 17:30

Thakur_B wrote:
Austin wrote:Defence sources said such a step will not only allow the French firm to ramp up its production rate but will help it to meet offset obligations in India

Rafale deal: Dassault likely to enter into JV with Indian firm
That Ambani funding for election campaigns for both parties must have come in handy.

You are absolutely spot on - I mean after all, HAL has proven to be such a capable production agency and a knowledge sink for TOT.

They are experts on know how to manufacture the screw driver to screw in the panel that came in from overseas, or if the panel was made in house, how to hammer it into a roughly acceptable form.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 03 May 2015 17:35

Any idea of what a Meteor round costs in comparison with our Astra-1/2?

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 03 May 2015 17:51

Saudi's paid about $ 3 Million per round (perhaps slightly more) as per Janes (Janes Missiles and Rockets, Feb. 2015 report titled " Saudi Arabia becomes the first meteor export customer"). Thats the only export for the missile so far. Its hands down the most expensive Fighter missile (A2A) in the world to a point where those that developed it can only afford a handful with some of its biggest developing partners (UK) pushing fleet induction to 2018 and perhaps beyond. Don't know what an ASTRA costs but 2-3 ASTRAs for one Meteor isn't going to be too unreasonable an assumption..

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 03 May 2015 18:32

Tx. One doesn't know whether the IAF has asked for the Meteor option.

Anthony Hines · Post by **Anthony Hines** » 03 May 2015 18:36

If at $3 mil per round, assuming kill ratio of 3:1 and resulting in destruction of a $50 mil A/c, it is still cost effective in a war of attrition.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 03 May 2015 18:40

Anthony Hines wrote:If at $3 mil per round, assuming kill ratio of 3:1 and resulting in destruction of a $50 mil A/c, it is still cost effective in a war of attrition.

The problem is that at $3 Million a round it limits your overall missile loads..Its not a radically upgraded seeker that is going to serve them well into the next couple of decades. The Japanese that want to actually use the platform are going to put their own AESA seeker in there. A MICA will serve both my Rafale and Mirage fleets while the Meteor eats into my overall missile inventory due to cost and only serves one platform (36 aircraft). ASTRA is the ultimate solution since it will be shared by all platforms in the IAF...The cost_to target analogy is ok for strategic targets (such as ABM for example) but in a large multi-front war your actual inventory and how much you have standardized does play an important role...and this is a reason why most air-forces have slowly moved and standardized to one BVR and one WVR weapon for its entire fast jet fleet...The ultimate acquisition from a multi-role fleet point will be determined by how much the ratio between smart and dumb bombs is..If the ratio is high it means better tactical flexibility with a smaller squadron strength. If it is low, you need a lot many more sorties to accomplish your missions. Buying 3 Million dollar missiles, and operating 3-4 BVR missile types eats into that so the overall goal appears to be (and rightly so) to standardize into the ASTRA and make that into a world class product. They appear to be headed that way at a good pace (recent testing). Hopefully the long term IAF plans involve ASTRA integration on the rafale.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 04 May 2015 10:17

Philip wrote:Any idea of what a Meteor round costs in comparison with our Astra-1/2?

So that Astra may be canned in favor of the Meteor.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 04 May 2015 11:08

Perish the thought! Astra surely is intended for widespread use across most of our fighters from MKIs to LCAs,which will also bring its cost down substantially and allow it to be produced in larger numbers.Can't wait for the longer-ranged Astra-2 to arrive. If you've read the MIG-29 details posted in other tds,the Israeli experience too,our MIG-29UGs with existing Russian AAMs -and the MKIs equipped with the same,will be quite adequate to deal with Paki F-16s,etc.,even now.Once Astra arrives,it will give us an increased indigenous capability.Two air shows ago,Shiv and I were told by the Astra boffin,that this missile would make a huge diff. in the IAF's air-dominance capability.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 04 May 2015 11:16

I doubt if we could integrate Astra with Rafale because if this is an outright purchase with no TOT or Source Code Access then Integrating any RF missile would be a big challange.

Alternate we would have to pay to the French to get Astra integrated with Rafale.

Thakur_B · Post by **Thakur_B** » 04 May 2015 11:35

Pratyush wrote:
Philip wrote:Any idea of what a Meteor round costs in comparison with our Astra-1/2?
So that Astra may be canned in favor of the Meteor.

Its Philip saar, so Astra would have to be canned in favour of next generation R-77 onlee

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 04 May 2015 11:38

Dont forget Rafale to be canned in favor of upgraded MiG-29s.

Gyan · Post by **Gyan** » 04 May 2015 11:51

Astra will be to our tactical missiles what Agni was to our strategic missiles. Around 10,000 Astra missiles and their direct variants will be required.

Thakur_B · Post by **Thakur_B** » 04 May 2015 11:56

Karan M wrote:Dont forget Rafale to be canned in favor of upgraded MiG-29s.

Because Rafale has been in service for 15 years and is already oudated, unlike the upgraded MiG-29 which are as good as MiG-35, which is a brand new aircraft, hence MiG-29 UPG >> Rafale F3
<insert random rant about ebil amreeka and ze west>
<insert rabble about ze C-17 is 14 times more expensive than Il-76 and has 1/3rd the availability>
<insert random plug for armata>

Thakur_B · Post by **Thakur_B** » 04 May 2015 11:58

Gyan wrote:Astra will be to our tactical missiles what Agni was to our strategic missiles. Around 10,000 Astra missiles and their direct variants will be required.

I disagree. Nag project is what can be compared to Agni. The MLPGM family is largely a spin off of Nag project.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 04 May 2015 13:23

Thakur_B wrote:
Karan M wrote:Dont forget Rafale to be canned in favor of upgraded MiG-29s.
Because Rafale has been in service for 15 years and is already oudated, unlike the upgraded MiG-29 which are as good as MiG-35, which is a brand new aircraft, hence MiG-29 UPG >> Rafale F3
<insert random rant about ebil amreeka and ze west>
<insert rabble about ze C-17 is 14 times more expensive than Il-76 and has 1/3rd the availability>
<insert random plug for armata>

Uh oh. You forgot the rant about hanging the dutty brown SDRE DPSU people as versus the greats that come from UAZ, MiG etc who are herrows who must be prostrated in front of. How some air marshal after a few drinks told how he would have single handedly made the LCA>>F-16 but oh noes, he was denied.

How Putin the Greats MIC does everything nice & sugar & spice but SDREs need to be taught a lesson etc. And finally, how the IN must buy Kilos instead of Scorpenes, how the IA should buy Armatas, how the IAF should buy Ka-28s or whutever. In fact, lets just call ourselves Russians, do namaskar, pranaam towards the Kremlin 5 times a day, and be done with it.

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 04 May 2015 14:22

http://www.business-standard.com/articl ... 303_1.html
Rafale negotiations to start this month: Parrikar

"The government-to-government committee will be set up which will begin negotiations on the (Rafale) deal. The negotiations will start anytime in May and we have to conclude them as early as possible," Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar told PTI here.

Jean-Yves Le Drian is scheduled to visit India on May 5 and hold talks with Parrikar and National Security Advisor Ajit Doval on May 6 to carry forward the proposed deal.

Last month, during Prime Minister Narendra Modi's visit to Paris, India and France had agreed to get into a government to government contract for 36 Rafale jets in fly-away condition keeping the critical requirement of the Indian Air Force in mind.

The deal is estimated to be over USD 6 billion and will have about 30-50 per cent offset.

Parrikar said the government-appointed committee will complete the negotiations in a "time-bound manner".

"He (Drian) will visit only for the purpose of working out the modalities and to take the process forward. We will not be directly involved in future talks. The committee is being appointed for it by two governments to kick-start the process and fix the modalities," he said.

French defence major Dassault Aviation, makers of Rafale, is likely to enter into a joint venture with state-run HAL or any private player to set up a base here for augmenting its existing production line in Merignac in France, defence sources said.

Again, neither is 36 certain nor is *made in India* dead or limited to 36.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 04 May 2015 16:06

How is the "offset" unique to the Make in India? Has it not been the policy to have offsets for large weapon deals like the rest of the world?

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 04 May 2015 23:10

pankajs, Its about the 36 planes costing $6B.
Its about the 30-50% offset for them.
Its about Dassault setting up Indian facility to augment the France one.
Essentially Dassault wants the Indian facility to be the offset ($1.8B - $3B).

GeorgeWelch · Post by **GeorgeWelch** » 05 May 2015 00:08

brar_w wrote:How is the "offset" unique to the Make in India? Has it not been the policy to have offsets for large weapon deals like the rest of the world?

Depending on the deal, offsets can be any money that is spent in India.

For instance travel expenses have been included in offsets.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 05 May 2015 00:20

Yeah that is my general impression as well. Traditionally (in international defense trade) an Offset is work that you contract out as a fraction of the overall size of the order. It can be any work, it doesn't have to be system specific. For example in canada a dassault can offer to sell the rafale and as part of its offset give out a contract for panels, doors etc for its business jets. This is usually how offsets work in most deals..Not all offset (or any for that matter) is product specific otherwise it would be very tough to compete.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 05 May 2015 02:31

Its also size of the company/firm dependent. A Boeing or Airbus has many times more option when it comes to meeting offsets than a General Atomics or even Lockheed or Dassault, especially if you have a product that you expect to market it all over the world. In some instances a lot many OEM's have complied with offset requirements that were close to 200% of the contract value (Canada - C-130 iirc) because it had the business that it could offload and the Canadians had the industry that could absorb the work without making it cost prohibitive for both.

TOT is usually less rigid/standardized with each user defining its own requirements..I don't think a standard TOT policy exists for most users..

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 05 May 2015 11:33

here is the quid pro quo Qatar got for the 24 rafales.

The accord coincides with the announcement that Qatar Airlines will have a number of new slots in France to fly to and from. That news has been criticised by Air France which says Gulf based firms enjoy “colossal subventions” and therefore do not need the government’s help in an already crowded and competitive market.

--
east european, italian,african and portugese airlines are already toast in front of the gulf airline trio. air india is reduced to a feeder airline. most other routes make losses. I think they are setting their sights to gnaw at the big boys - air france, lufthansa, klm and BA using arms sales as offsets. none of these euros are in great shape and some strategic stake sales to the gulf might be in order in preparation for a eventual sale like football clubs. only turkish airlines seems to be carrying on with equally big ambitions, they run a huge network.

the opening of the polar routes and non-stop services from gulf to anywhere in world by 777, A330 and A380 threatends singapore airlines and cathay also. no longer is going to america a toss between singapore/HK in easy with long layovers or the rude german/british/french combo.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 05 May 2015 11:40

Saab reveals enhanced radar for Gripen C/D fighter

As well as enhancing the detection distance, the Mk4 radar will be able to detect and track smaller targets at the same ranges. While at high altitude the in-service Mk3 radar can detect a target with a radar cross-section (RCS) of approximately 0.4 m 2 (the size of a medium-altitude, long-endurance unmanned aircraft) at a distance of 'X', at the same range the Mk4 system will be able to see a target with an RCS of 0.1 m 2 (the approximate size of an air-to-air missile or 'stealth' aircraft').

In addition to improving detection ranges, the Mk4 will allow for the full integration of modern weapon systems, such as the Raytheon Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air Missile (AMRAAM) C-7, the Raytheon AIM-9X Sidewinder, and the MBDA Meteor beyond-visual-range missile.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 05 May 2015 11:57

The offsets could perhaps be transferable to other mil projects like the Indo-French SRSAM or does it have to be only restricted to the product on hand? had it been the Typhoon,then a TOT/unit for the EJ-200TVC engine,ideal for the AMCA would've been a great win.I'm sure that a way will be found esp. that decision has been made and both sides are very eager to close the deal asap.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 05 May 2015 12:03

Austin wrote:Saab reveals enhanced radar for Gripen C/D fighter

As well as enhancing the detection distance, the Mk4 radar will be able to detect and track smaller targets at the same ranges. While at high altitude the in-service Mk3 radar can detect a target with a radar cross-section (RCS) of approximately 0.4 m 2 (the size of a medium-altitude, long-endurance unmanned aircraft) at a distance of 'X', at the same range the Mk4 system will be able to see a target with an RCS of 0.1 m 2 (the approximate size of an air-to-air missile or 'stealth' aircraft').

In addition to improving detection ranges, the Mk4 will allow for the full integration of modern weapon systems, such as the Raytheon Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air Missile (AMRAAM) C-7, the Raytheon AIM-9X Sidewinder, and the MBDA Meteor beyond-visual-range missile.

Depends on what x is.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 05 May 2015 15:44

The offsets could perhaps be transferable to other mil projects like the Indo-French SRSAM or does it have to be only restricted to the product on hand?

Yeah that is how offsets work usually. Its very rarely 100% product specific or else how will you go about marketing the aircraft to 10 different countries? You'll end up with a low volume product (Rafale, Typhoon, Gripen etc) and have the same parts being produced at different locations. Companies use their overall portfolio to make sure that there are products whose contracts to sub-contractors can be outsourced to the country receiving the offset. If there are landing gear parts for business jets, then dassault can give out some contract as part of the offset. Lockheed did that with its C-130 line for years. Boeing and Airbus do that all the time and use their very large commercial business to comply with offset requirements. In the F-35's case South Korean and japan wanted 5th generation design and tunnel data (various configurations lockheed tried) as an offset, plus thousands of man-hours of design consulting in addition to a Satellite technology transfer in the case of South Korea.

The reports emerging indicate to a different hybrid sort of deal however, with dassault looking to tie up with an Indian company (HAL but I guess they have been wanting to tie up with Reliance for a long time as well) in order to outsource some production work so it remains to be seen whether that work is rafale specific or dassault and partners (Thales, Snecma etc specific).

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 05 May 2015 15:48

Karan M wrote:
Depends on what x is.

Its most likely software based discrimination and targeting improvements so its most likely better capability (more precise targeting and better against lower RCS's (from 5m2 to 1 m2 etc ) at similar ranges..Most radars get these improvements over their life.

Mort Walker · Post by **Mort Walker** » 06 May 2015 02:12

^^^We don't know if it is software based discrimination or "targeting improvements" (what does that mean in this context?) for better detection. It can be newer receiver components or better clutter suppression and signal processing improvements.
Ideally, x would be the range of your max range BVR mijjle in case that mijjle has to be use it in a guided mode to reach the target.