MRCA News and Discussion

[dorai]

Czech guardians signed off

On 1 September the Czech Air Force signed off as guardians of the Baltic skies after four month on NATO Quick Reaction Alert from the Siauliai air base in Lithuania.

2009-09-02 |

Two Gripen fighters have been on 24 hour standby, ready to be in the air 15 minutes after an alert. During this period a record eight Alfa scrambles were recorded, live incidents compared to the regular two training scrambles performed every work day.

“All Alfa scrambles ended with a visual identification and we were always on time”, says detachment commander Major Jaroslav Mika.

From the start the Czech Air Force arrived with a detachment of 75 people including seven operational pilots and 30 technicians working three shifts. After a while 10 support personnel were sent home since the host, the Lithuanian Air Force, provided more service than first anticipated. During the preparation stage it was also planned for some support personnel from the Swedish Air Force, but they were never needed. The only things needed were some new moving maps and some extra pilot equipment.

“Gripen is a remarkable fighter regarding logistical support”, is Major Mikas conclusion.

http://www.gripen.com/en/MediaRelations ... ed_off.htm

German Air Force to Replace Czech Air Contingent in Baltic Air-Policing Mission

08:36 GMT, August 31, 2009 Air contingents of the allies deployed on the Baltic Air-policing mission will rotate in Lithuanian Air Force Aviation Base (Šiauliai) on August 31. After four months of duty Czech Air Contingent with four JAS-39 „Gripen" jets will be replaced by German troops. For the two first months Baltic airspace will be guarded with four fourth-generation „Eurofighter" jets to be deployed beyond Germany's territory in a multinational mission for the first time. Later F-4F „Phantom" will take their place.

Security for Baltic airspace will be provided by Germany for the third time. Germans conducted the mission on July-September 2005 and July-August 2008, with F-4F „Phantom" jets both times. The third shift of German Air Contingent will include 130 soldiers, mostly members of Fighter Wing 74 of German Air Force (deployed in Neuburg on the Danube). Troops in the Contingent will rotate every two to three weeks and commander - every six weeks. The first shift will be led by Lt. Col. Marc Gruene.

http://www.defpro.com/news/details/9458/

[Cain Marko]

For instance:
MiG-35 = 39,600lbf afterburning / 33,069lb empty = 1.197
The SH is listed as having an 0.93 t/w ratio, yet it weighs less and has more thrust than the MiG-35!
using the 'MiG-35 calculation' we get:
44,00lb afterburning / 30,564 empty = 1.439

George,

YOu have the MiG-35 figures all wrong. Here is a v.quick lookie @ the fulcrum evolution:
MiG-29A - 10900kg empty, 18500kg mtow
MiG-29M (original 9.15 circa 1992) - 11600kg empty, 22500kg mtow
MiG-29K (original 9.31 circa 1991) - 12700kg empty, 23000kg mtow
MiG-29K (new 9.41, 2007) - 12000-12700kg empty, 24000kg mtow
MiG-35 (new?) - yet to be seen but guess it will be closer to 11.5 - 12 tons since the M/K/35 are considered one unified family.

THe current MiG-35 is based on the M so is probly no heavier than 11600kg empty. In my calculations I was conservative and used 12 tons as empty. Adding 15-20% composites will only help keep weight down. So, in all probability the MiG-35 has the 2nd spot after the EF2K in the TWR dept. for the MRCA race.

Remember, the fulcrum (mig-29A) is based in Leh, which says something about its performance. The newer fulcrums will only have more power and greater TWR. They are also more manouverable probly since the M series onwards all have relaxed stability unlike the original A variant which was stable. This was supposedly the reason its STRs were lower than the flanker and possibly the viper.

Dorai,

Those are some very informative posts. Thanks.

CM.

[GeorgeWelch]

George,

YOu have the MiG-35 figures all wrong.

I was just going by what was at that link posted by avinash.rd ::shrug::

If it's that far off, someone really ought to correct it.

One more point. Rafale carries more payload.

French pilots have admitted that the SH does better with a heavy payload than the Rafale.

[Cain Marko]

Some interesting (and not so flattering information) about the Shornet posted by "Franc" @ Keypubs. I know its dated, but the source is v.good (keeping in mind the innate tendencies of bean counters of course). I was aware of some of these issues, wonder how many have been taken care of:

http://www.gao.gov/archive/1999/ns99127.pdf

Table 1 shows that the testers
identified two operational effectiveness issues with significant risk
(air-to-air weapons and survivability) and six with moderate risk.
Table 1: Critical Operational Issues
Source: Navy operational test reports.
The operational testers’ OT-IIB assessment identified 29 major deficiencies
in the E/F. The deficiencies related to such things as the E/F’s ability to
accelerate, turn, climb, and roll. Essentially, the E/F does not do as well in
these areas as the F/A-18C aircraft. Additionally, the testers identified
Critical operational issue OT-IIA risk OT-IIB risk
Air-to-air weapons Not assessed Significant
Survivability Significant Significant
Fighter escort Moderate Moderate
Combat air patrol Little or no risk Moderate
Air combat maneuvering Not assessed Moderate
Air-to-ground sensor performance Moderate Moderate
Air-to-ground weapons Moderate Moderate
Air-to-air sensor performance Moderate Moderate
B-281419
Page 9 GAO/NSIAD-99-127 Defense Acquisitions
buffeting and lateral instability, or drift, as flying quality deficiencies. They
also listed as major problems the ALE-50 towed decoy and the capability of
the radar warning receiver to indicate the direction of oncoming threats. I think they have taken care of these and the towed decoy + EW suite works fine.
The specific deficiencies identified by the operational testers4 are as
follows:
• poor climb performance above 30,000 feet;(the shornet needs those 12 ton engines badly)
• low acceleration; not surprising considering the canted pylons, massive weight and low twr.
• airframe buffet; iirc, this was a problem leading to vibration issues even in the f-18C. End result was that land based versions such as those used by the RMAF/RAAF were forced to keep the heavy navalized gear to manage vibration and damage to weapons.
• high angle of attack and agility and controllability;
• slow response to control inputs, slow loaded energy addition rate, and
excessive speed loss during air combat maneuvering;
• tactically ineffective sustained turn rate; Not surprising
I think the defects below have been rectified
• insufficient cooling capacity for seekers on air-to-air weapons; - presumably taken care of by now since the apg-79 seems to be working fine.
• improper indication of direction of arrival of oncoming threat systems;
• damage to AIM-9 missile assemblies caused by wing tip environment;
• ALE-50 tow line burn-off in afterburner;
• difficulty maintaining lateral trim;
• under-wing environment damages aircraft stores;
• unsafe delivery of Rockeye bomb;
• aircraft radar deficiency;
• leading edge extension difficulties;
• inconsistent brake effectiveness;
• inadequate cooling capability of the fuel thermal management system;
and
• Targeting Forward Looking Infrared Radar resolution and
magnification.
Appendix I describes each of these deficiencies and discusses their

And much of this was in comparison to the f-18C! One can imagine what it'll be like when faced with flankers or modern designs such as the J10 or the rest of the MRCA candidates.

CM.

[Singha]

of the whole lot the F18 is well known as the least performance oriented airframe. but thats one square in the entire matrix. the IAF will have plenty of sukhois, and (one hopes) Tejas for the air superiority role.

however if Tejas is going to be limited to a token few, then MRCA needs to be a great A2A platform surely.

F_solah variant based around block52 Sufa maybe more cost efficient and performing than a Obese block60 derivative.

[soumik]

why don't we just get 100 migs-35's and another 100 EF-2000? that way we can have the best of both worlds.

[Austin]

I think superior Air to Air performance should be the corner stone for any aircraft selected and should be sacrosanct .

The rest of the capability can be added along the way for any fighter , but if one starts with an basic fundamental flaw in AA performance and rely on superior electronics or BVR to do the job , then its a problem , your opponent will catch up with electronics as its dynamic and missile etc can always be jammed electronically or outflanked by tactics.

If you end up in WVR combat as most likely it will happen in this part of subcontinent , you need an equal chance to out knife your opponent both in WVR missile and gun kills

[Cain Marko]

F_solah variant based around block52 Sufa maybe more cost efficient and performing than a Obese block60 derivative.

Singha saar, why all these halfway measures when the rafale provides the most balanced combo?. Excellent A2A (stellar STR/ITR, >305 m/s climb rate, supercruise, passive attack capability via Spectra and OSF + Mica IIR, AESA + Meteor).
Superb A2G ability (payload > 9 tons!, range, standoff munitions including Apache, Scalp, AASM). IIRC, it did not suffer a single hit in strike missions during Red flag 08. I simply don't think there is any MRCA contender that offers the relative maturity, innovation, stealth, multirole capability as the Rafale.

Sure the French are pricey, but I'd rather have fewer rafales which offers some v.distinct advantages. Number shortage will be made up not just by MRCA but also by LCAs, MKIs, Pakfa and later MCA.

It sure is a looker to boot!

CM

[Cain Marko]

I think superior Air to Air performance should be the corner stone for any aircraft selected and should be sacrosanct .

The rest of the capability can be added along the way for any fighter , but if one starts with an basic fundamental flaw in AA performance and rely on superior electronics or BVR to do the job , then its a problem , your opponent will catch up with electronics as its dynamic and missile etc can always be jammed electronically or outflanked by tactics.

If you end up in WVR combat as most likely it will happen in this part of subcontinent , you need an equal chance to out knife your opponent both in WVR missile and gun kills

Hear hear! Some v.good points there. There is good reason the IAF still practices WVR with guns in a variety of exercises including expensive intl ones such as indradhanush and the run up to red flag 08.

CM

[VijayKumarSinha]

I think superior Air to Air performance should be the corner stone for any aircraft selected and should be sacrosanct .

The rest of the capability can be added along the way for any fighter , but if one starts with an basic fundamental flaw in AA performance and rely on superior electronics or BVR to do the job , then its a problem , your opponent will catch up with electronics as its dynamic and missile etc can always be jammed electronically or outflanked by tactics.

If you end up in WVR combat as most likely it will happen in this part of subcontinent , you need an equal chance to out knife your opponent both in WVR missile and gun kills

Couldn't agree more with Austin. Air to Air performance is sacrosanct. U.S.A is going around saying that 'maneuverability is irrelevant' in order to sell F-35's(manuverability is not one of its top selling points) and BVR weapons, when the truth is that they already have the F-22's: the best dog fighter is the world. Whatever might be the future of aviation(चालकless lol) Air to air will find its way into it in some way or another.


फ सोल्हा कॉ सुखोई टीस म के आई ने कॉप इंडिया २००६ मे नको चने चब्वा दिया था ऐसे मे उसी प्लॅटफॉर्म का प्लेन लेने में हमारा कुछ फ़ायदा नही है

दूसरी तरफ यूयेसे मे फ पैंतीस कॉ लेकर अलग ही तमाशे चल रहे हैं
http://www.defenselink.mil/news/newsart ... x?id=55711
पता चला की इस आड्मिनिस्ट्रेशन ने नही तो अगली ने अगर नया ओर बेहतर एंजिन बनाना शुरू कर दिया तो हमे ये प्लेन और देर से मिलेगा(अगर भारत नें फ सोलह खरीदा तो)

[GeorgeWelch]

The rest of the capability can be added along the way for any fighter , but if one starts with an basic fundamental flaw in AA performance and rely on superior electronics or BVR to do the job , then its a problem , your opponent will catch up with electronics as its dynamic and missile etc can always be jammed electronically or outflanked by tactics.

In theory, but the MiG-29 has been trying to do that for THIRTY YEARS and still hasn't managed it.

At some point you have to acknowledge that Russia will NEVER catch up in avionics because they simply don't have the money.

If you end up in WVR combat as most likely it will happen in this part of subcontinent , you need an equal chance to out knife your opponent both in WVR missile and gun kills

WVR agility means squat vs missiles because you are well inside the NEZ. Far more important is your counter-measure suite.

As far as gun kills, the SH can point its nose with the best of them.

[GeorgeWelch]

U.S.A is going around saying that 'maneuverability is rrelevant' in order to sell F-35's(manuverability is not one of its top selling points)

You have it backwards, the F-35 wasn't designed with maneuverability as a top priority (although it still is very good, comparable to F-16) BECAUSE they found it didn't matter.

Foreign sales for the F-35 are nice, but just a fraction of domestic sales. If they didn't believe what they were selling, they never would have made it their main fighter.

[VijayKumarSinha]

U.S.A is going around saying that 'maneuverability is rrelevant' in order to sell F-35's(manuverability is not one of its top selling points)

You have it backwards, the F-35 wasn't designed with maneuverability as a top priority (although it still is very good, comparable to F-16) BECAUSE they found it didn't matter.

Foreign sales for the F-35 are nice, but just a fraction of domestic sales. If they didn't believe what they were selling, they never would have made it their main fighter.

आपका मतलब की वोही फ सोलह जिसकी सुखोई ने २००६ में मदर सिस्टर one कर दी थी?

did you just use CAPITAL LETTERS? OMG OMG I thought you could do without it.

Also, as that article above pointed out they still havn't settled on the right engines for that plane, so are you sure you want it as your main fighter?

[rohitvats]

Paging all the 'Hawa Bahadurs'.......F-16 in air...repeat F-16 in air....

Takeoff in SW direction....wide left turn...and then steep climb....turning all the while heading in North idrection....accelerating all the way....yummy.....

[Nihat]

You are very lucky to be there , if it's not LCA , it's SH or F-16 and plenty of visual treats in the offing In the near future , try to take a wide angle video next time , if possible.


Whats the schedule for the aircraft's after the B'lore trials , are they off to Leh straight away in Nov.

[VijayKumarSinha]

Paging all the 'Hawa Bahadurs'.......F-16 in air...repeat F-16 in air....

Takeoff in SW direction....wide left turn...and then steep climb....turning all the while heading in North idrection....accelerating all the way....yummy.....

F-16, This is हवा बहादुर in Euro Fighter calling, over.....
have you hugged your chute today? over....
I hope with your लालटेन and your shiny new block 52s, you can finally fly at night, over.....

[avinash.rd]

I believe the SH has a smaller RCS than the EF.

Which part of the avionics do you think the EF is ahead in?

This is the same EF that STILL doesn't have an AESA roadmap

Sorry, smart munitions have rendered this largely moot.

SH carries more than the Rafale and has the largest range of weapons now and in the future.

The Eurofighter has got AECs radar long back. Please refer the below links
http://www.selex-sas.com/EN/Common/file ... CAPTOR.pdf
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EF2000

Please read the "Performance" section of this article. U will find that EF is ahead of F-15/16/18 and Rafale.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eurofighte ... e_note-113

One more thing Rafale carries more payload than SH. Please refer the section"Weapons Load:" in the below link
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MMRCA

I think these proofs are enough to prove that EF2000 is the better fighter than F-18

Performance


In 2004, United States Air Force Chief of Staff General John P. Jumper said after flying the Eurofighter:
“ I have flown all the air force jets. None was as good as the Eurofighter.[97] ”

The Typhoon's combat performance, compared to the new F-22 Raptor and the upcoming F-35 Lightning II[98] fighters being developed in the United States and the Dassault Rafale developed in France, has been the subject of much discussion. In March 2005, Jumper, then the only person to have flown both the Eurofighter Typhoon and the Raptor, talked to Air Force Print News about these two aircraft . He said,
“ The Eurofighter is both agile and sophisticated, but is still difficult to compare to the F/A-22 Raptor. They are different kinds of airplanes to start with; it's like asking us to compare a NASCAR car with a Formula One car. They are both exciting in different ways, but they are designed for different levels of performance.[99] ”

Further, "The Eurofighter is certainly, as far as smoothness of controls and the ability to pull (and sustain high g forces), very impressive," he said. "That is what it was designed to do, especially the version I flew, with the avionics, the color moving map displays, etc. — all absolutely top notch. The maneuverability of the airplane in close-in combat was also very impressive."[99][100]

The Typhoon is capable of supersonic cruise without using afterburners. This is referred to as "supercruise". According to the official German Luftwaffe and Austrian Eurofighter website, the maximum speed possible without reheat is between Mach 1.2 and Mach 1.5.[101][102][103] Air Forces Monthly gives a maximum supercruise speed of Mach 1.1 for the RAF FGR4 multirole version.[104]

In 2002, the MBDA Meteor was selected as the long range air-to-air missile armament of Eurofighter Typhoon.[105][106] Pending Meteor availability, Typhoon will be equipped with the Raytheon AMRAAM. The current in-service date for Meteor is predicted to be August 2012.[106]

The Eurofighter consortium claims their fighter has a larger sustained subsonic turn rate, sustained supersonic turn rate, and faster acceleration at Mach 0.9 at 20,000 feet (6,100 m) than the F-15, F-16, F/A-18, Mirage 2000, Rafale, the Su-27, and the MiG-29.[107][108][109]

In 2005, a trainer Eurofighter T1 was reported to have had a chance encounter the previous year with two U.S. Air Force F-15Es over the Lake District in the north of England. The encounter became a mock dogfight with the Eurofighter allegedly emerging victorious.[110][111][verification needed]

In the 2005 Singapore evaluation, the Typhoon won all three combat tests, including one in which a single Typhoon defeated three RSAF F-16s, and reliably completed all planned flight tests.[112][113][verification needed] Singapore still went on to buy the F-15 due to uncertainty over Typhoon tranche 2 delivery dates.

During the exercise "Typhoon Meet" held in 2008, Eurofighters flew against F/A-18 Hornets, Mirage F1s, Harriers and F-16s in a mock combat exercise. It is claimed that the Eurofighters won all engagements (even outnumbered 8 vs 27) without suffering losses.[114][115]

The aviation magazine "Flug Revue" reports that in 2008 German Typhoon were pitted against French Rafales. The results are said to be "extremely gratifying", the main difference being the "much greater thrust of the EJ200 engine". [116]

In July 2009, Former Chief of Air Staff for the Royal Air Force Air Chief Marshall Sir Glenn Torpy said that "The Eurofighter Typhoon is an excellent aircraft. It will be the backbone of the Royal Air Force along with the JSF".[117]

[Singha]

with proliferation of Aim9x, asraam, python-5 and k-74 type missiles, I suspect pilots esp strike pilots will be under strict instructions to avoid all WVR combat unless absolutely necessary for defending some strongpoint.
mostly, they will use turn and afterburners to reject the idea.

[Shankar]

In 2004, United States Air Force Chief of Staff General John P. Jumper said after flying the Eurofighter:
“ I have flown all the air force jets. None was as good as the Eurofighter.[97] ”

did he fly Mig 35 OR Su 30 ??

[avinash.rd]

In 2004, United States Air Force Chief of Staff General John P. Jumper said after flying the Eurofighter:
“ I have flown all the air force jets. None was as good as the Eurofighter.[97] ”

did he fly Mig 35 OR Su 30 ??

May be he is talking about only western aircrafts!

[Singha]

F-solah just took off for a circuit. blinking dorsal light and centerline fuel tank. then 2mins later a hawk comes along at higher level going towards kolar. maybe baaz-e-falcon will jump it and prove its claws ?

added later: zero visibility due to rain here. hope the baaz landed back safe, else its APG80 TFR mode will be tested sooner

[MarcH]

In 2004, United States Air Force Chief of Staff General John P. Jumper said after flying the Eurofighter:
“ I have flown all the air force jets. None was as good as the Eurofighter.[97] ”

did he fly Mig 35 OR Su 30 ??

I bolted the important part for you.

I think there is no discussion which aircraft performs best in a2a. But is that the most important factor ?
And one should be fair to the Super Hornet. It has certainly the best acceleration at sea level and low speeds. Add to this excellent nosepointing cability and very competetive lowspeed handling. Heck it is a carrier fighter, where the critical part ist getting off and on of a moving flight deck.
Further more, if the Growler light is worth using, it adds something to the IAF fleet nobody else can offer. Thus, it would have a role even after the FGFA arrives, and adds to the overal fleet efficiency of the IAF.
And it would be an option, in case the MiG-29k doesn't perform as advertised.

[avinash.rd]

I think there is no discussion which aircraft performs best in a2a. But is that the most important factor ?
And one should be fair to the Super Hornet. It has certainly the best acceleration at sea level and low speeds. Add to this excellent nosepointing cability and very competetive lowspeed handling. Heck it is a carrier fighter, where the critical part ist getting off and on of a moving flight deck.
Further more, if the Growler light is worth using, it adds something to the IAF fleet nobody else can offer. Thus, it would have a role even after the FGFA arrives, and adds to the overal fleet efficiency of the IAF.
And it would be an option, in case the MiG-29k doesn't perform as advertised.

MarcH,

I certainly agree. But if u consider the complete package, then one has to agree that EF2000 is much better. There are minor advantages in F-18, but EF2000 is a better aircraft for air defense and I feel it can be improved and customized. It is a contemporary fighter and considered to be the second best after F-22.

[Bala Vignesh]

The MRCA deal is not just about buying aircrafts... At its heart is the age old geo-political battle of which side should we lean on... This is being fought since the day the decision to induct the first supersonic jet was taken... ( IIRC, the F104 was considered along with MiG 21 and Mirage III)

My belief is that, no matter what US does to help us, we should be vary of it, as in the long run it just screws you up... History is the proof for it... Another point is that US is also the main weapons supplier for the country, against whom the aircraft will be mainly placed..

By this I don't mean we should align ourselves with Russia, but rather find the middle ground... So on this point i find that Dassault Rafale offers the best value for money, followed by SAAB Gripen...

So my opinion would be that we buy the Rafale for the current order and if we are not happy we shift to the next aircraft that tops the flight test programe...

Just my 2 cents...

[GeorgeWelch]

Also, as that article above pointed out they still havn't settled on the right engines for that plane, so are you sure you want it as your main fighter?

They have an engine that they are satisfied with (the F135).

The question is whether they want an alternate engine (the F136) to introduce price competition in the future.

The Eurofighter has got AECs radar long back. Please refer the below links

The EF has flown DEMONSTRATORS with AESA for ages. But fully integrating such a thing and making it combat-ready is tricky and expensive and time-consuming and has NOT been done.

No EF is coming off the production line with AESA nor will it till 2014 at least.

One more thing Rafale carries more payload than SH. Please refer the section"Weapons Load:" in the below link
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MMRCA

I think we've already shown that that link is untrustworthy. Besides I have seen quotes from French pilots admitting that the SH does better with a heavy load.

Performance

All those quotes are nice but ultimately meaningless.

The days when a fighter's performance could be measured by its turning ability are long gone.

Avionics have grown and will grow increasingly more important, so it will become critical to remain at the cutting edge to avoid obsolescence.

Unfortunately for the EF, the consortium has demonstrated a distinct lack of commitment to funding upgrades. This means that 15-20 years from now the EF will be functionally obsolete because there will be no upgrade path.

Such concerns aren't as sexy or exciting as airshow maneuvers, but in the real world they are far more important.

[GeorgeWelch]

passive attack capability

All contenders have this.

via Spectra and OSF

The French are unhappy with Spectra because of its limited capabilities and the Rafale does not come with OSF anymore.

AESA + Meteor

It doesn't come with either one right now.

Basically the Rafale has no unique advantages in the avionics side and is inferior kinetically to the EF in most respects with a higher pricetag to boot.

It also suffers the same fatal flaw as the EF in that there is a distinct lack of commitment to keeping it modernized. Getting the French government to fund upgrades has been like pulling teeth.

[avinash.rd]

No EF is coming off the production line with AESA nor will it till 2014 at least.

It is 2010 not 2014. Trench 3 will have AESA. If u think u cant agree about the proof I have provided. What proof do u have to show that F-18 is the better aircraft? U said that European fighter pilots have agreed that F-18 is a better aircraft. Proof??

[Philip]

I think that "we're still missing the wood for the trees as they say".We are not looking for the "best" fighter of the lot,as we already have the superlative Sukhoi with us and the "best" of the lot will be the 5th-gen fighter,but require to fill depleting numbers and their capability,a "jack-of-all trades" fighter,easy ion the purse,like a jack,has a few tricks up his sleeve and can be the man for all seasons.His main role is going to assisting the BVR bouncers,the Flamkers ,with hunting intruders and carrying enough stand-off ordnance tasked to attack key enemy targets and survive in better fashion,than the Jaguars and Mirage-2000s currently engaged with that rsponsibility.While AESA radars and BVR missiles will be carried,so will EW and other specialised pods for jamming for SEAD strikes.The winner should be the best affordable "jack" of them all.

[avinash.rd]

I think that "we're still missing the wood for the trees as they say".We are not looking for the "best" fighter of the lot,as we already have the superlative Sukhoi with us and the "best" of the lot will be the 5th-gen fighter,but require to fill depleting numbers and their capability,a "jack-of-all trades" fighter,easy ion the purse,like a jack,has a few tricks up his sleeve and can be the man for all seasons.His main role is going to assisting the BVR bouncers,the Flamkers ,with hunting intruders and carrying enough stand-off ordnance tasked to attack key enemy targets and survive in better fashion,than the Jaguars and Mirage-2000s currently engaged with that rsponsibility.While AESA radars and BVR missiles will be carried,so will EW and other specialised pods for jamming for SEAD strikes.The winner should be the best affordable "jack" of them all.

Philip,
The real contest is between F-18. EF2000 and Rafale. On which fighter would u put ur money? I think all will come at similar price.

[Nirmal]

We all discussed a lot on Pok II failure on a dedicated thread.

But I would like to understand the effect of this development on MMRCA more specifically on the tender of American companies and SAAB which uses American engine.

I hope we all agree that MMRCA cannot be evaluated independent of this development.

-Nitin

If we consider American engines or components an impediment in our procurement process then how does that absolve LCA which is using American Engine and host of other COTS components of US origen. Surely,
it also makes LCA equally subject to sanctions nightmare.

[GeorgeWelch]

No EF is coming off the production line with AESA nor will it till 2014 at least.

It is 2010 not 2014. Trench 3 will have AESA. If u think u cant agree about the proof I have provided.

What proof? Nowhere does it say 2010. One place says 2012, but if you look at the source, that is from 2006.

Here's what Italy says about it:

http://www.defensenews.com/osd_story.ph ... &i=4139303

talks are too late and that Italy will stick with the mechanically scanned version for the first of its tranche-three aircraft.

So no, T3 doesn't come with AESA.

T3 doesn't arrive till 2013.

http://www.eurofighter.com/news/article134.asp

Since early T3 will not come with AESA, that pushes likely delivery back to 2014.

U said that European fighter pilots have agreed that F-18 is a better aircraft.

I said better at lifting heavy loads.

[Austin]

In theory, but the MiG-29 has been trying to do that for THIRTY YEARS and still hasn't managed it

.

The Mig-29 is capable AA Fighter and IAF appreciates and acknowledges its capability , as long as IAF is happy with it and its even in the process of upgradation its good for us.

At some point you have to acknowledge that Russia will NEVER catch up in avionics because they simply don't have the money

That is what you want to believe

And there is nothing like NEVER for anybody

WVR agility means squat vs missiles because you are well inside the NEZ. Far more important is your counter-measure suite.

Agility and Countermeasures are both important , and missile have their own Pk value.

As far as gun kills, the SH can point its nose with the best of them.

With 3D TVC , I am sure Mig-35 can do better

[Austin]

Interview: President, United Aircraft Corporation Alexey Fedorov

[Raveen]

In theory, but the MiG-29 has been trying to do that for THIRTY YEARS and still hasn't managed it

.

The Mig-29 is capable AA Fighter and IAF appreciates and acknowledges its capability , as long as IAF is happy with it and its even in the process of upgradation its good for us.

At some point you have to acknowledge that Russia will NEVER catch up in avionics because they simply don't have the money

That is what you want to believe

And there is nothing like NEVER for anybody

WVR agility means squat vs missiles because you are well inside the NEZ. Far more important is your counter-measure suite.

Agility and Countermeasures are both important , and missile have their own Pk value.

As far as gun kills, the SH can point its nose with the best of them.

With 3D TVC , I am sure Mig-35 can do better

1. IAF was not happy with Mig-29 last time I checked

2. Sure, you are correct...NEVER say NEVER, but in this fast moving world, 10-20 years later (eg. AESA) = as good as NEVER

3. Yes

4. Yes, but what was the last recorded gun only kill by the IAF vs. a fighter? Even the PAF Atlantique was shot down using missiles and not guns

Not trying to butt heads with anyone saar, just trying to add my $.02 and lead to a more productive discussion

[Austin]

1. IAF was not happy with Mig-29 last time I checked

2. Sure, you are correct...NEVER say NEVER, but in this fast moving world, 10-20 years later (eg. AESA) = as good as NEVER

3. Yes

4. Yes, but what was the last recorded gun only kill by the IAF vs. a fighter? Even the PAF Atlantique was shot down using missiles and not guns

Not rying to butt heads with anyone saar, just trying to add my $.02 and lead to a more productive discussion

1 ) Says who , Mig-29 had its down due to breakup of SU and non availability of spares , but things improved and IAF is quite happy with it , and the upgrade should add atleast 20 years of service

2 ) 20 years later how ? Mig-35 will come with AESA , and 250 km for 3m2 if achieved is a decent figure for Zhuk-AE as per info from Igor blog and NIIP Big AESA looks promising , it just seems to be on track , and just because USAF got it 10 years back does not mean IAF is not happy with what it has or hopes to get in the same period of USAF , we are neither matching nor competing with USAF , nor will our budget allow us.

3 ) Is Atlantiq a fighter or engaged in dog fight with Mig-21 ? but F-16 or J-10 will end up doing the same say with Mig-35 hence guns are very relevant in this missile age for WVR combat.

[Raveen]

1. IAF was not happy with Mig-29 last time I checked

2. Sure, you are correct...NEVER say NEVER, but in this fast moving world, 10-20 years later (eg. AESA) = as good as NEVER

3. Yes

4. Yes, but what was the last recorded gun only kill by the IAF vs. a fighter? Even the PAF Atlantique was shot down using missiles and not guns

Not rying to butt heads with anyone saar, just trying to add my $.02 and lead to a more productive discussion

1 ) Says who , Mig-29 had its down due to breakup of SU and non availability of spares , but things improved and IAF is quite happy with it , and the upgrade should add atleast 20 years of service

2 ) 20 years later how ? Mig-35 will come with AESA , and 250 km for 3m2 if achieved is a decent figure for Zhuk-AE as per info from Igor blog and NIIP Big AESA looks promising , it just seems to be on track , and just because USAF got it 10 years back does not mean IAF is not happy with what it has or hopes to get in the same period of USAF , we are neither matching nor competing with USAF , nor will our budget allow us.

3 ) Is Atlantiq a fighter or engaged in dog fight with Mig-21 ? but F-16 or J-10 will end up doing the same say with Mig-35 hence guns are very relevant in this missile age for WVR combat.

1. Partly agree, but lets not forget the RD-33 smoke problems

2. I agree, we dont compete with USAF, but the original pt was that Russian avionics severely lag Western avionics and to that extent a 10+ year delay is telling, spl considering that the Russians WERE competing with the USAF. Moreover, if Russian avionics were superior then why would the MKI have non Russian components?

3. The Atlantique was not engaged in a dog fight, which makes it easier to shoot down with a gun rather than a supersonic dog fighter with agility where one would have to resort to missiles
Proven by the fact that we can't remember the last gun only dogfight kill for IAF?

[Kartik]

The Atlantique was not engaged in a dog fight, which makes it easier to shoot down with a gun rather than a supersonic dog fighter with agility where one would have to resort to missiles
Proven by the fact that we can't remember the last gun only dogfight kill for IAF?

if you're trying to use that incident as proof that gun kills are not likely, then you're majorly mistaken..show me one recent fighter that has deleted guns. the RAF tried it with its Typhoons, only to go back and reinstall guns on them. however capable missiles are, they can be spoofed, jammed, or outmanevered at the edge of their energy and envelope limits. they are not foolproof and when you look at how many most fighters carry, an onboard gun is the last bit of safety, else the only way out is to punch the AB and egress the fight as quickly as one can.

[Austin]

1. Partly agree, but lets not forget the RD-33 smoke problems

2. I agree, we dont compete with USAF, but the original pt was that Russian avionics severely lag Western avionics and to that extent a 10+ year delay is telling, spl considering that the Russians WERE competing with the USAF. Moreover, if Russian avionics were superior then why would the MKI have non Russian components?

3. The Atlantique was not engaged in a dog fight, which makes it easier to shoot down with a gun rather than a supersonic dog fighter with agility where one would have to resort to missiles
Proven by the fact that we can't remember the last gun only dogfight kill for IAF?

1. Yes smoke was an issue and I used to hate it see it smoke that badly , for an other wise beautiful looking aircraft , but IAF is going for RD-33 Series 3 , hopefully that stops the black smoke.

2. Russia may lack in some aspect perhaps avionics but compensates with better other things like weapons.

Russia and USAF per say dont compete directly, yes may be to get orders they may , but strategically they dont to the extent say for eg PAF tries to compete with IAF.

In their case its the Nuclear warhead and missile that do the talking and both understand their opponents strength and limitation.

The MKI may have chose western system then ie. mid 90's since the Russian then did not have a competing system , but today it may not be the same for eg a Su-35 can outmatch the MKI on most parameter .

3. Just because they didnt go for the gun kills does not mean they couldn't have , may be they just wanted to check if AA-8/R-60 was any good and they found it was

[Raveen]

The Atlantique was not engaged in a dog fight, which makes it easier to shoot down with a gun rather than a supersonic dog fighter with agility where one would have to resort to missiles
Proven by the fact that we can't remember the last gun only dogfight kill for IAF?

if you're trying to use that incident as proof that gun kills are not likely, then you're majorly mistaken..show me one recent fighter that has deleted guns. the RAF tried it with its Typhoons, only to go back and reinstall guns on them. however capable missiles are, they can be spoofed, jammed, or outmanevered at the edge of their energy and envelope limits. they are not foolproof and when you look at how many most fighters carry, an onboard gun is the last bit of safety, else the only way out is to punch the AB and egress the fight as quickly as one can.

I am just trying to prove that missile kills are likelier

[Raveen]

3. Just because they didnt go for the gun kills does not mean they couldn't have , may be they just wanted to check if AA-8/R-60 was any good and they found it was

I am glad they atleast checked and that the result was a satisfactory one...but I say the R-60 was a fizzle...let's re-test!



But on a serious note, the fact that even when a big, slow moving and easy target was shot down using missiles...why would a dogfighter use a gun on another fast moving manouverable dog fighter...unless until it's the last resort like Kartik suggested