VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
Post Reply
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18274
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Post by Rakesh »

Women, Men or Whoever....just get them in. Obviously, without lowering entrance and training standards. See below. I hope things have changed for the better since this article.

The Indian Air Force’s Big Problem: Not Enough Pilots!
https://thediplomat.com/2015/04/the-ind ... gh-pilots/
April 30, 2015
Furthermore, the IAF’s current fighter aircraft to pilot ratio is 1 : 0.81.”Our sanctioned strength for [combat] pilots is less than that of our adversaries,” the report said, adding that the Pakistan Air Force’s fighter aircraft to pilot ratio was 1 : 2.5, IHS Jane’s Defence Weekly reported.
And this is another growing problem. A problem big enough that even the Air Chief mentioned it.

Not enough done in aviation medicine field: IAF Chief RKS Bhadauria
https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/ne ... 057778.cms
Nov 14, 2019
The IAF chief also spoke about the fatigue and lack of sleep among pilots due to mobile phones and social media. "Technology has not only just revolutionised the working environment but also the social ethos and customs. Mobiles, iPads, etc. are just with everybody. And we have to find ways to discourage young pilots to stay away from this late at night. We have to find ways to recognizing who hasn't had the enough sleep," said the Air Chief Marshal.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18274
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Post by Rakesh »

Rafale verdict will have positive impact on overall military procurement: Ex-IAF Chief Dhanoa
https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/ne ... 055916.cms
srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5249
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Post by srai »

IAF ratio of aircraft to pilots 1:0.81

We are talking about around 30 squadrons. So much for 42 squadrons!

Part of the problem would be diverse combat aircraft types. It takes a lot of hours to gain an expertise on a type. Dividing a limited pool of pilots to man a diverse fleet would definitely be a challenge. Need to standardize on fewer types going forward.
Prasad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7793
Joined: 16 Nov 2007 00:53
Location: Chennai

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Post by Prasad »

Issue of pilots is overblown. Dhanoa said so in an interview before he left office.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18274
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Post by Rakesh »

France lays out Rafale upgrade path to 2070
https://www.janes.com/article/92555/fra ... th-to-2070

https://twitter.com/livefist/status/1195008109002911744 ---> The French Air Force just detailed an upgrade path for its Rafale fleet that goes all the way to 2070, reports Gareth Jennings.

Image
Roop
BRFite
Posts: 670
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Post by Roop »

Here is a YT link listing the India-specific enhancements (ISE) to Rafale (I don't know how accurate it is, I simply offer it FWIW):

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18274
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Post by Rakesh »

Prasad wrote:Issue of pilots is overblown. Dhanoa said so in an interview before he left office.
That is music to my ears! Any link or source when ACM Dhanoa Sir said this? Any numbers provided?
Prasad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7793
Joined: 16 Nov 2007 00:53
Location: Chennai

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Post by Prasad »

Starting 15m, 11s.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5249
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Post by srai »

Rakesh wrote:France lays out Rafale upgrade path to 2070
https://www.janes.com/article/92555/fra ... th-to-2070

https://twitter.com/livefist/status/1195008109002911744 ---> The French Air Force just detailed an upgrade path for its Rafale fleet that goes all the way to 2070, reports Gareth Jennings.
AI will be the next leap forward. Initially, it will enhance human decision making. Over time it will evolve towards autonomous capability.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18274
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Post by Rakesh »

Prasad wrote:Starting 15m, 11s.
Thank you for this video. Very informative.

At 11:40 he talks about breaking down the door as well.
Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8012
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Post by Gerard »

Great video. At 17:20 he mentions the Su-30MKI/BrahMos from the Indian landmass as addressing half the Indian ocean, with a refueling tanker, the other half. :D
Katare
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2579
Joined: 02 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Post by Katare »

Breaking down the door??
Prasad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7793
Joined: 16 Nov 2007 00:53
Location: Chennai

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Post by Prasad »

SEAD
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18274
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Post by Rakesh »

@Katare: As Prasad said above —> SEAD (Suppression of Enemy Air Defences).

None of the three aircraft - Su-30MKI, upgraded Mirage 2000s and Rafale - that ACM Dhanoa Sir mentioned are in the same league as the F-18 Growler, but the Chief believes they are good enough to take on Pakistani and Chinese air defences. The Super Sukhoi upgrade will make the platform even more potent. Watch these videos, for the “concept” of breaking down the door or SEAD.

You cannot fight what you cannot see. You can still hit the enemy without SEAD, but your attrition losses will be very high and you will lose a good number of pilots. That is why the Chief mentioned that the MiG-21 (and I will add Tejas, Jaguar, etc) will operate under the shadow of the Su-30MKI, upgraded Mirage 2000s and the Rafale.



Sumeet
BRFite
Posts: 1616
Joined: 22 May 2002 11:31

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Post by Sumeet »

Rakesh we will not get Growlers since we will be getting S-400s. Better to work on escort jammers with Israelis.
kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6278
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Post by kit »

Sumeet wrote:Rakesh we will not get Growlers since we will be getting S-400s. Better to work on escort jammers with Israelis.

Even if the F18s are a good possibility for carrier aviation?
chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 32283
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Post by chetak »

kit wrote:
Sumeet wrote:Rakesh we will not get Growlers since we will be getting S-400s. Better to work on escort jammers with Israelis.

Even if the F18s are a good possibility for carrier aviation?
One suspects that what we may receive may be the "export" genre, the defanged and secularized version.
Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5352
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Post by Cain Marko »

Rakesh wrote:@Katare: As Prasad said above —> SEAD (Suppression of Enemy Air Defences).

None of the three aircraft - Su-30MKI, upgraded Mirage 2000s and Rafale - that ACM Dhanoa Sir mentioned are in the same league as the F-18 Growler, but the Chief believes they are good enough to take on Pakistani and Chinese air defences. The Super Sukhoi upgrade will make the platform even more potent. Watch these videos, for the “concept” of breaking down the door or SEAD.
]
Well saar, I think he was referring more to DEAD than SEAD considering he specifically mentioned the MKI/Bmos combo. Perhaps the MKI is not sophisticated like the growler but it does carry a massive jamming pod on the centerline when needed along with wingtip sap 518 jammers too. All in all, it will try brute power in lieu of sophistication.

I wouldn't underestimate the Rambha.
srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5249
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Post by srai »

^^^
DEAD operation (Su-30MKI)
  1. Brahmos (450km) & Nirbhay (1000km)—> long range strike to take out Air Defense C2 nodes/network
  2. NGARM (100km) —> take our SAM battery radars
  3. SAAW (100km) —> take out SAM battery launchers, C2 and other support vehicles
Supported by jamming pods (SAP-518 / SAP-14 / DARE HBJ / ELL-8251).
Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5722
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Post by Kartik »

France lays out Rafale roadmap. Some of it will be music to the IAF's and jingo's ears. I really wish the Narendra Modi govt. just purchased another 48 Rafale and ended the 114 MRCA plan and focused its entire attention thereafter on indigenous platforms like the MWF, TEDBF and AMCA and how to develop the other technologies in India itself.

From AW&ST

BERLIN—The French Air Force has developed a road map for its Dassault Rafale that could see the fighter serving on the front line until 2070.

In addition to a new, nuclear-tipped missile in the 2030s, the air force wants to add more conventional weapons, avionics, sensors and connectivity to the Euro-Canard that will pave the way for the New Generation Fighter (NGF) being developed with Germany and Spain as part of the Future Combat Aircraft System (FCAS).

The French Navy, operating the Rafale from the Charles de Gaulle aircraft carrier, is also aligned with the plan.


Such a commitment could be music to the ears of potential export customers. The Rafale is in contention for tenders in Finland, India and Switzerland, and would calm customer fears they might be left with orphaned, expensive fleets.

By comparison, the Eurofighter operating nations have said they want to fly later tranches of the fighter beyond 2040, but none have said, at least publicly, how far beyond.

“The Rafale will be the testbed for new technologies,” Maj. Gen. Frederic Parisot told the International Fighter Conference here Nov. 13. “The F4 upgrade in 2025 will lay the initial building blocks of connected combat, expanding the connectivity and software tools for networked operations.”

An important factor is that air force commanders foresee a need to have a second, cheaper-to-operate platform for operations in which the threats are less complex. Parisot points to the ongoing fast jet operations in Africa using various versions of the Mirage 2000. Once the last Mirage 2000 is retired in 2035, the Rafale will take on that mantle, leaving the NGF to deal with the high-end mission.


Additional aircraft will also be purchased; around 60 more will be delivered over the next decade, replacing early model aircraft.

Rafale upgrades are phased. The Rafale community is currently being equipped with the F3R upgrade, which delivers the integration of the MBDA Meteor beyond-visual-range air-to-air missile and the Thales Talios targeting pod, which delivers increased electro-optical acuity and enhanced stabilization. The French Navy is expected to deploy with the F3R-equipped Rafale M in February.

The F4 upgrade, planned for 2023, will introduce the new Mica NG air-to-air missile as well secure radios and satellite communication systems.

Updates to the RBE2 active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar and the Spectra electronic warfare system are also planned.

The proposed F5 upgrade, planned for 2030, allows for the integration of the ASN4G missile, replacing the ASMP-A. It also paves the way for the use of remote carriers—the unmanned air systems that will complement the FCAS—performing surveillance and electronic warfare while flying ahead of or alongside the Rafale or NGF.

Perhaps the most significant upgrade in F5 will be what Parisot calls a virtual cognitive assistant—an artificial intelligence system capable of reconfiguring aircraft systems in the event of a failure, alerting the pilots to tactical situations, and advising on new routings.

Parisot likened the cognitive assistant to Iron Man’s “Jarvis” from the Marvel comics. Jarvis communicates with Iron Man through voice activation, a feature Parisot says the cognitive assistant will also require, noting it should operate “intuitively without excess chatter ... with a high level of trust, speakability and intelligibility.”

Most crucially, it will monitor pilots’ brain, heart and eye activity, looking out for what Parisot calls “cognitive overload.”

If detected, the system will deliver “cognitive countermeasures,” he explains, with the AI taking back tasks from the pilot and reducing the level of information on visual displays.


Work on the artificial intelligence is already underway through the Man-Machine Teaming advanced study program launched by Thales and Dassault in March 2018.

A critical element in being able to accelerate the upgrade process for the aircraft is ongoing work to separate the aircraft’s flight-critical software from its tactical systems. This is an approach adopted by Saab for its Gripen NG that allows upgrades to onboard systems to be delivered without the need for costly and time-consuming recertification.
Additional connectivity could allow mission data to be updated in real time from electronic intelligence gathering such as the planned CUGE platform to replace the Transall Gabriel Sigint aircraft.

Parisot acknowledges the significant efforts underway to support collaborative operations. But he notes that elements of the Rafale force need to be able to operate in a “nonconnected mode of action ... this is critical for the deterrent mission.”

F6 and F7 upgrade plans are also envisioned and will be aligned with the upgrade path for the NGF.

Several studies are also underway to extend the Rafale’s airframe life from the current 5,000 hr. up to 7,500 and potentially 9,000 hr.


There are also studies taking place into whether additional power could be gleaned from the SafranM88 engine when the Rafale receives the new ASN4G.
Sumeet
BRFite
Posts: 1616
Joined: 22 May 2002 11:31

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Post by Sumeet »

chetak wrote:
kit wrote:

Even if the F18s are a good possibility for carrier aviation?
One suspects that what we may receive may be the "export" genre, the defanged and secularized version.

Kit,
If that happens it will be like casting coup of the century. We will have S-400s and Growlers as well :) We can test how effective they are against each other :D

I doubt America will allow us to make Growlers operational in S-400 envelope. If I were Russia I could install some smart software on my S-400s to study and spy on Growlers.


Chetak,
Export version of Growler will also be good for us. It will upgrade our EW/EA capability by leaps and bound. However, best will be to invest in our own capability (home grown solution). We are in process of making HB Jammer, we can make dedicated LB and MB jammers as follow ons and then iteratively improve them. If need be we could work initially with Israelis on this and eventually achieve 100% indigenization. For EW its better to have local capability so that one can keep on upgrading as the need arise without having to run to OEM and pay through our noose. EW is a cat and mouse game.

Also, NGJ MB from Raytheon is causing significant drag on SH which according to Navy is impacting its operational range. That is why USN was reluctant to pursue NGJ HB and LB with Raytheon. I am sure Brar_W (since he is so well informed on US military affairs) will be to fill in more on this point.
chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 32283
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Post by chetak »

Sumeet wrote:
chetak wrote:
One suspects that what we may receive may be the "export" genre, the defanged and secularized version.

Kit, if that happens it will be like casting coup of the century. We will have S-400s and Growlers as well :) We can test how effective they are against each other :D

I doubt America will allow us to make Growlers operational in S-400 envelope. If I were Russia I could install some smart software on my S-400s to study and spy on Growlers.

Chetak,
Defanged version of Growler is good as well for us. It will upgrade our EW/EA capability by leaps and bound. However, best will be to invest in our own capability (home grown solution). We are in process of making HB Jammer, we can make dedicated LB and MB jammers as follow on and then iteratively improve them. If need be we could work initially with Israelis on this and eventually achieve 100% indigenization. For EW its better to have local capability so that one can keep on upgrading as the need arise without having to run to OEM and pay through our noose. EW is a cat and mouse game.

Also, NGJ MB from Raytheon is causing significant drag on SH which according to Navy is impacting its operation range. That is why USN was reluctant to pursue NGJ HB and LB with Raytheon. I am sure Brar_W (since he is so well informed on US military affairs) will be to fill in more on this point.

They may not part with the growlers in any form.

we will get the defanged and secularized version of the non growler variant, if at all, with some face saving, chota mota bells, and whistles.

The growlers are game changers.

You can bet that as soon as the S-400s arrive, they will expect us to "exercise" a lot more but the russkies would have blocked off those options.

It is, however, going to be extremely interesting to see how two competing S-400 systems operating virtually in the same neighborhood get along.

One would also not be at all surprised if one of those cheeni systems is deployed at gwadar to "protect" cheeni assets there and quite "innocently", of course, ends up providing realtime AD cover over a large part of pukiland and maybe eyran as well. They will have over watch on parts of afghanistan too. F-35 flights in the entire region may become scarce.

we may have to continue to look to the israelis for any podded options in this space
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Post by brar_w »

There is no export variant of the Growler. There is just one program for the aircraft, and one program for the mission systems (jammers, internal communication systems, receivers, and other specialized equipment). Australia joined as a partner and continued the partnership through to the Next Generation Jammer. They didn't buy just the aircraft but partnered on a whole host of investments required to maintain and upgrade the capability (EW ranges, threat systems, EW labs etc. etc.) Perhaps we will see an export configuration developed or marketed to support sales campaigns in Germany and elsewhere in Europe but I don't think it will be easy. So far, Boeing has received no money to develop an export variant for the Block 1 Growler and such funding does not appear to be on the horizon as it is just months from receiving funding for Block 2 Growlers. Only Australia specific contracts that I have ever seen concerned targeting pods and the ASRAAM.

The Next. Gen. Mid Band is not causing any significant drag over and above what was expected to be caused once the US Navy mandated 65 kW power generation per pod with a 20% margin for growth without altering its outer mold line. The performance closely mirrors what they themselves expected when they did their AOA. The power generation requirements (and the altitude envelope) dictate the pod diameter which is what causes the drag. It is massive and heavy because of the stand off range that was demanded (generally considered to be 200 km for USN SEAD (jamming) and DEAD (targeting) for a post 2020 system - this roughly double that of the older gen. pods and HARM/AARGM missile). The increase in drag often cited by the GAO and others was in reference to original program threshold requirements which were significantly lower and called for a common OML/pod across all three variants. But, the higher drag profile is more than adequately addressed by a more optimized LBJ (ALQ-99 pods all share the same OML and hence drag) pod and the fact that the Block 2 Growler will borrow the Block 3 SH's CFT's. The AARGM-ER is also probably a lower drag weapon than the AARGM and an increase SO range and altitude envelope likely means that they can operate more efficiently. I wouldn't be surprised if the Block 2 Growler comes out (NGJ-MB+LB+ALQ-99 HB and AARGM-ER) as combat radius neutral or even slightly ahead compared to the Block I Growler.

I expect the NGJ-HB to be delayed because there is simply not enough technology out there to pack that much power and jamming into a form factor that the USN will be happy with. I expect that in the post 2030+ timeframe with the current HBJ transmitters handling the workload till then (they were modernized less than 10 years ago). HBJ requirements and envelope was always the hardest to meet (original analysis wanted stand-off jamming within the X band through MMW band envelope). There are probably also many other ways to defeat that threat than a stand-off jammer so that will likely also factor into the AOA.
Sumeet
BRFite
Posts: 1616
Joined: 22 May 2002 11:31

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Post by Sumeet »

brar_w wrote: I expect the NGJ-HB to be delayed because there is simply not enough technology out there to pack that much power and jamming into a form factor that the USN will be happy with. I expect that in the post 2030+ timeframe with the current HBJ transmitters handling the workload till then (they were modernized less than 10 years ago). HBJ requirements and envelope was always the hardest to meet (original analysis wanted stand-off jamming within the X band through MMW band envelope). There are probably also many other ways to defeat that threat than a stand-off jammer so that will likely also factor into the AOA.
In that case how DRDO/DARE is making HBJ, are we going to operate within very strict parameters as far as jamming power, stand off range etc are concerned ? Do you have any observations about this ? Or we are just making a self protection jammer for which requirements aren't anywhere in that range ?
Last edited by Sumeet on 19 Nov 2019 04:59, edited 1 time in total.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Post by brar_w »

It is a factor or stand off range, the diversity of emitters you are trying to defeat or degrade, and other parameters like number or targets etc. The Next gen. jammer was re baseline and split into three because optimizing a pod around the most stressing requirements would befriend meant a pod significantly larger and more powerful then the mid band pod currently flying - it would have been designed around the needs or the High Band Stand Off mission.

Developing a high band jammer is not the hard part but doing one that could perform the same Stand Off mission the USN specified was considered damn near impossible hence it was separated and was to be pursued in the mid to late 2020s when technologies like GaN on Diamond or microfluidic cooling were more mature. The current ALQ-99s have high band transmitters but in those configurations you are limited to stand in or escort missions. As frequencies increase you loose efficiency thereby requiring a lot of power and cooling. There was a reason that some of the RAT pod designs studied under the original NGJ tech development efforts were approaching triple digit kW in terms of power generation. A SO HBJ like the one the USN originally wanted likely would have needed that much.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18274
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Post by Rakesh »

kit wrote:
Sumeet wrote:Rakesh we will not get Growlers since we will be getting S-400s. Better to work on escort jammers with Israelis.
Even if the F18s are a good possibility for carrier aviation?
Growler is not coming. Even if the S-400 deal is cancelled, still the Growler will not come. That is a highly sensitive piece of equipment which the Khan will share with only "select" and "compliant" poodles like Australia.
kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6278
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Post by kit »

Rakesh wrote:
kit wrote: Even if the F18s are a good possibility for carrier aviation?
Growler is not coming. Even if the S-400 deal is cancelled, still the Growler will not come. That is a highly sensitive piece of equipment which the Khan will share with only "select" and "compliant" poodles like Australia.

i was thinking of growlers for the navy., India has already deployed sensitive US equipment in a number of platforms including the Poseidon / Neptune. It does make sense for an expeditionary force to have such force multipliers against peer adversaries like China. It is in the US interests to build up Indian Naval capabilities. The presence of both French and UK attaches in the Naval IFC is an indicator of an understanding with western powers in "policing" the IOR.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Post by brar_w »

How will the IN Employ the Growlers from a STOBAR carrier?
chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 32283
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Post by chetak »

kit wrote:
Rakesh wrote: Growler is not coming. Even if the S-400 deal is cancelled, still the Growler will not come. That is a highly sensitive piece of equipment which the Khan will share with only "select" and "compliant" poodles like Australia.

i was thinking of growlers for the navy., India has already deployed sensitive US equipment in a number of platforms including the Poseidon / Neptune. It does make sense for an expeditionary force to have such force multipliers against peer adversaries like China. It is in the US interests to build up Indian Naval capabilities. The presence of both French and UK attaches in the Naval IFC is an indicator of an understanding with western powers in "policing" the IOR.
we are operating US equipment in India more because it suits the US's game plan that we do so. They have locked us down in all those alphabet soup agreements just so they can make us do it their way.

In any case, India shies away from the very concept of "an expeditionary force".

re growlers, why would the US give them to the IN and not to the IAF.

What would stop the IN from operating alongside the IAF in a supportive role.

This scenario is not as outlandish as it sounds because this is exactly what happened in earlier wars, notably in 1965, 1971 and kargil. The role of the carrier borne Bréguet Alizé of the IN has been underestimated in the few writeups available of the events of that period. In kargil, it was the IN dorniers which provided support.

The US will deny technology on a country basis and not futz around choosing favorites in a specific country.
kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6278
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Post by kit »

brar_w wrote:How will the IN Employ the Growlers from a STOBAR carrier?
from a future EMALS carrier., it is certainly not feasible with the vikrant
chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 32283
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Post by chetak »

kit wrote:
brar_w wrote:How will the IN Employ the Growlers from a STOBAR carrier?
from a future EMALS carrier., it is certainly not feasible with the vikrant
EMALS is in the same category as the fighter engine tech. :)

Its a game changer.
kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6278
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Post by kit »

chetak wrote:
kit wrote:
from a future EMALS carrier., it is certainly not feasible with the vikrant
EMALS is in the same category as the fighter engine tech. :)

Its a game-changer.
i don't think the US would have compulsions sharing the EMALS tech with India, China is likely to field in their next-gen carriers.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Post by brar_w »

kit wrote:
brar_w wrote:How will the IN Employ the Growlers from a STOBAR carrier?
from a future EMALS carrier., it is certainly not feasible with the vikrant
That carrier, if sanctioned, is probably 12-15 years out. The SH line will be long shut down by then.
mahadevbhu
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 81
Joined: 28 Oct 2019 19:47

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Post by mahadevbhu »

Brar_w what's your recommendations from an Indian perspective for choice of
1.57 naval aircraft
2. Mmrca
3. American weapons are both expensive and have innumerable restrictions on their usage. What's the way forward for Indo US arms deals given the same facts.
4. Jsf is expensive but it is the newest F16 / Mig 21 style mass produced fighter. It being the mmrca will dent our budget and throttle the amca. How can one codevelop the amca as a Indo US JV?
Sumeet
BRFite
Posts: 1616
Joined: 22 May 2002 11:31

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Post by Sumeet »

mahadevbhu wrote:Brar_w what's your recommendations from an Indian perspective for choice of
1.57 naval aircraft
Not Brar but giving my two cents.

We should pick up Rafale F4 naval version. We have already invested in Rafale infrastructure and it's simply common sense that we build on top of that. Rafale is interoperable with USN if the need arise. No need to go for Super Hornet and keep our strike force at mercy of fluctuating temperament of GOTUS and Congress.
2. Mmrca
Again Rafale F4. It's a no-brainer. Keep SH around to extract best price and tech from French.
3. American weapons are both expensive and have innumerable restrictions on their usage. What's the way forward for Indo US arms deals given the same facts.
Let it be all about non-combat/strike aircraft. In future when we have our own Strike platform (MWF, AMCA with indigenous Radar/Sensor tech) we may cooperate on joint development of some missile systems, CNI equipment, Avionics etc.

In all core tech (Radar, IRST, Engine, Airframe design & Aero structures, Flight control system, Data fusion & AI, EW & DataLink) that goes into modern aircraft it will be our own hard earned money and sweat. There are no two ways about it.
4. Jsf is expensive but it is the newest F16 / Mig 21 style mass produced fighter. It being the mmrca will dent our budget and throttle the amca. How can one codevelop the amca as a Indo US JV?
We need to build MWF and AMCA with engines from GE till Kaveri variant does not come off age. No one (US or be even Russia) will part with key technologies. You already saw experience we went through with Russians on PAK-FA. No will respect you unless you bring significant technical help in core areas to the table. You will not be entertained for JVs. Simply providing dollars and a consumer market will not make you a partner eligible for equal treatment. It's futile to engage in these sort of partnerships and JVs. Instead take help at component level (engine like from GE) or subsystem level (Cooling system is of Israeli origin in our HB Jammer under development) and when our indigenous tech is mature we can swap out these from existing aircraft (if financially viable).
mahadevbhu
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 81
Joined: 28 Oct 2019 19:47

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Post by mahadevbhu »

I think that we should have the jsf as well. This will reduce the risk carried by amca. Jsf can be used by the Navy as well as the air Force
ArjunPandit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4056
Joined: 29 Mar 2017 06:37

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Post by ArjunPandit »

mahadevbhu wrote:I think that we should have the jsf as well. This will reduce the risk carried by amca. Jsf can be used by the Navy as well as the air Force
+72 to that..we can also order some F18 + my fav growler, and super entendard (did i complete that) to complete the zoo... :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:
mahadevbhu
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 81
Joined: 28 Oct 2019 19:47

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Post by mahadevbhu »

This is going off topic. Last post. Fifth gen Technology is not easy as per Lockheed Martin s experience with the jsf. Thus it needs risk mitigation as well as hand holding which the JSF could provide.
Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8428
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Post by Indranil »

What operational risk are you trying to mitigate?
mahadevbhu
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 81
Joined: 28 Oct 2019 19:47

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Post by mahadevbhu »

Development risk. The risk.that.our mil.ind complex will not be able to make a good product.

With substandard specs and performance.
Post Reply