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.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9479
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

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

Postby Rakesh » 30 Jul 2020 22:40

Not Hnair Saar, but here are my responses...

Vivek K wrote:Great reply! However, on the larger question - does the capability come at a cost that IAF cannot afford? With calls to purchase 114 Rafales what does that do to a fleet that has to take on two large airforces? Can India buy 114 Rafales and still be able to afford the additional numbers to get back up close to 45 squadrons?

The IAF will not be able to afford 114 Rafales or 114 of any phoren fighter. There is no money.

The numbers will have to be made up by multiple Tejas variants. The IAF can put up a brave face, but the reality is this deal will cost nothing short of $20 billion and that is a conservative figure.

And even if money miraculously appeared via Houdini, this 114 deal is a political hot potato. No Govt will touch it.

Babudom will just drag this for as long as they like.

Vivek K wrote:Why can the other air dominance fighter - the Su-30 MKI not work to perform Rafales roles in combination with about 85 upgraded Mig-29s? And also what is the utility of the jags then - aren't they going to take on SEAD in the beginning hours of a fight? Isn't the MKI capable of performing SEAD roles as well? Should IAF work on making the existing MKIs more lethal instead?

There are many features on the Rafale that is currently not on the Su-30MKI. A few examples would be the AESA radar and EW suite. The Rafale will suppress enemy air defences to a large degree, which will allow the Su-30MKI and the Jaguar to do their jobs. Both aircraft can still do their job, but the attrition rate will be much higher. Survivability of pilot and platform is most important.

Vivek K wrote:We see responses all over the spectrum about the Rafales - nuke delivery, to SEAD as you put it so eloquently.
Question is, can these roles not be performed by the existing fleet and expanding those numbers?

No, as explained above.

Once the Super Sukhoi and Darin III upgrades are completed, that component of the IAF fleet will be much more lethal. But Darin III is nowhere to close to completion and the contract for the Super Sukhoi upgrade has yet to be signed. Neither will be done by 2022. All Rafales will be delivered by 2022. If the balloon goes up between now and 2022, what do you suggest the IAF should do?

I say again - Survivability of pilot and platform is most important. The IAF is not into Kamikaze missions.

Vivek K wrote:And how much does one think an MLU in 2030 for the Rafales cost going by the $65 million per a/c to upgrade M2Ks without engine change? Some use a number of 85% in cost using 3% annual escalation in original cost. But if you escalate current costs to purchase (purchase price $150 mill +??) and look at 85% of the escalated price - would this aircraft be affordable? Does it add capabilities or because of its price impact the force structure in a way to actually reduce overall force projection?

Why did the IAF use upgraded Mirage 2000s (along with non-upgraded Mirage 2000s) to strike terrorist camps at Balakot in Feb 2019? Why not use MiG-29 or Su-30MKI? Or Jaguar? What does the Mirage 2000 offer the IAF that none of these other combat aircraft do? Unless we want to believe that the IAF was also doing a concurrent mission of promoting French products during the Balakot mission. Why was Su-30MKI (and Mirage 2000 and MiG-21) used the following day to protect Indian airspace when PAF planes were attempting their response?

The Mirage 2000 upgrade (at $43 million per bird) was a wise investment. Aircraft have to be upgraded. That is part of operating combat aircraft. Even the Su-30MKI will not have an engine upgrade during her Super Sukhoi refit and that was confirmed by Group Captain HV Thakur (retd). Even Tejas will undergo upgrades. So will AMCA. So will every other platform. Air Forces around the world do this. If you want to avoid this, then invest in Supermarine Spitfires and P-51 Mustangs. No need to upgrade them at all.


manjgu
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2445
Joined: 11 Aug 2006 10:33

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

Postby manjgu » 30 Jul 2020 22:50

Vivek K wrote:
manjgu wrote:Phillip..without discounting the usefullness of AEW/AWACS in modern air war..in the india pak context..the narrowness of Pakistan airspace allows indian ground based radars to adequately cover and control the air space ... that could be one of the thoughts. Idk how true but they say IAF knows the moment PAF takes off ... even abhis formation was being directed by ground based controllers not some fancy AEW a/c

So is Indian doctrine Puki centric? Does India not want to dominate/monitor other borders? The border with Pukis is the smallest but if you add up the country has far more to protect than mere Pukistan.

So again - is Raffy purchase a puki centric purchase? Or is it geared more for China? And if it is geared more for China, is there any utility to monitor/control the theater there? There was a remark that PAF had more on time availability of their AEW during Balakot than IAF. And if IAF is aware of every PAF take off - why then weren't 24 planes checked with a larger force on Feb 27th?

Can't have your cake and eat it too. IAF needs to evaluate long term strategy to get to 45 squadrons - I will let you do that using Rafale.



vivek .. u r confusing the issues.1) GIven how its forces are deployed till now, yes India has been pak centric all this while. IAF was aware of 24 a/c forming up in the air in v good time but not aware of their INTENTIONS as it was not a declared war situation and the resultant ambiguity. you need to understand that first. By your logic if PAF has such a abundance of AEW, why they did not detect our strike packages into Balakot and the Migs coming up next day?? 2) the fact that 50% of Raffy are to be stationed in eastern sector, its funny for you to be asking if Raffy is pak centric purchase. modern long ranged A/c are not X centric or Y centric..their long ranges allow them to switch from one place to another. India in its wisdom/folly decided that the possibility of a shooting match with chinis is v less likely and so the low force deployments.

Vivek K
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2402
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

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

Postby Vivek K » 30 Jul 2020 23:13

Rakesh wrote:Not Hnair Saar, but here are my responses...

Our key difference is - quality over quantity can work against PAF. Against China, with larger numbers, quality will be ineffective. Rafale is a good fighter and so are several others perhaps. But again you seem to think only equipment works where i would differ humbly as a layman - tactics and training make a lot of difference as well. You support Rafale since you claim sending in MKIs to do the missions that Raffy can do would be kamikaze like. I disagree. The MKI is a capable bird. IAF has know about AESA radars for quite a long time. And so timely action should be taken.

Radars and EW threats will continually evolve. A solution today may not be guaranteed in two years to be as effective. Without a local MIC, there is no security against opponents like the Chinese.

And you seem to make a habit of distorting my comments Saar. I never questioned the M2K upgrade. Please read my post again. All I said was use it to estimate the cost of the Raffy upgrade and the overall impact of this aircraft'as cost on the IAFs' ability to meet its goal of 45 squadrons.
Air Forces around the world do this. If you want to avoid this, then invest in Supermarine Spitfires and P-51 Mustangs. No need to upgrade them at all.

And where did that come from? Was I questioning the upgrade or putting up the total cost of the aircraft - I'm sure even you have heard about Life Cycle Cost Analysis. But I daresay if you add a GE-414 to a composite Spitfire, that would make a fabulous airplane. Or better still - add that to the Marut and you will have an aircraft better than the Jag.

manjgu
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2445
Joined: 11 Aug 2006 10:33

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

Postby manjgu » 30 Jul 2020 23:17

and there is a IAF radar station on a mountain top which gives a awesomely commanding view of almost whole of paki punjab and parts of POK and on a good day/mood they can look into kabul ... and beyond..like a ground based awacs !!! so dont underestimate what ground based radars can do.

manjgu
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2445
Joined: 11 Aug 2006 10:33

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

Postby manjgu » 30 Jul 2020 23:24

Vivek K wrote:Our key difference is - quality over quantity can work against PAF. Against China, with larger numbers, quality will be ineffective. Rafale is a good fighter and so are several others perhaps. But again you seem to think only equipment works where i would differ humbly as a layman - tactics and training make a lot of difference as well. You support Rafale since you claim sending in MKIs to do the missions that Raffy can do would be kamikaze like. I disagree. The MKI is a capable bird. IAF has know about AESA radars for quite a long time. And so timely action should be taken.

tactics and training can only be known ( how good or bad) only in actual combat. if u have a platform ( rafale) which is superior to ur current platform( MKI), why will u not leverage that ? we just cant be buying MKI given that its a dual seater ( 2 pilots needed)..higher running costs etc. no one is saying MKI is not a capable platform... everybody on BR roots for local MIC .

Vivek K
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2402
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

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

Postby Vivek K » 30 Jul 2020 23:25

manjgu wrote:vivek .. u r confusing the issues.1) GIven how its forces are deployed till now, yes India has been pak centric all this while. IAF was aware of 24 a/c forming up in the air in v good time but not aware of their INTENTIONS as it was not a declared war situation and the resultant ambiguity. you need to understand that first. By your logic if PAF has such a abundance of AEW, why they did not detect our strike packages into Balakot and the Migs coming up next day?? 2) the fact that 50% of Raffy are to be stationed in eastern sector, its funny for you to be asking if Raffy is pak centric purchase. modern long ranged A/c are not X centric or Y centric..their long ranges allow them to switch from one place to another. India in its wisdom/folly decided that the possibility of a shooting match with chinis is v less likely and so the low force deployments.

Point taken about the Raffys positioning. That is my bad. But I was reacting to your statement that seems very different about AWACS/AEWs being overrated.

The Balakot strike was unexpected so along with a gutsy decision, had a better surprise element. But alongwith the element of surprise, I would think that superior jamming helped to keep the enemy unaware of the ingress and egress. Why do you think there was no PAF response?
The Feb 27th event was expected. So there should not have been as much of a surprise element and IAF could have used it to thrash PAF and kill more than the one F-16. 3-5 a/c down would have conveyed a message.

The Migs the next day have been explained by USAF as well in their practice with IAF - the Migs used terrain to hide behind and took the enemy by surprise.

But I am surprised at the lack of SAM usage on either side. Pukis were probably scared of hitting their a/c but pre-engagement there would have been a window for SAM usage. Was that ROE taking that weapon out? So does that indicate command and control issues? Could AWACS positioning around the clock have helped? If ground based radars were adequate, why did the first response not use SAMs (were the attacking a.c too far for SAMs?)

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9479
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

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

Postby Rakesh » 30 Jul 2020 23:50

Vivek K wrote:Our key difference is - quality over quantity can work against PAF. Against China, with larger numbers, quality will be ineffective. Rafale is a good fighter and so are several others perhaps. But again you seem to think only equipment works where i would differ humbly as a layman - tactics and training make a lot of difference as well. You support Rafale since you claim sending in MKIs to do the missions that Raffy can do would be kamikaze like. I disagree. The MKI is a capable bird. IAF has know about AESA radars for quite a long time. And so timely action should be taken.

Absolutely tactics and training make a key difference and that difference was clearly evident at Balakot, was it not? While the PAF was firing AMRAAM after AMRAAM in orgasmic euphoria, the Su-30MKI pilot successfully evaded them all. Our pilot in turn was waiting to get a lock on, which the PAF - true to form - turned and ran back. Now the IAF could have fired back, but the pilots were following strict ROEs which did not permit firing upon any aircraft until they crossed over into Indian air space.

You said timely action "should" be taken. The key word is *SHOULD*. Has that action occurred? Since it has not, I ask again...what do you want the IAF to do if the balloon goes up between now and 2022?

We can talk about the lack of vision and the lack of desire to adopt home grown products. All true. Any new system that is being adopted has to follow a rigorous testing phase. And that takes time. Do you think the PLAAF pilot - who the IAF pilot is up against - cares about that when they go head-to-head? What do you want the IAF to do if the balloon goes up between now and 2022?

Simple question - why did the IAF want 126 Mirage 2000s in 2001, when a MoU for 140 Su-30MKIs was signed in 2000? The Rafale that you so deeply disdain is the result of a 20 year quest from 126 Mirage 2000s to 126 MMRCA to 36 Rafale. Why did the IAF need 126 more phoren birds over 140 Su-30MKIs? Twenty years ago, the Su-30MKI should have sufficed no? What was the need for 126 Mirage 2000s?

Oh wait, I already know your answer to that. The IAF is import pasand, because Tejas was on the verge of being inducted in 2000. Never mind that that Tejas only first flew on 04 Jan 2001 and had to undergo years of testing (like all normal aircraft development cycles go through) before induction. But facts like that are just minor quibbles to you.

Vivek K wrote:Radars and EW threats will continually evolve. A solution today may not be guaranteed in two years to be as effective. Without a local MIC, there is no security against opponents like the Chinese.

Isn't that why air forces do aircraft upgrades?

Like the Super Sukhoi Upgrade, Darin III upgrade, Mirage 2000-5 upgrade, MiG-29UPG upgrade, etc?

Or is conducting upgrades an arts & crafts lesson for the IAF to do in her pastime?

Vivek K wrote:And you seem to make a habit of distorting my comments Saar. I never questioned the M2K upgrade. Please read my post again. All I said was use it to estimate the cost of the Raffy upgrade and the overall impact of this aircraft'as cost on the IAFs' ability to meet its goal of 45 squadrons.

But Sir you are questioning it by over inflating the cost of the upgrade. You said $65 million per aircraft cost for the Mirage 2000, when the reality was $43 million per aircraft cost. And since you over inflated the cost of the Mirage 2000 upgrade, by the time the Rafale upgrade comes along, you will say the upgrade will cost $500 million per bird. I am distorting Sir or are you? Where is $43 million and where is $65 million? That is a $22 million difference! I guess that is not a distortion in your books, is it?

The 114 MMRCA deal will not go through. The IAF squadron strength of 42 (not 45, another distortion I see ;) ) will be made up by different Tejas variants. There is no money or political will for this. Two more Rafale squadrons will likely come, to which I am sure you will undergo similar heartache like you are having now.

Prem Kumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2537
Joined: 31 Mar 2009 00:10

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

Postby Prem Kumar » 31 Jul 2020 00:01

Rakesh wrote:Not true Sir. This tweet is from the Prime Minister's own twitter account...

https://twitter.com/narendramodi/status ... 86464?s=20 ---> Induction of indigenously made Tejas fighter jet into the Air Force fills our hearts with unparalleled pride & happiness. #TransformingIndia


Thanks Rakesh! Happy to have been proved wrong.

V_Raman
BRFite
Posts: 734
Joined: 04 Sep 2008 22:25

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

Postby V_Raman » 31 Jul 2020 05:00

I get this feeling that Rafale order was done for H&D more than anything else. We just could not back out given how far along we were. We did it the right way alright without corruption, fought in SC, became an emotive issue, etc. etc. But those are due to being pushed to a point of no return.

Vivek K
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2402
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

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

Postby Vivek K » 31 Jul 2020 05:17

Rakesh wrote:Absolutely tactics and training make a key difference and that difference was clearly evident at Balakot, was it not? While the PAF was firing AMRAAM after AMRAAM in orgasmic euphoria, the Su-30MKI pilot successfully evaded them all. Our pilot in turn was waiting to get a lock on, which the PAF - true to form - turned and ran back. Now the IAF could have fired back, but the pilots were following strict ROEs which did not permit firing upon any aircraft until they crossed over into Indian air space.

You're only making my point in your hastiness Admiral! With tactics and training a lot can be overcome. The MKI is a capable bird and with a large force available- well suited to the multiple roles it may need. Added to that are upgraded M2Ks and Mig-29s. These upgraded aircraft can work in tandem with the MKI to accomplish IAF's missions.

You said timely action "should" be taken. The key word is *SHOULD*. Has that action occurred? Since it has not, I ask again...what do you want the IAF to do if the balloon goes up between now and 2022?

Timely action could have been taken in IAF placing orders for LCA several years ago and not delaying them for imaginary large number of refuellers that we possess. It was not taken so that IAF could create the finances for such a ridiculously expensive fighter - $217 million per aircraft - a bargain price compared to the $290 million paid by Qatar. Delivery schedule of the Rafale - 18 by Feb 2021 and final 18 by May 2022. So what will you do in 2020 Admiral if shit hits the roof? Throw 3 Rafales plus the two trainers at PLAAF plus PAF? How will that help - pray enlighten us?

Simple question - why did the IAF want 126 Mirage 2000s in 2001, when a MoU for 140 Su-30MKIs was signed in 2000? The Rafale that you so deeply disdain is the result of a 20 year quest from 126 Mirage 2000s to 126 MMRCA to 36 Rafale. Why did the IAF need 126 more phoren birds over 140 Su-30MKIs? Twenty years ago, the Su-30MKI should have sufficed no? What was the need for 126 Mirage 2000s?


You're hiding the full picture of the time Admiral: at that time, Mig-21s were falling out of the skies at 15-17 aircraft per year. IN 2000 there was no sight (IIRC) of the bisons. The first two were shipped in May 2001; Deliveries of the Sukhoi MKIs were also nowhere near. And a MKI demonstrator crashed in Farnborough in June 1999. The LCA was also nowhere near induction and estimates pointed to 2010. And the IAF had initially built facilities for 150 M2ks. So it made sense at the time to get additional M2ks as an insurance against the Mig fleet, the LCA, the MKI (first delvieris in June 2002).
Today's scenario is different - with the 272 Sukhois delivered and 12 more on order. MIg 29 upgrades largely completed and so is the M2K upgrade (I believe) and the LCA has proven itself to all naysayers as a good fighter. In today's situation adding another fighter type puts a strain on maintenance and logistics. IAF operates - Sukhois, Migs 21,27, 29, M2K, Jaguars.

Oh wait, I already know your answer to that. The IAF is import pasand, because Tejas was on the verge of being inducted in 2000. Never mind that that Tejas only first flew on 04 Jan 2001 and had to undergo years of testing (like all normal aircraft development cycles go through) before induction. But facts like that are just minor quibbles to you.

Admiral - putting words in the mouth of another seems unbecoming of a forum moderator. I will leave it at that. Please read the above. Also factor in that I was banned in 2000 for a couple of weeks for being opposed to the LCA program. That was then, the current LCA is real and is available and costs far less than the M2K upgrade - even at the numbers you state.

Isn't that why air forces do aircraft upgrades?

So is buying the Rafale an upgrade? I'm not sure i understand. When you buy a shiny new plane, and it takes 5 years to get here (through normal process - contracting, manufacturing, training, etc) do you think your opponents are sitting round doing nothing. How long will that fighter retain its edge. So then wat will you advise? Because shit could hit the roof in 2026-28 and upgrades take time - selection, contracting and then installing. So will you have to buy new aircraft say the F35 then at that time to ensure safety against the Chinese J-XX?
Or is conducting upgrades an arts & crafts lesson for the IAF to do in her pastime?

Sad to see a forum moderator go to pieces like this. All my comments are made respectfully Admiral. I have reason to believe that you distort/misinterpret my posts.

But Sir you are questioning it by over inflating the cost of the upgrade. You said $65 million per aircraft cost for the Mirage 2000, when the reality was $43 million per aircraft cost. And since you over inflated the cost of the Mirage 2000 upgrade, by the time the Rafale upgrade comes along, you will say the upgrade will cost $500 million per bird. I am distorting Sir or are you? Where is $43 million and where is $65 million? That is a $22 million difference! I guess that is not a distortion in your books, is it?

Where did you read the word question in my post? Let me restate - with the Track record of the French - $2.2 billion for the M2K upgrade, they are pricey for a) the initial purchase and b) the upgrade. So in total the cost of purchase and upgrade of the Rafale will punch a large hole through IAF's capex budget. Guess what this will cause - deferment and cancellation of other purchases. I am questioning the price of the Rafale not of M2k or MKI or Mig-29 or .....

The 114 MMRCA deal will not go through. The IAF squadron strength of 42 (not 45, another distortion I see ;) ) will be made up by different Tejas variants. There is no money or political will for this. Two more Rafale squadrons will likely come, to which I am sure you will undergo similar heartache like you are having now.

Agree with the error. My response - IAF's authorized squadron level is 42 though some feel that 45 squadrons are needed to fight two hostile neighbors each of which is expanding their air force rapidly.

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4509
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

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

Postby Cain Marko » 31 Jul 2020 05:37

Rakesh wrote:
Vivek K wrote:Why can the other air dominance fighter - the Su-30 MKI not work to perform Rafales roles in combination with about 85 upgraded Mig-29s? And also what is the utility of the jags then - aren't they going to take on SEAD in the beginning hours of a fight? Isn't the MKI capable of performing SEAD roles as well? Should IAF work on making the existing MKIs more lethal instead?

There are many features on the Rafale that is currently not on the Su-30MKI. A few examples would be the AESA radar and EW suite. The Rafale will suppress enemy air defences to a large degree, which will allow the Su-30MKI and the Jaguar to do their jobs. Both aircraft can still do their job, but the attrition rate will be much higher. Survivability of pilot and platform is most important.

Vivek K wrote:We see responses all over the spectrum

I say again - Survivability of pilot and platform is most important. The IAF is not into Kamikaze missions.


Tried to explain this before:
Lo-lo-lo profiles are better performed by rafale than MKI. The value of such profiles is clear from balakot. The hammer is designed for this sincee it is powered. Tfr modes on rbe2 are also key. The Russian equivalent of this is the su34, not the MKI iirc.

Meteor is a gamechanger that no other platform has or will have.

Mica iir with spectra/osf is another potent combo not provided by other planes in the IAF fleet.

Spectra in itself is the most complete EW package on any fighter in the IAF.

This makes the rafale a very potent addition to the inventory filling a unique but crucial space.

Manish_Sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4701
Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17

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

Postby Manish_Sharma » 31 Jul 2020 06:20

Cain Marko wrote:
Spectra in itself is the most complete EW package on any fighter in the IAF.

This makes the rafale a very potent addition to the inventory filling a unique but crucial space.


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thales_Spectra

SPECTRA (Système de Protection et d'Évitement des Conduites de Tir du Rafale (literally: System of Protection and Avoidance of enemy Fire-Control for Rafale) or "Self-Protection Equipment Countering Threats to Rafale Aircraft") was jointly developed by Thales Group and MBDA for the Dassault Rafale fighter aircraft, now in service with the French Air Force and Navy.

The full SPECTRA integrated electronic warfare suite provides long-range detection, identification and accurate localisation of infrared homing, radio frequency and laser threats. The system incorporates radar warning receiver, laser warning and Missile Approach Warning for threat detection plus a phased array radar jammer and a decoy dispenser for threat countering.[1] It also includes a dedicated management unit for data fusion and reaction decision.[citation needed]

The SPECTRA system consists of two infrared missile warning sensors (Détecteur de Départ Missile Nouvelle Génération). A new generation missile warning system (DDM NG) is currently being developed by MBDA. The DDM NG delivered its first in flight images in March 2010 and will be available on the Rafale from 2012.[citation needed] DDM NG incorporates a new infrared array detector which enhances performance with regard to the range at which a missile firing will be detected (with two sensors, each equipped with a fish-eye lens, DDM NG provides a spherical field of view around the aircraft). The DDM-NG also offers improved rejection of false alarms and gives an angular localisation capability which will be compatible with the future use of Directional Infrared Counter Measures (DIRCM).[2]

Thales Group and Dassault Aviation have mentioned stealthy jamming modes for the SPECTRA system, to reduce the aircraft's apparent radar signature. It is not known exactly how these work or even if the capability is fully operational, but it may employ active cancellation technology, such as has been tested by Thales and MBDA. Active cancellation is supposed to work by sampling and analysing incoming radar and feeding it back to the hostile emitter out of phase thus cancelling out the returning radar echo.


Air Marshal Bakshi (Retd.) Said on CNN-IBN the day Rafale were to Land in Ambala that "....Rafale can fly just 500 feet above the ground for 1000 kilometers..." that itself makes it stealthy to radars add motored aasm hammer + SPECTRA Suit with active cancellation + Towed decoy + 150 kilometers range meteor.

I don't think any other fighter in Asia matches these capabilities, no wonder porkis and cheenis tried to sabotage the deal through media moles and their political pawns.

fanne
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3487
Joined: 11 Feb 1999 12:31

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

Postby fanne » 31 Jul 2020 07:17

One another way to look into it is this - IAF imports most if not all of its fighters. Last one deal for importing the fighter was done on 30 November 1996, (SU30MKI, the delivery of what continues even today, with minor enhancement on the way), some 25 years ago. If it has to be cutting edge, it had to do a deal for the best fighter available 20 years from 1996 at least (that is by 2016). The best fighter is F-22 which US is selling to no one, the next best is f-35, unfortunately it is not coming to us (and may not come ever or for foreseeable future), the next best is of course Rafale (followed by Eurofighter, F15X, F-16/Gripen and then J of chinese etc. along with our LCA). We got the best fighter that was available (and irrespective of how costly it is). It is way ahead technically than what we have, or TSPAF or CHICOMAIR.

If J-20 is not stealthy, Rafale will make a mincemeat of it and we are safe for another 10-15 years. If J-20 is good, we will have to then go for SU-57 (hopefully operational by then) or F-35 (if geopolitics favor it). Our MCA is way into the future and who knows how good it will be. However LCA, LCAMK2 and TEDBF,ORCA and MCA will keep filling the lower end and progressively the medium range fighter need, while we keep importing the top edge (so that we have upper hand against adversaries) till we become good at it.

manjgu
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2445
Joined: 11 Aug 2006 10:33

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

Postby manjgu » 31 Jul 2020 08:11

Vivek K wrote:
manjgu wrote:vivek .. u r confusing the issues.1) GIven how its forces are deployed till now, yes India has been pak centric all this while. IAF was aware of 24 a/c forming up in the air in v good time but not aware of their INTENTIONS as it was not a declared war situation and the resultant ambiguity. you need to understand that first. By your logic if PAF has such a abundance of AEW, why they did not detect our strike packages into Balakot and the Migs coming up next day?? 2) the fact that 50% of Raffy are to be stationed in eastern sector, its funny for you to be asking if Raffy is pak centric purchase. modern long ranged A/c are not X centric or Y centric..their long ranges allow them to switch from one place to another. India in its wisdom/folly decided that the possibility of a shooting match with chinis is v less likely and so the low force deployments.

Point taken about the Raffys positioning. That is my bad. But I was reacting to your statement that seems very different about AWACS/AEWs being overrated.

The Balakot strike was unexpected so along with a gutsy decision, had a better surprise element. But alongwith the element of surprise, I would think that superior jamming helped to keep the enemy unaware of the ingress and egress. Why do you think there was no PAF response?
The Feb 27th event was expected. So there should not have been as much of a surprise element and IAF could have used it to thrash PAF and kill more than the one F-16. 3-5 a/c down would have conveyed a message.

The Migs the next day have been explained by USAF as well in their practice with IAF - the Migs used terrain to hide behind and took the enemy by surprise.

But I am surprised at the lack of SAM usage on either side. Pukis were probably scared of hitting their a/c but pre-engagement there would have been a window for SAM usage. Was that ROE taking that weapon out? So does that indicate command and control issues? Could AWACS positioning around the clock have helped? If ground based radars were adequate, why did the first response not use SAMs (were the attacking a.c too far for SAMs?)


1) how cute ! feb 27 was expected... in hindsight everyone is wiser. it could have been 28th or 1st as well... some riposte was expected but the ambiguity was in which way. 2) lack of SAM -- are u expecting either country to firing SAM's on a/c within their respective air spaces? sorry but ur comments on SAM issue are v confusing and not cogent.

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4509
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

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

Postby Cain Marko » 31 Jul 2020 09:25

fanne wrote:
If J-20 is not stealthy, Rafale will make a mincemeat of it and we are safe for another 10-15 years. If J-20 is good, we will have to then go for SU-57 (hopefully operational by then) or F-35 (if geopolitics favor it). Our MCA is way into the future and who knows how good it will be. However LCA, LCAMK2 and TEDBF,ORCA and MCA will keep filling the lower end and progressively the medium range fighter need, while we keep importing the top edge (so that we have upper hand against adversaries) till we become good at it.

My guess is that IAF weighed these options and came up with a2 pronged strategy to deal with the proliferation of 5 gen fighters until the coming of the amca:

1. Rafale
2. S400

We may see an additional sqd or two of rafale or f35 or su57 depending on geopolitical dictates... But that's about it. After this it should be all Tejas, tedbf and amca.

Sumeet
BRFite
Posts: 1532
Joined: 22 May 2002 11:31

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

Postby Sumeet » 31 Jul 2020 09:46

Some people have mentioned about Rafale's low flying capability, see below video as a testimony. Imagine it sneaking through Himalayas like that loaded with Hammer AASM to get to it's target, scaring Erieye with Meteor.


Sumeet
BRFite
Posts: 1532
Joined: 22 May 2002 11:31

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

Postby Sumeet » 31 Jul 2020 09:52

Cain Marko wrote:
fanne wrote:
If J-20 is not stealthy, Rafale will make a mincemeat of it and we are safe for another 10-15 years. If J-20 is good, we will have to then go for SU-57 (hopefully operational by then) or F-35 (if geopolitics favor it). Our MCA is way into the future and who knows how good it will be. However LCA, LCAMK2 and TEDBF,ORCA and MCA will keep filling the lower end and progressively the medium range fighter need, while we keep importing the top edge (so that we have upper hand against adversaries) till we become good at it.

My guess is that IAF weighed these options and came up with a2 pronged strategy to deal with the proliferation of 5 gen fighters until the coming of the amca:

1. Rafale
2. S400

We may see an additional sqd or two of rafale or f35 or su57 depending on geopolitical dictates... But that's about it. After this it should be all Tejas, tedbf and amca.


yep S-400, Phalcon, Netra, ODL, Rafale with Meteor/Scalp/Hammer, MKI with Brahmos-A/I-Derby ER/Astra Mk2 (in future) can blow away any threat for next 8-10 years.

I expect Rafale and MKI to be upgraded in this time frame (at least the new squadrons of Rafale). This way we get 10 years to get to Tejas Mk2 FOC and AMCA IOC.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9479
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

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

Postby Rakesh » 31 Jul 2020 09:59

Vivek K wrote:You're only making my point in your hastiness Admiral! With tactics and training a lot can be overcome. The MKI is a capable bird and with a large force available- well suited to the multiple roles it may need. Added to that are upgraded M2Ks and Mig-29s. These upgraded aircraft can work in tandem with the MKI to accomplish IAF's missions.

The IAF has been operating the Su-30K/MK since 1997 (23 years) and with the MKI since 2002 (18 years). The IAF has been operating the Mirage 2000 and MiG-29 since 1985 (35 years). How much more tactics and training does the IAF need to master on these platforms? And with the upgrades, even those tactics and training have been updated and mastered. What are you talking?

Tactics and training go hand-in-hand with capable platforms. Tactics and training are developed from the platforms you have. Tactics and training do not live in a vacuum. What tactics and training that is applicable for one aircraft (i.e. payload and range capability of Su-30) will not work for another (i.e. payload and range capability of MiG-29). But both are needed, as they serve different needs.

What are the multiple roles that the IAF needs that you are referring to? If the IAF can reduce the attrition rate (both in terms of men and material) by inducting a newer platform, to support the existing platforms in service, the IAF would most certainly take it. The IAF is only effective when the men and women who wear the uniform, are actually AVAILABLE (i.e ALIVE) when needed.

Sir, in your desire for local maal, you have thrown logic out the window. You view every foreign purchase as some sort of evil Satanic design to kill the Tejas. The current Chief has already gone on record stating that the Tejas is the best in its class in the world. The Air Chief was present at the raising of the second squadron. He even flew a sortie during the squadron raising. The IAF could not have asked for a better man to support the Tejas program. He is perfect for the role.

Vivek K wrote:Timely action could have been taken in IAF placing orders for LCA several years ago and not delaying them for imaginary large number of refuellers that we possess. It was not taken so that IAF could create the finances for such a ridiculously expensive fighter - $217 million per aircraft - a bargain price compared to the $290 million paid by Qatar. Delivery schedule of the Rafale - 18 by Feb 2021 and final 18 by May 2022. So what will you do in 2020 Admiral if shit hits the roof? Throw 3 Rafales plus the two trainers at PLAAF plus PAF? How will that help - pray enlighten us?

Could and should had to be done. But it is not done, is it? You keep harping about the past, as if it is going to change anything in the present. Even the 12 Su-30MKIs and 21 MiG-29s ordered will come only in 18 - 24 months. The first batch of 83 Tejas Mk1As will arrive only by Dec 2023, assuming the contract is signed in Dec 2020. That is how aircraft deliveries work.

Are you aware of why the unit cost of the Rafale in the first 36 deal is costing this much? Have you see the break down of the deal? Which air base in India can house the Rafale without base infrastructure? What about training simulators? Weapons (unless you plan for the Rafale to fire tulsi and marigolds at the enemy)? Spares? Tools? PBL Contract?

Even I can shoot off a figure like that ---> Almost $64 million for each Tejas Mk1A. That much money for a MiG-21 replacement? Should it not be around $20 million per bird, because MiG-21 was even cheaper than $20 million! At $64 million, that is more than 3X the amount of $20 million and that too for a MiG-21 replacement? But my criticism is not valid and is illogical. Because the finer details of that unit cost is below.

​Deal for 83 Tejas fighters passes bureaucratic hurdle
https://www.flightglobal.com/fixed-wing ... 96.article
19 March 2020

The procurement cost of $5.3 billion covers 73 single-seat Tejas Mk1As and 10 twin-seat trainers in addition to sensors, weapons and associated equipment and spares support from HAL for a period of two years, a company official tells FlightGlobal.

Pulling out the figure of $217 million for each Rafale might work with the gullible whom you want to convince that the deal is a waste of money, but not with me. Nice try though. Although I am fully aware that you will now say that since $217 million is greater than $63 million, so Rafale is a waste of money :lol:

Vivek K wrote:You're hiding the full picture of the time Admiral: at that time, Mig-21s were falling out of the skies at 15-17 aircraft per year. IN 2000 there was no sight (IIRC) of the bisons. The first two were shipped in May 2001; Deliveries of the Sukhoi MKIs were also nowhere near. And a MKI demonstrator crashed in Farnborough in June 1999. The LCA was also nowhere near induction and estimates pointed to 2010. And the IAF had initially built facilities for 150 M2ks. So it made sense at the time to get additional M2ks as an insurance against the Mig fleet, the LCA, the MKI (first deliveries in June 2002).

Deliveries of the Su-30MKIs were nowhere near because the first batch was formally inducted on 27 Sept 2002. So in 2000, there was no Su-30MKI. How in the year 2000, could MKI delivery be near...when there was no plane to induct in the first place? In 2000, the Rambha was still undergoing tests and certification. Just a minor, very little issue that you seem not to be concerned with.

The first two BISONs returned to India only in July 2001. There was no sight of the BISONs in 2000 because again, testing and certification had to be completed. Another minor, really negligible issue. I should not have even brought it up!

In the year 2000, the M2K completed 15 years of service and the IAF was very happy with the platform and wanted to induct more. They wanted to license build 110 in the 1980s for a total fleet of 150 Mirage 2000s. That did not pan out and in 2001, they were looking to induct 126 Mirage 2000s. Now with MMRCA 2.0, the IAF is looking to induct 114 aircraft to add to the 36 Rafales, for a total fleet of 150. And in 2001, the IAF was looking at the Dash 5 variant and not H/TH variant that was in service.

Dassault was winding down the production line and would have transferred the entire line to India. Acquiring 126 Mirage 2000 had nothing to do with Su-30MKI or BISON. They were different programs to serve different needs.

Vivek K wrote:Today's scenario is different - with the 272 Sukhois delivered and 12 more on order. MIg 29 upgrades largely completed and so is the M2K upgrade (I believe) and the LCA has proven itself to all naysayers as a good fighter. In today's situation adding another fighter type puts a strain on maintenance and logistics. IAF operates - Sukhois, Migs 21,27, 29, M2K, Jaguars.

MiG-27 retired last year. MiG-21 will be out the door by 2024. Only the Su-30MKI, MiG-29UPG, Mirage 2000 and Jaguars are left. The latter three will all be gone by the mid-2030s. The MiG-29 and the Mirage 2000 will hit 50 years of age in 2035, assuming they are still around at that time. The story for the Jaguar is not too different either.

That leaves only the Su-30MKI and in 2035, the oldest bird will be 33 years of age. There are 13 - 14 Su-30MKI units and thus that leaves around 29 squadrons that need to be filled with other combat aircraft. Majority of those 29 units will be different Tejas variants, followed by 2 (and possibly 2 more) Rafale units. I don't have a crystal ball, but I do not see how MMRCA 2.0 is going to pan out - financially or politically.

Vivek K wrote:Admiral - putting words in the mouth of another seems unbecoming of a forum moderator. I will leave it at that. Please read the above. Also factor in that I was banned in 2000 for a couple of weeks for being opposed to the LCA program. That was then, the current LCA is real and is available and costs far less than the M2K upgrade - even at the numbers you state.

I am aware of what I typed and I stand by it. This is what you said about the Mirage 2000 upgrade cost....

Vivek K wrote:And how much does one think an MLU in 2030 for the Rafales cost, going by the $65 million per a/c to upgrade M2Ks without engine change?

I pointed out that the upgrade cost was nothing even close to that figure of $65 million. You are getting takleef because I called you out on that. Your track record is to inflate the cost of phoren maal to prove a point, which you do not have to begin with.

Vivek K wrote:So is buying the Rafale an upgrade? I'm not sure i understand. When you buy a shiny new plane, and it takes 5 years to get here (through normal process - contracting, manufacturing, training, etc) do you think your opponents are sitting round doing nothing. How long will that fighter retain its edge. So then wat will you advise? Because shit could hit the roof in 2026-28 and upgrades take time - selection, contracting and then installing. So will you have to buy new aircraft say the F35 then at that time to ensure safety against the Chinese J-XX?

Some more facts for you Sir.

Fact #1 - The deal for the Rafale was signed in Sept 2016.

Fact #2 - The handover was done in Sept 2019, as per signed contract. Industry standard is three years for initial delivery. Even HAL is taking three years for delivery of Tejas Mk1A. Shocking no?

Fact #3 - Again, as per signed contract, the first batch was to arrive in India by May 2020. The pilots had to complete their training syllabus which is completed in progressive stages. This was part of the agreement when it was signed in Sept 2016.

These pilots are not learning the basic nuances of flight with the Rafale. All 4++ generation combat aircraft are more mission specific training vs actual flying. And this training takes time and much of this training is classified. I am sure you know what types of training I am referring to. And the pilots who are operating her are the best in the IAF. Many of them, if not all, are TACDE graduates with FSL or FCL badges. Wing Commander Abhishek Tripathi took part in Cope India 2018 ---> https://twitter.com/sethu1215/status/10 ... 29856?s=20

So the delivery of May 2020, has happened now in July 2020 due to COVID - a delay of two months. Perhaps at the Tejas Mk1A signing scheduled for Dec 2020, they should consult some guru to see if any zombies or aliens will come to attack Planet Earth in 2023, like how COVID did in 2020. That would be helpful. Who knew in Sept 2016 that something like COVID would put the entire world on hold?

So a delay of two months in the first batch, but you said five years. Please explain how you came up with that figure. Oh wait, we all know. You tacked on Prime Minister Modi's announcement with President Hollande from April 2015 and brilliantly came up with five years. But delivery can only happen with actual contract signature and not MoU. You should know that Sir, if you are going to critique the acquisition. Come on!

The next part of your analysis is a true gem ---> i.e. shit could hit the roof in 2026-28 and upgrades take time - selection, contracting and then installing.

Tejas Mk1A signing scheduled for Dec 2020 and delivery of first batch is scheduled for Dec 2023. Like Rafale, will Tejas Mk1A also be obsolete to tackle J-XX? Because HAL proposed the Mk1A in 2015 and the first batch will be delivered in 2023. Eight years later. By that time, she will be obsolete! Knowing this, do you think Sir, we should sign up for Mandarin and Cantonese classes? Because the Chinese will have run us over and instead of the Tricolor flying over the Red Fort, it will be the Chicom flag. Or do you foresee Tejas to have over-the-air upgrades, so it will always be relevant? But Rafale will be lagging behind right? Those evil French looted us.

If you come up with that rule for Rafale, it will be true for Tejas as well. Will also be true for the upgraded Mirage 2000s, upgraded MiG-29s and every other combat aircraft in the IAF. But we all know that is not how it works. Nice try.

Vivek K wrote:Sad to see a forum moderator go to pieces like this. All my comments are made respectfully Admiral. I have reason to believe that you distort/misinterpret my posts.

You are digging your own hole. I do not need to resort to distorting and mis-interpreting your posts. Example is right below.

Vivek K wrote:Where did you read the word question in my post? Let me restate - with the Track record of the French - $2.2 billion for the M2K upgrade, they are pricey for a) the initial purchase and b) the upgrade. So in total the cost of purchase and upgrade of the Rafale will punch a large hole through IAF's capex budget. Guess what this will cause - deferment and cancellation of other purchases. I am questioning the price of the Rafale not of M2k or MKI or Mig-29 or .....

Please divide $2.2 billion with 49 Mirage 2000s and see what the per unit cost upgrade comes to. Please just do that. And when you do, see if you get a figure anywhere close to $65 million per aircraft. Those are YOUR words, not MINE.

The Mirage 2000 was comparatively expensive in 1985 in relation to the MiG-29 purchase. But yet in 1999 at Kargil, the platform which successfully attacked Tiger Hill was the Mirage 2000. The MiG-29 could not do it and neither could the Su-30K/MK. The Mirage 2000 has always had a higher availability rate compared to the MiG-29. In Balakot, the platform that successfully completed the mission was the Mirage 2000. Not the Su-30MKI or the upgraded MiG-29, both of which were present in significant numbers. Why did the IAF not use them?

The French are pricey, but you get the capability what you pay for. F-35 is more expensive than Tejas. Where on the technological totem pole lies the F-35 in relation to the Tejas? But is that a valid comparison for the IAF? Now please do not say I am arguing for F-35 instead of Tejas :)

You *CANNOT* take the unit cost of the Mirage 2000 from 1985 and then tack on the upgrade cost from 2011. It does not work like that. Using that formula, every aircraft will look horrendously expensive over the course of her life. So I am distorting your words and mis-interpreting your posts? Or are you doing Lahori mathematics to prove your point? And here is the source for the $2.2 billion upgrade cost, a number that you gave.

Indian Air Force Mirage 2000 Upgrade Progresses Despite Groundings
https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news ... groundings

Although a $2.2 billion upgrade of India’s Dassault Mirage 2000 fighters is progressing, around a quarter of the fleet of 49 is grounded because a contract for spares has remained unsigned for years, AIN has learned from sources involved in the program.

Sumeet
BRFite
Posts: 1532
Joined: 22 May 2002 11:31

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

Postby Sumeet » 31 Jul 2020 12:40

What people are also forgetting with Rafale which has planned F4 and very possible F5 version (~2030) with 6th generation tech we will have a very good upgrade path which will put pressure over our adversaries. That pressure will remain on TSP/China for next decade and will give us psychological edge and they will have to play a catch up. Rafale's F4/F5 version will put it at par with F-35 in terms of Sensors, Data fusion and

We chose MKI as our air dominance fighter 2 decades ago and it did put pressure on TSP (not on China since they had similar equipment). However, it is not able to maintain pressure in this regard because lack of upgrade path ensuring continuous insertion of state of art technology.

This pressure will multiply if we:
    Get our indigenous missiles ready & integrated with Tejas, MKI and Rafale(SAAW, NGARM, Brahmos-A/NG, Astra Mk1/Mk2, Astra SFDR)
    Get more Netra and Phalcons AWACS
    Make IACCS and data link operational asset wide operation
    Augment our Space Recon/Elint/Image int/Navigation assets
    Induct S-400, Barak-8 MR SAM, XRSAM, Akash Mk2, VL-QRSAM and if (possible/needed) S-500
    Use this decade to get Mk2 to FOC and AMCA to near to IOC

Give me some time I will dig up details on Rafale's planned upgrade path and share here as a point by point list

ks_sachin
BRFite
Posts: 1482
Joined: 24 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Sydney

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

Postby ks_sachin » 31 Jul 2020 12:46

Sumeet wrote:....

Saar you forget that our boys now have a rifle that will fire consistently...
They will also get new helmets...

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8946
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby brar_w » 31 Jul 2020 12:59

Sumeet wrote:What people are also forgetting with Rafale which has planned F4 and very possible F5 version (~2030) with 6th generation tech we will have a very good upgrade path which will put pressure over our adversaries.

What 6th gen tech?

Rafale's F4/F5 version will put it at par with F-35 in terms of Sensors, Data fusion and

We will have to wait and find out. The F-35 is well supported and is not a static target. Block 4 is delivering starting next 2 years and will continue to deliver significant upgrades pretty much across sensors, sensor fusion, mission computing, weapons, EW and the lot. Then, in the second half of the 2020's, block 5 will start including a possible re-enging using an adaptive engine or technology inserted from adaptive engine development programs. You must also factor in that the F-35 starts from a different baseline. For example, at the current baseline it generates more electric power for sub systems then either the F-22 or the f-15E. The electrical system will likely get a significant upgrade by block 5. There is EOS and a critical mass of customers who are invested in these upgrades with a very high $ amount put into modernization and follow on development. Rafale upgade is mostly French funded within the constraints of their defense budget and without EOS so they are picky about what they get and what they ultimately buy. For example, they still don't have an AESA retrofit program and one may not come till mid-life for non AESA equipped aircraft. But they do a good job in supporting the program within their budget considerations though when SCAF requires billions per year of R&D this pipeline will be put to test. But a 5th, or 6th gen fighter it is not.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9479
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

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

Postby Rakesh » 31 Jul 2020 18:24

Sumeet wrote:What people are also forgetting with Rafale which has planned F4 and very possible F5 version (~2030) with 6th generation tech...

Typo saar? Did you mean 5th generation tech? But the main USP of fifth generation is VLO.

While Dassault has done a lot of work to reduce Rafale's signature, she is certainly not VLO.

But she is a very capable plane and will take on any Pak/Chinese threat.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23027
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

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

Postby chetak » 31 Jul 2020 18:44

Rakesh wrote:
Sumeet wrote:What people are also forgetting with Rafale which has planned F4 and very possible F5 version (~2030) with 6th generation tech...

Typo saar? Did you mean 5th generation tech? But the main USP of fifth generation is VLO.

While Dassault has done a lot of work to reduce Rafale's signature, she is certainly not VLO.

But she is a very capable plane and will take on any Pak/Chinese threat.

bhala uski kameez meri kameez se safed kaise :wink:

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9479
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

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

Postby Rakesh » 31 Jul 2020 18:48

chetak wrote:bhala uski kameez meri kameez se safed kaise :wink:

:lol:

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14480
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

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

Postby pankajs » 31 Jul 2020 20:57

From the horses mouth. Lo jee ... No wonder IAF is pumped up on the induction of Rafale.

Rafale vs J-20: Ex-IAF chief Dhanoa calls China’s bluff with ‘two simple questions’
https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-ne ... eIrXI.html

“If the J-20, also called the Mighty Dragon, is indeed a fifth generation stealth fighter, then why does it have canards while genuine 5th generation fighters such as the US’ F 22, F 35 and Russian fifth generation Su 57 don’t,” Dhanoa asked.
....
“I don’t think J-20 is stealthy enough to be called a fifth generation fighter as the canard increases the radar signature of the fighter and gives away its position to a long-range meteor missile that the Rafale has,” he said.

The other question the former IAF chief has for the Chinese is: “Why can’t the J-20 supercruise if it is really a 5th generation fighter as its manufacturer Chengdu Aerospace Corporation calls it.”
...
The Rafale has the supercruiseaility and its radar signature is comparable to the best of the fighters in the world,” Dhanoa told Hindustan Times.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9479
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

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

Postby Rakesh » 31 Jul 2020 21:06

Fake article Saar. All nonsense onlee. Dhanoa Sir is incorrect. Why are you giving takleef to folks on the forum who wanted the IAF to induct the plane hush-hush? J-20 is superior to Rafale. The Chinese are so smart, that at the very first attempt, they have created an aircraft that rivals even the F-22 and F-35! I am dhoti shivering onlee.

Let us start learning Mandarin and Cantonese for when we get assimilated into the Han populace. Rafale is waste of money.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9479
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

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

Postby Rakesh » 31 Jul 2020 21:30

Manish_Sharma wrote:Air Marshal Bakshi (Retd.) Said on CNN-IBN the day Rafale were to Land in Ambala that "....Rafale can fly just 500 feet above the ground for 1000 kilometers..." that itself makes it stealthy to radars add motored aasm hammer + SPECTRA Suit with active cancellation + Towed decoy + 150 kilometers range meteor.

I don't think any other fighter in Asia matches these capabilities, no wonder porkis and cheenis tried to sabotage the deal through media moles and their political pawns.

Air Marshal Bakshi (retd) is wrong. Rafale cannot even fly. Fake News!

The IAF is betraying the country by buying Rafale, when Tejas can fly at 250 feet above the ground for 2,000 kilometers.

And Tejas is cheaper. All lies onlee to justify importing.

Sumeet
BRFite
Posts: 1532
Joined: 22 May 2002 11:31

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

Postby Sumeet » 31 Jul 2020 22:18

Rakesh wrote:
Sumeet wrote:What people are also forgetting with Rafale which has planned F4 and very possible F5 version (~2030) with 6th generation tech...

Typo saar? Did you mean 5th generation tech? But the main USP of fifth generation is VLO.

While Dassault has done a lot of work to reduce Rafale's signature, she is certainly not VLO.

But she is a very capable plane and will take on any Pak/Chinese threat.

Yes I meant 5th Gen stuff but that too in terms of Sensors and Data Fusion. I mentioned that above. Of course Rafale can never become like a designed from scratch 5th Gen VLO /all aspect stealth fighter. That difference is inherent in the nature of these two entities Rafale vs F-35/F-22.

More I will write in response to Brar's post above later.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9479
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

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

Postby Rakesh » 31 Jul 2020 22:20

Thank You Sumeet.

VishalJ
BRFite
Posts: 1022
Joined: 12 Feb 2009 06:40
Location: Mumbai
Contact:

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

Postby VishalJ » 31 Jul 2020 23:06

Angad speaks on the Rafale


Vips
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2898
Joined: 14 Apr 2017 18:23

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

Postby Vips » 01 Aug 2020 04:26

The Han idiots have come up with new classification of the jets. Per the CCP Global Times mouthpiece Rafale is 3rd Generation aircraft and the intergalactic J20 is a 4th generation bird. :lol:

It is a special stealthy plane which is easily detectable by a not so cutting edge radar (PESA of SU30 MKI) and it can supercruise after activating the afterburners of the (Russian pilfered) engines :rotfl:

disha
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7397
Joined: 03 Dec 2006 04:17
Location: gaganaviharin

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

Postby disha » 01 Aug 2020 08:04

At any given point, I think the BRF forum members would make excellent tacticians at AF TACDE!

I have a noob question. How many here have studied the minute by minute account of Super Entedards when HMS Shiefeild was attacked? Honest answer. No googling. This was circa 1982.

And then compare it with what Raffalay brings.

m_saini
BRFite
Posts: 232
Joined: 23 May 2020 20:25

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

Postby m_saini » 01 Aug 2020 09:11

^^ Noob so I cheated and googled :mrgreen:

Not posting the source so as not to spoil the challenge for others. Is low-level ingress the correct answer? though it seems other factors also played a role. Major among them being the pressing need of the officers to relieve themselves during the attack :rotfl:

manjgu
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2445
Joined: 11 Aug 2006 10:33

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

Postby manjgu » 01 Aug 2020 12:20

and low level over land is muuuuuuuuuuuuuch more difficult than over sea !!

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8946
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby brar_w » 01 Aug 2020 16:01

Vips wrote:The Han idiots have come up with new classification of the jets. Per the CCP Global Times mouthpiece Rafale is 3rd Generation aircraft and the intergalactic J20 is a 4th generation bird. :lol:


It is consistent with how the Chinese classify their aircraft and generations.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9479
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

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

Postby Rakesh » 01 Aug 2020 18:26

https://twitter.com/livefist/status/128 ... 32608?s=20 ---> HEADS UP: Air Marshal Raghu Nambiar's most detailed interview goes up 6pm. Every Rafale Q: politics, IAF enhancements, comparisons with China's J-20, why India's next foreign fighter contest is a pipe dream -- and why his heart is most set on LCA Mk.2.


Vips
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2898
Joined: 14 Apr 2017 18:23

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

Postby Vips » 01 Aug 2020 19:06

brar_w wrote:
Vips wrote:The Han idiots have come up with new classification of the jets. Per the CCP Global Times mouthpiece Rafale is 3rd Generation aircraft and the intergalactic J20 is a 4th generation bird. :lol:


It is consistent with how the Chinese classify their aircraft and generations.


Brarji they are free to call their jets whatever they want but they expose themselves as jokers when they try to impose their classification standards (calling Rafale a 3.5 Gen jet) over already accepted and credible ones which are followed by the rest of the world.

Avinandan
BRFite
Posts: 217
Joined: 12 Jun 2005 12:29
Location: Pune

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

Postby Avinandan » 02 Aug 2020 01:01


abhik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3036
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

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

Postby abhik » 02 Aug 2020 01:41

Vips wrote:
brar_w wrote:
It is consistent with how the Chinese classify their aircraft and generations.


Brarji they are free to call their jets whatever they want but they expose themselves as jokers when they try to impose their classification standards (calling Rafale a 3.5 Gen jet) over already accepted and credible ones which are followed by the rest of the world.


The whole generation concept is "imposed" by the US/west no?

VKumar
BRFite
Posts: 599
Joined: 15 Sep 1999 11:31
Location: Mumbai,India

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

Postby VKumar » 02 Aug 2020 16:13

One squadron of Rafale every year till the MCA is available


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: BALAR025 and 137 guests