VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Cyrano · Post by **Cyrano** » 05 Jun 2020 13:45

What is that tail hook like structure between the engines?

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 05 Jun 2020 14:04

Emergency stop, even F15 and US air forces have them, in Nato Air forces if a fighter aircraft brakes fail, they deploy hooks which are meant to catch Aircraft carrier type steel wires and stop. IAF uses more the Russian method of deploying a large net to catch the aircraft.

Cyrano · Post by **Cyrano** » 07 Jun 2020 14:32

Thanks, does that mean the air strips on the bases where the Rafale will be operating from, will be equipped with steel wire arresting systems for emergency recovery? If not this feature simply adds weight, cost and some maintenance overhead.

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 07 Jun 2020 15:00

Well these Rafales have been flying and training in France and will use NATO standard runways on the way to India. Plus there will exercises in future with NATO countries, IAF will have lug NEts and related equipment if these were not there.

There is also a secondary use where they secure the aircraft while running the engine on the ground. So I guess the IAF decided to keep these tailhooks.

Cyrano · Post by **Cyrano** » 07 Jun 2020 15:55

Makes sense, thanks !

Manish_P · Post by **Manish_P** » 07 Jun 2020 19:17

^ like this Raptor

m_saini · Post by **m_saini** » 10 Jun 2020 10:43

Do the more knowledgeable members here have a consensus on why we bought rafale? Was it just the meteor or any other geo-political considerations? Because they french haven't helped much on kaveri and Rafale doesn't seem as capable as the buying price states. Certainly a Tejas with the european radar or gripen with meteor at half the price seem much better options otherwise.
If this has been discussed before, please let me know too. I'd love to read up in the previous pages.

srai · Post by **srai** » 10 Jun 2020 11:24

^^^
Simple answer: it won the MRCA competition. India couldn’t afford 126 units with ToT and license production. Instead, a deal was struck for 36 direct G-to-G deal with some Indian customizations.

m_saini · Post by **m_saini** » 10 Jun 2020 12:37

srai wrote:^^^
Simple answer: it won the MRCA competition. India couldn’t afford 126 units with ToT and license production. Instead, a deal was struck for 36 direct G-to-G deal with some Indian customizations.

So when they went for the G-to-G, was meteor the deciding factor? or was it some game-changing advantages inherent to Rafale itself? Or was it just that their love for Mirage got transferred to Rafale?

srai · Post by **srai** » 10 Jun 2020 12:51

^^^
G-2-G deal was a face saving measure, IMO. India couldn’t just walk away in good faith after an open international MRCA competition where the Rafale came out the winner and ensuing two/three years of commercial negotiations. Still got the IAF what it had selected but at lesser quantities (and within what the GoI budget could actually afford).

IAF down-selected Rafale and EF in the MRCA-1 after extensive technical evaluation over some two year period. That should answer your question

Read up on the history of MRCA-1 competition: RFI/RFP, evaluation, down select and negotiations with L1.

m_saini · Post by **m_saini** » 10 Jun 2020 13:49

srai wrote:^^^

Read up on the history of MRCA-1 competition: RFI/RFP, evaluation, down select and negotiations with L1.

Reading up on everything, our acquisition process seems like such a joke. Would've been much better to just get more Tejas and dump the extra money into Astra2 etc. But hindsight is 20/20 and hope Rafale does us proud now. Thank you for answering and guiding.

RajaRudra · Post by **RajaRudra** » 10 Jun 2020 14:10

srai wrote:^^^
G-2-G deal was a face saving measure, IMO. India couldn’t just walk away in good faith after an open international MRCA competition where the Rafale came out the winner and ensuing two/three years of commercial negotiations. Still got the IAF what it had selected but at lesser quantities (and within what the GoI budget could actually afford).

IAF down-selected Rafale and EF in the MRCA-1 after extensive technical evaluation over some two year period. That should answer your question

Read up on the history of MRCA-1 competition: RFI/RFP, evaluation, down select and negotiations with L1.

Remembering those days, When Rafale got selected(2011 i think), there is almost a celebration in BRF. It was the same time when Vivek was writing his story on Indo-China war and i used to check the BRF thread every day for a new post from Vivek..

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 10 Jun 2020 18:58

m_saini wrote:
srai wrote:^^^
Simple answer: it won the MRCA competition. India couldn’t afford 126 units with ToT and license production. Instead, a deal was struck for 36 direct G-to-G deal with some Indian customizations.
So when they went for the G-to-G, was meteor the deciding factor? or was it some game-changing advantages inherent to Rafale itself? Or was it just that their love for Mirage got transferred to Rafale?

Combination of factors, one being the IAF's love for the Mirage 2000. Meteor being another deciding factor. From a technical standpoint, the Rafale is a great aircraft. She is up there among all the fourth generation fighters currently being produced. The Rafale meets all the threat perceptions that the IAF believes it currently faces. In the IAF's own words, the Rafale is sanction free. From a reliability perspective, the IAF is confident with Dassault's expertise. The IAF has had a great experience with her immediate predecessor i.e. the Mirage 2000. As you know, this was the same aircraft that was used during the Balakot strikes. The IAF would be more than pleased to go in for another batch of Rafales and will likely happen. Acquiring more Rafales has greater odds than any of the other aircraft in MMRCA 2.0

In Air Chief Marshal Bhaduria's own words, "The Rafale is a Game Changer."

Watch this video below from 2:08 till 6:36, the speaker is Air Marshal Vinod Patney (retd) - former Vice Chief of Air Staff.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 10 Jun 2020 20:28

RajaRudra wrote:Remembering those days, When Rafale got selected (2011 i think), there is almost a celebration in BRF. It was the same time when Vivek was writing his story on Indo-China war and i used to check the BRF thread every day for a new post from Vivek..

27 April 2011 was the technical downselect (Rafale and Eurofighter).

31 Jan 2012 was the L1 downselect (Rafale).

You are correct....there was a celebration on BRF on both those days.

m_saini · Post by **m_saini** » 10 Jun 2020 21:09

Rakesh wrote:
Watch this video below from 2:08 till 6:36, the speaker is Air Marshal Vinod Patney (retd) - former Vice Chief of Air Staff.

Thanks for the video sir. At around 4:40, the Vice Chief says that the range of Meteor is 180km while the no escape range is 150km. I know that the specific data for nez would not be available publicly but is the Vice Chief right here? I've always read that the nez for AIM120B is around 30 km and Meteor has 3 times the nez so around 90 km.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 10 Jun 2020 21:14

No need for Sir

Actual ranges are obviously closely guarded secrets. Very few know what those numbers really are. I do not believe the NEZ is 150 km, but then again I am not a retired Air Marshal. As a civvie, I would stick with what MBDA has advertised.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 10 Jun 2020 21:25

One would think that the modern NEZ thinking (and actually something that is hard-coded into automated decision aids like the YATO tool on the F-35 for example) would not be static but rather dynamic* based on a whole host of factors. As an assessment and training tool, NEFE was developed in the 1980's to better formulate engagement strategies and make tactical decisions. Some of its assumptions and frameworks still hold true while others are less relevant today or have otherwise been updated/replaced by things that matter more. Simplistically, it was essentially a kinetic zone, given a given engagement profile, where you could confidently launch a weapon and expect it to reach within lethal miss distance of the intended target despite kinematic (velocity and maneuvering) actions taken by the adversary ( of course within a framework and asusmptions). While it is easily to extrapolate relative performance figures like 3X compared to Missile A, or 2 X compared to missile B, putting a range figure around it is a lot trickier. This becomes even more complicated when you have throttleable missiles which modulate their propulsion based on a particular engagement profile. So indeed in some instances the Meteor could have a better than 3X NEZ compared to the AMRAAM-B.

If you are at the very edge of the engagement envelope then your average speed when the VFDR motor is engaged will be lower and consequently, the time to target will be higher and end game velocity will be lower as well. And this all will vary depending upon the target and the engagement range and profile. Same applies to the ROI of buying all the speed upfront, or building it as you go along. For some engagements buying a very high speed (say Mach 6) upfront may be more beneficial to cruising at lower speeds for longer. So one would think that the NEZ will be more dynamic and dependent upon what targets you look at. In fact, there is some good literature around how modern thinking has taken up this dynamic nature and is using it in formulating frameworks and decision making training etc.

*Against a MiG-31 or an SR-71 (or even F-22A at max supercruise) it isn't too far fetched to think that the AMRAAM-B's NEZ is halved or worst. And of course here we are only focused on kinematics and engagement profiles and nothing else.

m_saini · Post by **m_saini** » 10 Jun 2020 22:15

brar_w wrote:...

Very informative and detailed as always. Another noob question, is engagement profile used as synonym for engagement envelope or does the profile entails other factors such as the RCS of the target, altitude etc?

SBajwa · Post by **SBajwa** » 10 Jun 2020 23:15

abhik · Post by **abhik** » 10 Jun 2020 23:55

Another FAQ question - Which base/squadron will host the first set of fighters or will it be split between both?

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 11 Jun 2020 00:03

I believe it will be No 17 Golden Arrows at Ambala in the West (facing Pakistan). They might raise a full squadron first before moving on to the second squadron. No 101 Falcons will be at Hasimara and will be the second squadron that will join the IAF and will be in the east facing China.

But do not get caught up with locations i.e. home base means nothing. Mirage 2000s took off from Gwalior (home base) in Feb 2019 and bombed Balakot in the north. The IAF can go where ever and with Rafale even more so. The more airframes the better obviously, but you get the idea.

ldev · Post by **ldev** » 11 Jun 2020 01:02

m_saini wrote:
Rakesh wrote:
Watch this video below from 2:08 till 6:36, the speaker is Air Marshal Vinod Patney (retd) - former Vice Chief of Air Staff.
Thanks for the video sir. At around 4:40, the Vice Chief says that the range of Meteor is 180km while the no escape range is 150km. I know that the specific data for nez would not be available publicly but is the Vice Chief right here? I've always read that the nez for AIM120B is around 30 km and Meteor has 3 times the nez so around 90 km.

Some more information:

The Meteor programme sees the UK, France, Germany, Italy, Spain and Sweden working together to provide access to technology and expertise across those nations.

The missile is guided by an advanced active radar seeker and is also equipped with two way data link communication, enabling the launch aircraft to provide mid-course target updates or re-targeting if required, including data from third parties.

According to Saab:

“An active radar target seeker combined with an RF proximity fuze, both of which are highly resistant to both active and passive countermeasures, ensures reliable detection, tracking and discrimination of the target.”

Meteor, say MBDA, offers a multi-shot capability against long range manoeuvring targets, jets, UAVs and cruise missiles in a heavy electronic countermeasures environment with range well in excess of 150 kilometres, MBDA also say that the no-escape zone of over 60 km is largest among air-to-air missiles.

A two way data-link and an active radar target seeker ensures that Meteor reaches its target, even at very long ranges. A jamming resistant proximity fuze and a lethal high explosive blast-fragmentation warhead combine to give the missile its high kill probability.

The missile is often lauded for its outstanding kinematic performance and according to MBDA, Meteor’s performance is achieved through its unique ramjet propulsion system – solid fuel, variable flow, ducted rocket.

“This ‘ramjet’ motor provides the missile with thrust all the way to target intercept, providing the largest No-Escape Zone of any air-to-air missile. To ensure total target destruction, the missile is equipped with both impact and proximity fuses and a fragmentation warhead that detonates on impact or at the optimum point of intercept to maximise lethality.”

According to MBDA, Meteor has three to six times the kinetic performance of current air-air missiles of its type.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 11 Jun 2020 02:47

abhik wrote:Another FAQ question - Which base/squadron will host the first set of fighters or will it be split between both?

Ambala with No.17 'Golden Arrows'. No. 101 'Falcons' will be based at Hasimara and will be resurrected after No.17 squadron gets all it's 18 Rafales.

m_saini · Post by **m_saini** » 11 Jun 2020 03:00

ldev wrote: Some more information:

The Meteor programme sees the UK, France, Germany, Italy, Spain and Sweden working together to provide access to technology and expertise across those nations.

The missile is guided by an advanced active radar seeker and is also equipped with two way data link communication, enabling the launch aircraft to provide mid-course target updates or re-targeting if required, including data from third parties.

Ah so the advertised NEZ is 60km. Thank you for the information. Also it says that the missile has 2 way data link enabling the mid-course target updates etc but afaik the F3Rs we're getting only has the 1 way data link. Are there any studies on how this effects the capability of Meteor?

ldev · Post by **ldev** » 11 Jun 2020 04:09

m_saini wrote:
ldev wrote: Some more information:

Ah so the advertised NEZ is 60km. Thank you for the information. Also it says that the missile has 2 way data link enabling the mid-course target updates etc but afaik the F3Rs we're getting only has the 1 way data link. Are there any studies on how this effects the capability of Meteor?

AFAIK the IAF deal with Dassault is to upgrade Indian Rafales to the F4 standard when it is complete. That will enable the 2 way data link allowing for re-targeting and 3rd party guidance e.g. AWACs, other networked aircraft etc. So in theory the aircraft actually firing the missile could just be the carrier. That could be helpful in a near peer BVR encounter such as IAF Rafales encountering PLAAF J-10Cs with the PL-15. Although IMO the Rafale with Spectra and the Meteor is in a different league and will swat the J-10C.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 11 Jun 2020 05:47

ldev wrote:AFAIK the IAF deal with Dassault is to upgrade Indian Rafales to the F4 standard when it is complete. That will enable the 2 way data link allowing for re-targeting and 3rd party guidance e.g.

Could you provide some sources for both those points? The French only signed the F-4 standard development contract last year. And they already sold that upgrade and rolled it into a contract signed 3 years earlier?

ldev · Post by **ldev** » 11 Jun 2020 08:02

brar_w wrote:
ldev wrote:AFAIK the IAF deal with Dassault is to upgrade Indian Rafales to the F4 standard when it is complete. That will enable the 2 way data link allowing for re-targeting and 3rd party guidance e.g.
Could you provide some sources for both those points? The French only signed the F-4 standard development contract last year. And they already sold that upgrade and rolled it into a contract signed 3 years earlier?

My bad. I meant to say that the F4 standard when complete will be available as an upgrade for the IAF.

The current contract includes Brahmos and Astra integration.

Quick question that you can answer in the other thread. The AMRAAM 120D has a two way data link right? Will the upgraded USAF F-16s with the AN/APG-83 be armed with the 120D?

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 11 Jun 2020 08:19

ldev wrote:Will the upgraded USAF F-16s with the AN/APG-83 be armed with the 120D?

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=7625&p=2437740#p2437740

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 23 Jun 2020 02:51

FWIW, no idea who this guy is and who his source is. Need to keep an eye out for this and see if any news outlet or dependable reporter can confirm that the IAF is going to push a case for 44 additional Rafales to the MoD.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 23 Jun 2020 04:21

Kartik wrote:FWIW, no idea who this guy is and who his source is. Need to keep an eye out for this and see if any news outlet or dependable reporter can confirm that the IAF is going to push a case for 44 additional Rafales to the MoD.

A follow on tweet to the tweet above...

https://twitter.com/Akhilfrmchd/status/ ... 30021?s=20 ---> If approved by MoD, the Indian Air force will get an additional 44 Dassault Rafale by 2026. Deal is going cost taxpayer $5 billion.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 23 Jun 2020 04:27

Thank you Kartik for posting this. I don't know how true this is, but it is the best conclusion to end the MMRCA contest once in for all.

Those 8 additional birds will likely serve as attrition replacements, broken down in 2 aircraft per squadron.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 23 Jun 2020 05:23

Indeed, if it comes through, it'll be the best way to end this MRCA saga. 80 is nearly 3/4th of the original 126 requirement and with Tejas Mk2 shaping up, the IAF has another MRCA that'll be entering service towards the second half of this decade.

srai · Post by **srai** » 23 Jun 2020 06:32

^^^
Let’s see if that comes out true and GoI/IAF end the MMRCA-III.

What offsets can India get from France for the second Rafale deal?

Essential spare parts Production
Overhaul capability- engines, airframe, avionics
Integration of own weapons and internal components

What strategic technologies can they provide their assistance?

Aero Engine
SSK/SSN

Mort Walker · Post by **Mort Walker** » 23 Jun 2020 06:34

Kartik wrote:FWIW, no idea who this guy is and who his source is. Need to keep an eye out for this and see if any news outlet or dependable reporter can confirm that the IAF is going to push a case for 44 additional Rafales to the MoD.

I would say do it ONLY if an order of 200 LCA Tejas are placed and that will be the LAST foreign fighter aircraft ever purchased by India. The LCA Tejas MK1A, Mk2, and MCA shall be purchased in quantities of 200, 400, and 800.

khan · Post by **khan** » 23 Jun 2020 07:19

Mort Walker wrote:I would say do it ONLY if an order of 200 LCA Tejas are placed and that will be the LAST foreign fighter aircraft ever purchased by India. The LCA Tejas MK1A, Mk2, and MCA shall be purchased in quantities of 200, 400, and 800.

After this, they need to be making LCA's like sausages. Maybe buy 2-3 refulers to make up for the range issue. Quantity has a quality of its own.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 23 Jun 2020 07:59

Mort Walker wrote:
Kartik wrote:FWIW, no idea who this guy is and who his source is. Need to keep an eye out for this and see if any news outlet or dependable reporter can confirm that the IAF is going to push a case for 44 additional Rafales to the MoD.
I would say do it ONLY if an order of 200 LCA Tejas are placed and that will be the LAST foreign fighter aircraft ever purchased by India. The LCA Tejas MK1A, Mk2, and MCA shall be purchased in quantities of 200, 400, and 800.

Right now, I want the 83 MK1A order to go through. If a proposal for 44 more Rafales Is indeed in the works, please also move the file for the 83 Mk1As. Files move fast for phoren maal (12 Su-30MKI and 21 MiG-29), please move the desi files equally fast.

Walk the talk on Atmanirbhar Bharat!

ldev · Post by **ldev** » 23 Jun 2020 08:49

One of the best aerobatic displays I have seen, because a lot of it is below the height at which the camera is located. Stunning visuals of the Swiss mountains. And it is a Rafale.

Roop · Post by **Roop** » 23 Jun 2020 11:13

Kartik wrote:Indeed, if it comes through, it'll be the best way to end this MRCA saga. 80 is nearly 3/4th of the original 126 requirement and with Tejas Mk2 shaping up, the IAF has another MRCA that'll be entering service towards the second half of this decade.

Agreed, I hope this rumor is accurate. If it is, it means that the PLA's recklessness has put the fear of God into Delhi's neta/babu/mantri complex (NBM).

khan wrote:After this, they need to be making LCA's like sausages.

The problem is, Khan sahib, in order to buy these sausages, the NBM has to wake up from its slumber and sign the damn contract.

srai · Post by **srai** » 23 Jun 2020 11:23

^^^ldev,

Airshow: Good one!

The best bit is right at the end. While at the top of a vertical loop, turns off the throttle and gently glides the loop to completion and then all the way down for landing as if gliding in.

Barath · Post by **Barath** » 23 Jun 2020 11:27

Rakesh wrote:
m_saini wrote: So when they went for the G-to-G, was meteor the deciding factor? or was it some game-changing advantages inherent to Rafale itself? Or was it just that their love for Mirage got transferred to Rafale?
Combination of factors, ......

In addition to those, I assume that france being flexible on weapons integration and favourable to pokhran II was also an unspoken factor.

As reputedly the air leg of the nuclear triad was on mirages and Jaguars, and is commonly assumed to transfer over to the rafale (strategic uses was also an unofficial justification for 36).