IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Guddu · Post by **Guddu** » 25 Sep 2016 21:43

This is a good opportunity to bomb pak and see if unkil still wants to give the F-18 line

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 25 Sep 2016 22:33

Christopher Sidor wrote:It seems likely that uncle is going to dump one of its other deadend assembly line F-A/18 hornet into India.

No. Supposedly Boeing is proposing to build a new assembly line for India. Under those conditions I doubt it would remain competitive against the Rafale.

Just like at the start of the IT era IBM and HP were dumping obsolete computers at prime rate in India now USA is going to dump even more obsolete technologies into India. Chinook being the prime example.

Chinook obsolete? Where did you get this notion from? Its no more obsolete than the equally venerable Mi-17. The US Army, for example, plans to operate the Chinook all the way to 2060.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 25 Sep 2016 23:20

Christopher Sidor wrote:
Manish_Sharma wrote:http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/new ... 362719.cms

It seems likely that uncle is going to dump one of its other deadend assembly line F-A/18 hornet into India. Just like at the start of the IT era IBM and HP were dumping obsolete computers at prime rate in India now USA is going to dump even more obsolete technologies into India. Chinook being the prime example.

Errrrrrr.......

That article is from May.

Much water had passed since then.

Christopher Sidor · Post by **Christopher Sidor** » 26 Sep 2016 00:47

^^^^^
I hope so.

Manish_Sharma · Post by **Manish_Sharma** » 26 Sep 2016 01:34

Rafale vs SU-30MKI

Top speed of sukhoi 30mki is 2,120km/h, while top speed of rafale is 2,130km/h. (But difference of 10 in speed did not create an impressive difference between both the giant fighters).

Lets talk about range....
Rafale target up to a range of 3,700km. And sukhoi can target up to a range of 3,000km.
(hmm... this is creating a difference).

Its length time...
Rafale is 15m long, while Sukhoi is 22m long.

https://www.quora.com/Which-one-is-bett ... khoi-30MKi

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 26 Sep 2016 02:20

At some times these analysis will trend away from mirroring pointless smartphone comparisons and actually consider tactical performance and mission specifics

The author throws a range number out there for the Rafale, but fails to communicate how many hard points are taken up by bags and what the limited performance is with them. The MKI does its maximum range on internal fuel while a medium fighter such as the rafale gets those impressive looking ranges and combat radius with a lot of external fuel. Same thing with supersonic performance where top speed is a very very small portion of the envelope and supersonic radius may be many times more critical.

Anytime you see medium fighters such as the Rafale, Shornet, and Gripen-E claim impressive heavy fighter like combat radius's take a look at the hard points being committed to fuel and the flight profiles. Unless you have considerable low observable features you won't be cruising for a long time at medium altitude given the sort of extended defensive coverage advanced adversaries can bring to bear.

Amoghvarsha · Post by **Amoghvarsha** » 26 Sep 2016 02:57

titash wrote:Rajat Pandit shows us how's it done

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 491180.cms

India will get the first Rafale in three years, with all 36 touching down by early-2022. Till then, in the event of a conflict, India will have to deploy two Sukhoi-30MKIs to tackle each Pakistani F-16 due to the latter's superior weapons package, including 80-km range missiles. But once the Rafales are inducted, Pakistan will have to deploy two F-16s for each of them

I realize the average reader by definition is "average", but still...

Haan Ji 2 MKIs for 1 F 16?Really?/?

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 26 Sep 2016 03:18

brar_w wrote:The MKI does its maximum range on internal fuel while a medium fighter such as the rafale gets those impressive looking ranges and combat radius with a lot of external fuel. Same thing with supersonic performance where top speed is a very very small portion of the envelope and supersonic radius may be many times more.

Additionally, the author has no idea of the top speed of the two planes. The Rafale's top speed is 1.8M and it will stay that way thanks to its fixed geometry intake. The top speed of the MKIs is likely to go up from its current 2.0 M if their engines are uprated in their upcoming MLUs.

Manish_Sharma · Post by **Manish_Sharma** » 26 Sep 2016 04:36

At 00:09 seconds it says :
Aircraft per 1 billion USD
(based on Unit Flyaway cost)
Which shows 5 jsf vs 13 Rafale.

At 00:12 seconds it says :
Sorties per day per 1 billion procurement USD
(based on unit flyaway cost)
Which shows 2 jsv vs 26 Rafale

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 26 Sep 2016 07:25

With 3 large drop tanks or even 2, given we have paltry 6 refuelers, rafale top speed acceleration and max g aoa will be more limited vs paper clean spec.
The su30 with all internal fuel will be heavy but no drag and less perf penalty. And 2 or 3 more heavy pylons for munitions.

Its not a fair comparison against flanker or eagle with cft...these heavies are streets ahead.

Kashi · Post by **Kashi** » 26 Sep 2016 08:19

Amoghvarsha wrote:Haan Ji 2 MKIs for 1 F 16?Really?/?

I am surprised he did not say 2 MKI for 1 JF-17 Block XXX.

Cybaru · Post by **Cybaru** » 26 Sep 2016 08:50

Why are we wasting bandwidth on posting trivialized bs comparison? Manish sharma did you find the article from quora you posted informative?

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 26 Sep 2016 10:09

^^^ I was just about to say that. Posters please desist from gathering the crap from all over the internet and dumping it here. The Su-30 vs. Rafale, Rafale vs JSF comparisons are BS of the highest order. Please try to validate the information before posting.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 26 Sep 2016 10:13

Why do I ee (this time in a media article) but often on discussion forums (teh last time was on DFI) the idea that the make and model of defender aircraft sent up to defend against intruders are decided by the make and model of the attacker.

To me the picture that comes to mind is ACM Arup Raha standing at the LoC with a pair of binoculars and spotting an F-16. He immediately radios a base and says - send 2 Sukhois. Next he sees one JF-17. He radios back to say "Send 2 MiG 21s."

This is not how it works

V_Raman · Post by **V_Raman** » 26 Sep 2016 10:14

F16/F18 assembly line will be good for india. If we had gotten the F4 phantom assembly line when it was offered, we would not be hit with so many production line issues now. F4 phantoms served till Desert Storm and with Germany till 2013!!

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 26 Sep 2016 10:27

these things have so many parts and 100s of suppliers, at best we get to do final assembly and the body panels...rest of the 100s of suppliers cannot be affordably set up here and will still be imported albeit some could be slowly pindigenized under offsets . in short I think no more than turkey assembling F-solah and so on....

will khan chacha give us TOT for radar and EW - never.
will khan chacha give us design secrets of GE404+ level - never , they will tell us what formula and materials to follow to make some of it thats all.

there has never been any alternative to local R&D for key high end items

Kashi · Post by **Kashi** » 26 Sep 2016 10:32

Singha wrote:there has never been any alternative to local R&D for key high end items

+108

This in nutshell underscores the importance of LCA of Dhruv of LUH of Rudra of Arjun of ATAGS of Kaveri of our missiles of our space launch probes.

If we design it and we make it, we can refine it and improve upon it.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 26 Sep 2016 10:34

I saw a news item that said Rafale has 700 suppliers, less than 2500 of HAL Tejas. That is surely because those 700 must be tier 3 suppliers supplying finished products. Each Tier 3 supplier will themselves have half a dozen Tier 2 suppliers and there will also be Tier 1s supplying to tier 2 and 3

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 26 Sep 2016 11:09

shiv wrote:I saw a news item that said Rafale has 700 suppliers, less than 2500 of HAL Tejas. That is surely because those 700 must be tier 3 suppliers supplying finished products. Each Tier 3 supplier will themselves have half a dozen Tier 2 suppliers and there will also be Tier 1s supplying to tier 2 and 3

Could be a result of greater vertical and horizontal integration within the French industry. Suppliers X, Y & Z could be supplying different components to the program while still being owned by the same industrial group.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 26 Sep 2016 12:04

"Apres moi,le deluge".Famous words of the Sun King Louis 14th. "Apres Rafale.le deuge" too!
Pak's Uri attack will only add momentum to more deals and fighter manufacturers will be rubbing their palms in glee.

http://www.defencenews.in/article/Forei ... _Woo_India

Foreign Jet-Fighter Makers Woo India
Sunday, September 25, 2016
By: Wall Street Journal

India is being offered blueprints to advanced combat aircraft by the world’s aerospace companies, a move unthinkable even a decade ago, as New Delhi gets ready to place another multibillion-dollar air force order.

India’s aging military jet fleet desperately needs an upgrade, which analysts say may spur it to place an order worth more than $10 billion in the next year. Hoping for an edge, and encouraged by a recent law that allows 100% foreign ownership of local defense firms, jet-fighter makers such as Lockheed Martin Corp., Boeing Co. and Saab AB are rushing in with offers to set up production lines to India.

Efforts to give India unprecedented access to jet fighter know-how illustrate the country’s rising importance to the West as China’s power increases, analysts say.

India, until a decade ago, was trying stubbornly to build its own jets, after the U.S. and Japan imposed sanctions following its nuclear tests in 1998, which broke U.S. nonproliferation laws and sparked tensions with Pakistan. U.S. companies were blocked from giving India the technology it needed.

Relations between India and the U.S. have improved since, as both share a goal to contain China’s military. India has struck deals with the U.S. to buy everything from Apache helicopters to transport planes and artillery, lifting the country to India’s second-biggest defense trading partner behind Russia.

“China’s rise has changed the equation,” said Pushan Das, a fellow with the Observer Research Foundation, a policy think tank based in New Delhi. Industry experts estimate India needs over 300 new combat jets in the next 15 years.

It could be a while before a deal is struck. Successful bidders also face the challenge of setting up a jet-manufacturing system from scratch. Previous such attempts have failed.

A deal struck in 2012 with France’s Dassault Aviation SA to build Rafale fighters in India fell through last year following disagreements, and was replaced with a smaller plan to import 36 jets. That plan finally was approved by India’s government, and an agreement was signed on Friday.

Similarly, efforts to co-develop a next generation fighter with Russia’s Sukhoi stalled over cost disputes, while a third indigenous jet program aiming to deliver 120 light combat aircraft is behind schedule.

Those programs relied on state-run Hindustan Aeronautics to build and design jets. Defense experts say the company faces a skills shortage as its best engineers are spread thinly across projects that include retrofitting old Russian and French jet fighters and building helicopters and drones. The company didn’t respond to requests for comment.

Impatient with the delays, India relaxed foreign investment laws and defense procurement rules to kick-start a privately managed jet-fighter industry as its air force struggles to keep its aging fighter fleet in the sky, including MiG-21 jets bought in the 1960s. Since then, U.S. manufacturers Lockheed and Boeing, and Sweden’s Saab, have proposed building jets with Indian partners.

The U.S. hasn’t sold jet fighters to India before, with India’s air force preferring European and Russian manufacturers.

Lockheed also has proposed moving its F-16 production line in Fort Worth, Texas, to India, and training more than 5,000 locals. Its bid also is critical to strengthening military cooperation between the U.S. and India, said Abhay Paranjape, Lockheed’s director of business development in India.

“If you ever want to fight together, you need to train together, and to do that you need to fly the same kind of aircraft,” Mr. Paranjape said. U.S. industry officials said per-unit costs could drop by as much as 20% in India compared with the U.S., potentially driving fresh sales outside India.

Still, it could take Lockheed roughly four years to transfer the Fort Worth F-16 line, which is slated for closure soon when remaining orders for the aging jet type tail off, industry officials said.

A logistics-sharing treaty, signed last month, is the first of three agreements the U.S. wants India to sign to allow for a greater transfer of U.S. military technology, potentially strengthening Lockheed and Boeing’s bids to sell jets in India.

Boeing’s India President Pratyush Kumar said it was aiming to help India build F/A-18 fighters and develop jets in the long term.

Saab’s plan would have it build a second manufacturing plant in Sweden for its Gripen E jet type, train Indian technicians there, and then dismantle and ship the plant to India, said its Indian country head Jan Widerström. Saab hopes to gain an advantage by offering the blueprints for the Gripen’s advanced radar system, Mr. Widerström said.

Saab and its suppliers could help train 20,000 local technicians in coming years if their bid is successful, and build anywhere from 100 to 200 jets for the Indian air force and export customers in places such as Thailand and Malaysia, said Mr. Widerström.

“We’re offering to set up aerospace capability in India for the next 100 years,” he said.

JayS · Post by **JayS** » 26 Sep 2016 18:46

^^

India is being offered blueprints to advanced combat aircraft by the world’s aerospace companies

“We’re offering to set up aerospace capability in India for the next 100 years,”

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 26 Sep 2016 20:14

http://www.combataircraft.net/2016/09/2 ... er-offers/

Mihir · Post by **Mihir** » 26 Sep 2016 23:37

brar_w wrote:At some times these analysis will trend away from mirroring pointless smartphone comparisons and actually consider tactical performance and mission specifics

Bullshit sir! Everyone knows that all fighter combat occurs one-on-one at 15,000 feet and at standard temperature and pressure. Fighters do not operate together as units. They do not fight in conjunction with supporting assets in terms of EW, SEAD, AEW&C, IFR, or land-based air defences.

A leading aviation expert has pointed out that "in the event of a conflict, India will have to deploy two Sukhoi-30MKIs to tackle each Pakistani F-16 due to the latter's superior weapons package, including 80-km range missiles". That makes complete sense. How it works is that an Su-30MKI will fire an R-73 at a Pakistani F-16. Because it lacks range, another Su-30MKI flying 35 km ahead of the first one will catch it, refuel it, and launch it again at the F-16. This will nullify the AMRAAM's range advantage.

Atmavik · Post by **Atmavik** » 27 Sep 2016 00:04

Mihir wrote: How it works is that an Su-30MKI will fire an R-73 at a Pakistani F-16. Because it lacks range, another Su-30MKI flying 35 km ahead of the first one will catch it, refuel it, and launch it again at the F-16. This will nullify the AMRAAM's range advantage.

kit · Post by **kit** » 27 Sep 2016 00:40

Amoghvarsha wrote:
titash wrote:Rajat Pandit shows us how's it done

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 491180.cms

India will get the first Rafale in three years, with all 36 touching down by early-2022. Till then, in the event of a conflict, India will have to deploy two Sukhoi-30MKIs to tackle each Pakistani F-16 due to the latter's superior weapons package, including 80-km range missiles. But once the Rafales are inducted, Pakistan will have to deploy two F-16s for each of them

I realize the average reader by definition is "average", but still...

Haan Ji 2 MKIs for 1 F 16?Really?/?

.. this guy truly has his brain in the other end if he has one

prahaar · Post by **prahaar** » 27 Sep 2016 00:59

Is Rafale likely to carry ALCM Brahmos?

Khalsa · Post by **Khalsa** » 27 Sep 2016 01:09

Gentelmen

I need some help from the likes of you who have the expertise in the area I am about to ask you to help me in.
My stance is and has been that this 36 is a much much better deal than anything else i.e 126 with Manufacturing etc.
however that is a nice argument to present to folks who understand domestic manufacturing and have a nerve that twitches every time LCA is not given the support it deserves.

However its enough for the following scenario.

Everywhere now the ONE BIG thing that is being thrown up is
that the previous govt was gonna get 126 for 11 Billion and this Govt has got 36 for 8 Billion.

I need bullet point arguments as ammo to help me defeat this wave of immature comparison between the two.

I know somethings right off the bat such the Meteor Missile is part of this package that was not part of the previous one.
I know we have gone for Performance Based Logistics which the previous deal did not account for.

Now I need more...

can you please help me out why 8 for 36 is not the same as 11 for 126.
Even if 11 Billion for 126 was a dreamed up figure and has been factually proven incorrect or sitting in la la Land then let me know.
i.e if we have sussed it out that it would have cost more in the end then let me know.

Amoghvarsha · Post by **Amoghvarsha** » 27 Sep 2016 01:40

kit wrote:
Amoghvarsha wrote:

Haan Ji 2 MKIs for 1 F 16?Really?/?
.. this guy truly has his brain in the other end if he has one

I was thinking about what will we do with the R77s Astras R27s we have.

Amoghvarsha · Post by **Amoghvarsha** » 27 Sep 2016 01:41

Mihir wrote:
brar_w wrote:At some times these analysis will trend away from mirroring pointless smartphone comparisons and actually consider tactical performance and mission specifics
Bullshit sir! Everyone knows that all fighter combat occurs one-on-one at 15,000 feet and at standard temperature and pressure. Fighters do not operate together as units. They do not fight in conjunction with supporting assets in terms of EW, SEAD, AEW&C, IFR, or land-based air defences.

A leading aviation expert has pointed out that "in the event of a conflict, India will have to deploy two Sukhoi-30MKIs to tackle each Pakistani F-16 due to the latter's superior weapons package, including 80-km range missiles". That makes complete sense. How it works is that an Su-30MKI will fire an R-73 at a Pakistani F-16. Because it lacks range, another Su-30MKI flying 35 km ahead of the first one will catch it, refuel it, and launch it again at the F-16. This will nullify the AMRAAM's range advantage.

Saar,

Will we fire the R77s the R27s and the Astra in Diwali?

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 27 Sep 2016 02:31

and this guy has lost his mind too
http://www.rediff.com/news/column/four- ... 160923.htm

he can be now the khujli wala of defence news

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 27 Sep 2016 02:39

Flight Test evaluation excerpts by a FAB test pilot who evaluated the Rafale back when the Brazilians were considering it. Must read for the capabilities that this fighter possesses versus what is just advertised and may not be operational.

Flight test- Rafale

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 27 Sep 2016 02:47

Parrikar really needs to stop the farce of a 2nd MMRCA type and commit to the Rafale. We have taken this, now double or triple the order & ensure a long term spares purchase & production agreement.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 27 Sep 2016 02:53

It would be one thing if we were getting F-35s. But buying F-16s (sensor performance at best = Rafale, airframe perfomance significantly behind), F-18 (sensor performance ahead, but airframe performance behind), Gripen (at par sensor wise, behind airframe wise), EF (arguably at par, but behind in range).. what exactly is the big advantage? US will sanction us at the drop of a hat, if a Huma type rules the roost and we blow up nukes. Just bizarre.
Parrikar/Jaitley really really needs to get out of penny pinching mode and commit to one proper airframe with long term support.
We didn't "lose the AF" because Mirage 2000's aren't made in India. Indigenize key rotables, spares & stock up others. And also sign an agreement which is ironclad for long term support - come what may (nuke tests, war etc).

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 27 Sep 2016 03:05

titash wrote:Rajat Pandit shows us how's it done

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 491180.cms

India will get the first Rafale in three years, with all 36 touching down by early-2022. Till then, in the event of a conflict, India will have to deploy two Sukhoi-30MKIs to tackle each Pakistani F-16 due to the latter's superior weapons package, including 80-km range missiles. But once the Rafales are inducted, Pakistan will have to deploy two F-16s for each of them

I realize the average reader by definition is "average", but still...

we have to understand this guy knows little of defence topics, routinely runs down indian programs and just regurgitates whatever he is told.

however, lets assume that what he said is true.

in this case, assuming the worst case scenario, that Su-30s dont currently deploy AA-12s but AA-10s & we have superior numbers (rising as serviceability rises), and the Su-30s have longer ranged radars plus datalinks plus IRST, the IAF may well send up larger number of Su-30s firing braces of SARH AA-10s and IR AA-10s for highest Pk. Two Su-30s firing from different axis may well be a winner in IAF sims. its up to the IAF to ensure a near 100% pk. they have been exercising against RSAF & USAF & other F-16 operators. they want confirmed kills.

Now two things.
First, this fellow should not have been talking of it.

Second, the fellow didn't even bother understanding the nuances and just went waah-waah.

for instance, astra is around the corner. its a 80km class missile. what then of "superior weapons fit" bla bla.
astra + R27 multispectral seekers will be a hard combination to counter.

Third, the fellow could have just as well made up the whole thing.

Amoghvarsha · Post by **Amoghvarsha** » 27 Sep 2016 03:05

Karan M wrote:Parrikar really needs to stop the farce of a 2nd MMRCA type and commit to the Rafale. We have taken this, now double or triple the order & ensure a long term spares purchase & production agreement.

I doubt.I think it will e the F/A 18.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 27 Sep 2016 03:07

It will be a farce.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 27 Sep 2016 03:28

Buying an old hag like the F-18 will be a mockery of mental acumen when we've just bought Raffys!
Reports also say that it will take 4 yrs to transfer the F-18 line to India.So when FGFAs are being built in large numbers wexwill be the last US bumchum in the world churning out its crap.

What signal also does that reflect of the LCA,whose production is starting? That the LCA is inferior to a 1980 hag with an overdose of
makeup? Then why not scrap the LCA right now?
Instead build more LCA prod facilities with pvt entities who are to build either of the 2 US hags.It would firmly establish an Indian prod. capability at a far lower cost .

krishna_krishna · Post by **krishna_krishna** » 27 Sep 2016 03:39

The F-35 which was peddled here by some is still junk :

http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companie ... spartanntp

shravanp · Post by **shravanp** » 27 Sep 2016 03:54

Afterall some khujli walahs are also needed in defense reporting as eggspurts. Very jokey!

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 27 Sep 2016 04:20

The F-35 will ultimately come good because umreeka will throw enough dinero at it, that it will finally do most of what it will be claimed to do.
Russia took a look at the complexity, all up stealth etc and went with something less challenging.
The Chinese as usual copied and called it equal equal.