MRCA News and Discussion

Shankar · Post by **Shankar** » 26 Sep 2009 17:32

How does Russia's way of making aircraft stealthy differ from the American technology?
- The Americans have two approaches. The first, and earliest one, was used for the F-117 and B-2. The low radar cross-section (RCS) was achieved through the shape of the aircraft and the use of radar-absorbing materials to cover the airframe. In this application, the principle of minimal level of visibility was a cornerstone - and other characteristics had to be sacrificed. For example, both aircraft are subsonic. Later the Americans tried another approach: modern radar absorbing materials are applied to F-16 and F-18, as well as to 5th generation F-22 and JSF combat aircraft, which have a traditional shape. The low level of visibility is achieved through different techniques, which Mikhail Pogosyan, director of Sukhoi, and I are going to reveal in the near future. We and the Americans are close to each other in this type of technology. Russia possesses the technology for upgrading in-service aircraft with modern stealth characteristics, and moreover, this technology is demanded by foreign operators of Russian aircraft. We, together with Sukhoi, have achieved world-class results in this area, which are confirmed by tests of real aircraft. We also can optimize the shape of the aircraft to lower the level of visibility, but I still wouldn't like to speak about the use of our techniques for 5th generation aircraft.
- When would it be possible to speak about achieved results?
- Some discussion is possible today. The exact results of radar cross-section reduction will never be disclosed, neither here in Russia nor abroad. But sometime ago it was announced that the RCS of a MiG-21 fighter after its treatment by our institute is approximately 0.25 sq m. This corresponds to the characteristics of a cruise missile.
- How far is it possible to go in reducing visibility of the 4th generation aircraft, and what additional improvements can be achieved in the next generation?
- My MiG-21 example demonstrates that the RCS of upgraded/modernized aircraft can be reduced 12-15 times. If we speak about new designed models, I wouldn't want to discuss the numbers publically.

so stealth will be surely a factor in aircraft selection -but the figures will never be made public -we can go by above figures - no other aircraft comes even close to these demonstrated figure

You make your own judgment

http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_viewtopi ... t-150.html

Shankar · Post by **Shankar** » 26 Sep 2009 17:34

the deal a/c numbers should be increased to 175-200 and is to be divided between mig-35 and rafale .............

The actual number most likely be more than 200 - in diffrent tranches -that is why cost is so important - all the public statements by IAF chief points to that

Shankar · Post by **Shankar** » 26 Sep 2009 17:36

The ITAE has flight-tested a unique and exotic technology to mask the Su-35's huge 35-inch radar antenna: the use of a low-temperature, "plasma-controlled screen." The screen is mounted in front of the antenna and is transparent to radar when switched off; it may be similar to a plasma TV screen, comprising cells filled with neon or xenon gas, which is excited by an electrical current. (Video shows a clearly defined luminous panel in front of the antenna.) When activated, the screen absorbs some incoming radar energy and scatters the rest in safe directions, over all RF bands lower than the frequency of the plasma-generation system. The screen switches on and off in tens of microseconds, according to the ITAE, thanks to years of intensive development of the gas mixture and plasma-generation system.

http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_viewtopi ... t-150.html

abhi.enggr · Post by **abhi.enggr** » 26 Sep 2009 17:37

Shankar wrote:
covers the new Russian counter-stealth radar carried in the leading edges of the Flanker wing and operating at the 1-2 GHz L-band frequency which bypasses the 8-16 GHz optimised stealth in the Joint Strike Fighter.
http://blogs.crikey.com.au/planetalking ... sumptions/

hi shankar thanks for this input ...........
at least proves our point ............
russian tech is a force to reckon..........
also even if it is not i will trust them over the yanks anyday.........
yanks are ******** ...........
i will never vote for SH even if it is better..........
what will an a/c do of it is hammpered by spare shortages and other sanctions in times of war...
usa has a long history of this ...........
they have started this with patton tanks and f-86 sabre and still russia helped us......
russain a/c with israel avionics will be a force to reckon........see the difference between su-30 mki and su-30 mkk......
su-30 mki is matchless.........even the yanks feel it to be better than all except f-22 which is not a worry for me........

RameshC · Post by **RameshC** » 26 Sep 2009 18:12

well compared to the SH, the mig has hardly has any combat experience, matter of fact, lots of migs were shot down in kosovo, Iraq etc. the SH has killed mig-21s so far in a single sortie, couple of them during iraq-2. I dont think the new package to pak include more f-16s, pak had ordered 38 but US has limited its delivery to 18, this small number hardly poses a serious threat to the mki or even the mig-21 bison fleet. what poses a threat is the over 200 su-27 and other copies made in china. Russian weapons have indeed failed with a report CAG report claiming over 1/3 of BVR missiles in our inventory not functioning, most of those R-27s, r-77 were ordered after kargil and so far 1000 have been delivered. CAG also mentions problems with missiles like KH-31 a/p as well. now just because the current order of missiles are of poor quality we have to order more r-77s which were meant to be working in the first place, thankfully IAf has measures to check them on the ground, what if they didnt check and a missile malfunctions in active combat, i for one dont doubt their ability to kill, thats only if they are functioning properly. so please no claims about how Russian deliveries are perfect and how they work eveytime and we have never been let down.

http://georgians.in/article_detail.asp?aid=606

SH, F-16IN and Rafale are the only ones who have had some exposure to combat duties, with Falcon and bug having a major advantage, none of the others have neither seen the kind of heavy usage during combat or have been operational so long in combat.

and please the mig even with RAM has 1/3 the rcs of a mig-29 which is still very high compared to the others in the competition, abrupt maneuvers are indeed important but missiles like Aim-120D have over 50 G ability to turn in yaw and pitch, secondly the mig-35 due to its tvc looses kinematic enemy at such abrupt turns, the mig's g-limits are 9gs, while f-22 the g-limit though classified is over 10G, the F-22 has much higher sustained speed in its min radius turn , hence it has a better chance of out turning missiles. secondly super sonic speed helps, you certainly wont evade a missile pulling sub sonic abrupt turns, not when the missile on your tail has speeds over mach 4. the reason for why the SR-71 was never shot down is its speed of over mach 3, same reason why mig-25s evaded many missiles again at speeds of mach 2.5. Afterburners burn fuel at alarming rate, supercruise is still full dry thrust, with which the raptor still has a long range, enough to deal with many migs. At full dry thrust the F-22 can hit speed over mach 1.7, which means he can still hit mach 1.5 at 90% dry thrust...lower IR signature, fast enough to pull high g abrupt maneuvers and evade.

no the only aircraft that is close to the Raptor is the EF. Mig cant supercruise. the mig's rcs is still above that of all the others in contention. just look at the size of the pods they want to put on the mig, even with RAM the mig will stick out like a sore thumb. The su-35 may be gr8 but fact is Brazil rejected it, though it suposedly outperforms Rafale, SH and Gripen.

those flankers are big and also stick out like a sore thumb, they may have anti stealth abilties but western are radars are very good at picking out large flankers easily. Those flankers will have a lot of trouble with SAMS, they may be good for air defence but SAM can easily kill a su-35. MKI had trouble when it went to red flag and had been shot done by SAMS. for all the gr8 equipment Russia has their training is not as extensive. because training in the Us with red flg and all such excercises you get a very broad view of training which on any given day will give NATO pilots advantages over Russian counter parts. Russian training is inadequate and for all who say we still do a gr8 job with Russian aircraft is because of our own training methods and tactics which are all our own.

Shameek · Post by **Shameek** » 26 Sep 2009 19:33

well compared to the SH, the mig has hardly has any combat experience, matter of fact, lots of migs were shot down in kosovo, Iraq etc. the SH has killed mig-21s so far in a single sortie, couple of them during iraq-2.

The MiGs shot down are not entirely due to the qualitative deficiencies of the aircraft. You have to consider the complete scenario before drawing conclusions. Pitting aircraft with limited command and control systems against those with AWACS support will get this kind of results. One of the first kills of the Gulf war was a Foxbat shooting down a Hornet. Does that mean the MiG is better than the F-18?

f-22 the g-limit though classified is over 10G

Source? Besides what about the human factor? The G-Limit affects the pilot more than the aircraft. Check out the detailed report on the recent F-22 crash and note the disastrous effects of G forces even in the most advanced of aircraft.

The su-35 may be gr8 but fact is Brazil rejected it, though it suposedly outperforms Rafale, SH and Gripen.

Brazil also rejected the SH and Gripen and then backtracked on the Rafale. How does that prove anything?

those flankers are big and also stick out like a sore thumb, they may have anti stealth abilties but western are radars are very good at picking out large flankers easily. Those flankers will have a lot of trouble with SAMS, they may be good for air defence but SAM can easily kill a su-35. MKI had trouble when it went to red flag and had been shot done by SAMS.

You do know the Flankers were flying under limitations at Red Flag? Besides what exactly are you trying to say here. Get rid of Flankers and replace them with more 'stealthy' aircraft?

because training in the Us with red flg and all such excercises you get a very broad view of training which on any given day will give NATO pilots advantages over Russian counter parts.

What broad view? Please elaborate.

rajeshks · Post by **rajeshks** » 26 Sep 2009 21:13

well compared to the SH, the mig has hardly has any combat experience, matter of fact, lots of migs were shot down in kosovo, Iraq etc. the SH has killed mig-21s so far in a single sortie, couple of them during iraq-2.

SH, F-16IN and Rafale are the only ones who have had some exposure to combat duties, with Falcon and bug having a major advantage, none of the others have neither seen the kind of heavy usage during combat or have been operational so long in combat.

Ramesh, You call SH flights in Iraq and Afghanistan as combat experience. Theoretically it is. From a logistics perspective also it was a war like scenario. But from air combat perspective it is hardly. Opponents didn’t have any kind of air defense or air assets. Flying under such conditions is nothing more than a training sortie for the pilots.

Russian weapons have indeed failed with a report CAG report claiming over 1/3 of BVR missiles in our inventory not functioning, most of those R-27s, r-77 were ordered after kargil and so far 1000 have been delivered. CAG also mentions problems with missiles like KH-31 a/p as well.

CAG is not an authority to speak on the technical aspects of weapons. They are just auditors. Being a government department CAG always tries to play it safe, the reports on the missiles or its shelf life is nothing more than that.

and please the mig even with RAM has 1/3 the rcs of a mig-29 which is still very high compared to the others in the competition, abrupt maneuvers are indeed important but missiles like Aim-120D have over 50 G ability to turn in yaw and pitch,

What will be the performance of Pak Aim-120 variants against Indian SH, F16, Rafale?

secondly the mig-35 due to its tvc looses kinematic enemy at such abrupt turns, the mig's g-limits are 9gs, while f-22 the g-limit though classified is over 10G, the F-22 has much higher sustained speed in its min radius turn , hence it has a better chance of out turning missiles. secondly super sonic speed helps, you certainly wont evade a missile pulling sub sonic abrupt turns, not when the missile on your tail has speeds over mach 4.
those flankers are big and also stick out like a sore thumb, they may have anti stealth abilties but western are radars are very good at picking out large flankers easily. Those flankers will have a lot of trouble with SAMS, they may be good for air defence but SAM can easily kill a su-35. MKI had trouble when it went to red flag and had been shot done by SAMS.

Simply, we are not going for war with USA or western countries. If we ever go for war with them SH, EF & Rafale will be useless.

prabir · Post by **prabir** » 26 Sep 2009 22:01

NPT, FMCT and CTBT talk by US will ensure that we do not put all our eggs in their basket. Any way US happens to be a meddlesome vendor who try to poke their nose into everything.

Also, only MMS has too much of love for US and that does not matter in India, because this decision on who will get the contract won't be MMS's alone. The decision will be taken in national interest and any attempt to do otherwise will be easily translated into a "sellout" or a "scam" by interested parties through selective leaks to the media.

I am sure Congress won't do something that stupid after Bofors experience. So, I think the best product + political package combination will get the deal.

archan · Post by **archan** » 26 Sep 2009 22:16

abhi.enggr wrote: hi shankar thanks for this input ...........
at least proves our point ............
russian tech is a force to reckon..........
also even if it is not i will trust them over the yanks anyday.........
yanks are ******** ...........
i will never vote for SH even if it is better..........
what will an a/c do of it is hammpered by spare shortages and other sanctions in times of war...
usa has a long history of this ...........
they have started this with patton tanks and f-86 sabre and still russia helped us......
russain a/c with israel avionics will be a force to reckon........see the difference between su-30 mki and su-30 mkk......
su-30 mki is matchless.........even the yanks feel it to be better than all except f-22 which is not a worry for me........

Hello? is this supposed to be a serious post?
Please let me know......
I don't know what to make of it...........
If this stays this way, I will keep misunderstanding........
And will end up taking action against......
So kindly clarify......
And what do you mean by "*****"?.....
Are the yanks stars?....

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 26 Sep 2009 22:37

archan wrote:
abhi.enggr wrote: hi shankar thanks for this input ...........
at least proves our point ............
russian tech is a force to reckon..........
also even if it is not i will trust them over the yanks anyday.........
yanks are ******** ...........
i will never vote for SH even if it is better..........
what will an a/c do of it is hammpered by spare shortages and other sanctions in times of war...
usa has a long history of this ...........
they have started this with patton tanks and f-86 sabre and still russia helped us......
russain a/c with israel avionics will be a force to reckon........see the difference between su-30 mki and su-30 mkk......
su-30 mki is matchless.........even the yanks feel it to be better than all except f-22 which is not a worry for me........
Hello? is this supposed to be a serious post?
Please let me know......
I don't know what to make of it...........
If this stays this way, I will keep misunderstanding........
And will end up taking action against......
So kindly clarify......
And what do you mean by "*****"?.....
Are the yanks stars?....

Good one.
On a more serious note, what more do you expect from MRCA thread? This thread has seen a lot worse for quite some time now.

pgbhat · Post by **pgbhat** » 26 Sep 2009 22:39

^^^
x2 we have a new SH fanboi in town.

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 26 Sep 2009 23:03

^^ What me? I was just commenting on the usual absurdness prevailing in this forum.
PS: F-18 perhaps my least favourite contender. For me, Rafale all the way!

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 26 Sep 2009 23:17

archanullah bin dottiii wrote:........

stay away from this thread for your own sake !! I feel like arnie in kindergarten cop in this thread !

only oldies like JaiS, CM and NRao who can handle kids dare to venture here. this is much more frightening than FATA itself !

archan · Post by **archan** » 27 Sep 2009 00:02

Rahul M wrote:
archanullah bin dottiii wrote:........
stay away from this thread for your own sake !! I feel like arnie in kindergarten cop in this thread !

only oldies like JaiS, CM and NRao who can handle kids dare to venture here. this is much more frightening than FATA itself !

I used to think that the strat forum was the less civilized one until the new clear scientists made me look over the fence and what do I see!

I have never had to do so much pandugiri in such a short time in the strat forum. I guess the difference between the two forums is LMU

. Now that I am here, let me make an attempt to make this a

more serious, more mature

place.

pgbhat · Post by **pgbhat** » 27 Sep 2009 00:20

Parijat Gaur wrote:^^ What me? I was just commenting on the usual absurdness prevailing in this forum.
PS: F-18 perhaps my least favourite contender. For me, Rafale all the way!

Saar not about you...

....don't misunderstand me just a general observation about the last couple of pages.

Baldev · Post by **Baldev** » 27 Sep 2009 05:37

RameshC wrote:well compared to the SH, the mig has hardly has any combat experience, matter of fact, lots of migs were shot down in kosovo, Iraq etc. the SH has killed mig-21s so far in a single sortie, couple of them during iraq-2. I dont think the new package to pak include more f-16s, pak had ordered 38 but US has limited its delivery to 18, this small number hardly poses a serious threat to the mki or even the mig-21 bison fleet. what poses a threat is the over 200 su-27 and other copies made in china. Russian weapons have indeed failed with a report CAG report claiming over 1/3 of BVR missiles in our inventory not functioning, most of those R-27s, r-77 were ordered after kargil and so far 1000 have been delivered

no the only aircraft that is close to the Raptor is the EF. Mig cant supercruise. the mig's rcs is still above that of all the others in contention. just look at the size of the pods they want to put on the mig, even with RAM the mig will stick out like a sore thumb. The su-35 may be gr8 but fact is Brazil rejected it, though it suposedly outperforms Rafale, SH and Gripen.

read this
http://www.dtic.mil/dpmo/gulfwar/IRAQI05B.pdf

and this

1991 (Operation Desert Shield/Desert Storm)

* January 17 - An F/A-18C Hornet is shot down. The pilot (Lieutenant Commander Michael Scott Speicher) of VFA-81 was killed but his body was not found until July 2009.

* January 17 - An A-6E Intruder is shot down by a surface-to-air missile. The pilot (Lieutenant Robert Wetzel) and navigator/bombadier (Lieutenant Jeffrey Norton Zaun) are captured. They were released on March 3.

* January 17 - An F-15E Strike Eagle (Serial Number : 88-1689) is shot down by anti-aircraft artillery (AAA). The pilot (Major Thomas F. Koritz) and WSO (Lieutenant Colonel Donnie R. Holland) are killed. Their bodies were recovered.

* January 17 - An F/A-18C Hornet is shot down. The pilot (Lieutenant Robert Dwyer) was lost over the North Persian Gulf after a successful mission to Iraq. His body was never recovered (officially listed as KIA-BNR).

* January 18 - An A-6E Intruder is shot down by anti-aircraft artillery (AAA). The pilot (Lieutenant William Thomas Costen) and navigator/bombadier (Lieutenant Charlie Turner) are killed. Their bodies were recovered.

* January 18 - An OV-10 Bronco is shot down by surface-to-air missile. The pilot (Lieutenant Colonel Clifford M. Acree) and observer (Chief Warrant Officer Guy L. Hunter, Jr.) are captured. They were released on March 6.

* January 19 - An F-15E Strike Eagle (Serial Number : 88-1692) is shot down by an SA-2E surface-to-air missile. The pilot (Colonel David W. Eberly) and WSO (Major Thomas E. Griffith) are captured. They were released on March 6 and March 3 respectively.

* January 19 - An F-16C Fighting Falcon (Serial Number : 87-0228) is shot down by a SA-6 surface-to-air missile. The pilot (Captain Harry 'Mike' Roberts) is captured. He was released on March 6.

* January 19 - An F-16C Fighting Falcon (Serial Number : 87-0257) is shot down by a SA-3 surface-to-air missile. The pilot (Major Jeffrey Scott Tice) is captured. He was released on March 6.

* January 21 - An F-14A+ Tomcat (b/n 161430) is shot down by an SA-2 surfact-to-air missile while on an escort mission near Al Asad airbase in Iraq. The pilot was rescued by USAF Special Operations Forces but the RIO (Slade, L.R.) was captured. He remained a POW until his release on March 3.

* January 28 - An AV-8B Harrier II is shot down by anti-aircraft artillery (AAA). The pilot (Captain Michael C. Berryman) is captured. He was released on March 6.

* January 31 - An AC-130H Spectre (Serial Number : 69-6567) is shot down by a surface-to-air missile. The entire crew of fourteen are killed. Their bodies were recovered.

* February 2 - An A-6E Intruder is shot down by anti-aircraft artillery (AAA). The pilot (Lieutenant Commander Barry T. Cooke) and navigator/bombadier (Lieutenant Junior Grade Patrick K. Connor) are killed. Only LTJG Connor's body is recovered as LTCMDR Cooke's body was never found (officially listed as KIA-BNR).

* February 2 - An A-10A Thunderbolt II (Serial Number : 80-0248) is shot down by a SA-16 surface-to-air missile. The pilot (Captain Richard Dale Storr) is captured. He was released on March 6.

* February 9 - An AV-8B Harrier II is shot down by a surface-to-air missile. The pilot (Captain Russell A.C. Sanborn) is captured. He was released on March 6.

* February 15 - An A-10A Thunderbolt II (Serial Number : 78-0722) is shot down by a SA-13 surface-to-air missile. The pilot (Lt. James Sweet) is captured. He was released on March 6.

* February 15 - An A-10A Thunderbolt II (Serial Number : 79-0130) is shot down by a SA-13 surface-to-air missile. The pilot (Captain Steven Phyllis) is killed and his body was later recovered.

* February 19 - An OA-10A Thunderbolt II (Serial Number : 76-0543) is shot down by a SA-9 surface-to-air missile. The pilot (Lieutenant Colonel Jeffery Fox ) is captured. He was later released on March 6.

* February 23 - An AV-8B Harrier II is shot down by a surface-to-air missile. The pilot (Captain James N. Wilborn) is killed and his body was later recovered.

* February 25 - An OV-10 Bronco is shot down by surface-to-air missile. The pilot (Major Joseph Small III) is captured and observer (Captain David Spellacy) is killed. Major Small was released on March 6 and Captain Spellacy's body was recovered.

* February 27 - An AV-8B Harrier II is shot down by anti-aircraft artillery (AAA). The pilot (Captain Reginald Underwood) is killed and his body was later recovered.

* February 27 - An F-16C Fighting Falcon (Serial Number : 84-1390) is shot down by anti-aircraft artillery (AAA). The pilot (Captain William Andrews) is captured. He was released on March 6.

and ya few british tornados were also shot fired when trying to fly low by ground based gun fire.

what iraq could do against thousands of TOMAHAWKS fired,sheer number of missiles is able to defeat any most modern air defence

Baldev · Post by **Baldev** » 27 Sep 2009 05:57

RameshC wrote:Th mig-35 wont see the f-22 before its shot, by the way why do you want mig-35 to counter f-22, chances are they wont face each other atleast not the MKI version of the mig-35. besides F-22 just has to put its thrust at 100% thrust without AB it will still out run most misiles, its capable of supercruise at well over mach 1.7, so the mig has no chance. First the mig cant see it, you cant shoot what you cant see, and possibly cant outrun a missile like Aim-120D launched at supersonic speeds at high altitude from a distance of over 140km. Actually the mig can barely survive an encounter with the SH, EF or Rafale or even Gripen NG, you want to bring the f-22??

you told everyone that you studied MBA at Harvard so you all know about marketing and business,my friend better talk of technical specifications here

RCS of SH,TYPHOON,RAFALE,GRIPEN isn't better than RCS of LCA you must know this.

when elta8222 jammer can suppress f15 apg70 radar range by 50% which was here in india in 2004, so you better think how far the little seeker on AMRAAM which has less than 20km range against 5^ sq can be suppressed

when you know that mig carries zhuk ae and internal jammer +FLIR+MAWS you better know that internal jammer and zhuk ae are enough to overload AMRAAM seeker and same thing is true for R77 seeker and thats why russians have missiles with various seekers to counter extreme jamming.

ss_roy · Post by **ss_roy** » 27 Sep 2009 06:03

So he is a charlatan.. great

MBA at Harvard

Sumair · Post by **Sumair** » 27 Sep 2009 07:02

ss_roy wrote:So he is a charlatan.. great

MBA at Harvard

I'm pretty sure that Harvard doesn't have any courses on "US Lobbying Laws", because such a thing doesn't exist. Lobbying is an evolutionary practice, necessitated to push things along in the congress and is bordering on as a illegal practice. It certainly is not codified into any law, either in the original constitution and or per addendums. Case studies and precedents? Yes. Laws? No.

chiru · Post by **chiru** » 28 Sep 2009 00:16

guys please cut all the s**t this place resembles porky defence forum...sad to know br does not have this news yet ....but im happy to post this first

http://www.hindu.com/2009/09/26/stories ... 470500.htm

BANGALORE: Rafale, the French built fighter aircraft and one of the six fighters competing for the Indian Air Force’s (IAF’s) multi-billion dollar multi-role combat aircraft (MMRCA) deal is in Bangalore. Two twin-engine delta-wing multi-role fighters designed and built by France’s Dassault Aviation and piloted by IAF and French pilots have been undertaking flights – which are part of the MMRCA flight trials — from Bangalore’s HAL Airport since Tuesday.

Officials said the two French aircraft had flown non-stop to Bangalore from Dassault’s Flight Test Centre at Istres in France, thanks to the fighter’s in-flight refuelling capabilities.

One of the most modern fourth generation fighters, the Rafale is in use with the French Air Force, and the French Navy for their carrier-based operations. Officials said the Rafale met all the air staff qualitative requirements sought by the IAF and that Dassault was prepared to transfer all the technology that was required by the Indian side. They pointed out that the Rafale had a functioning Active Electronically Scanned Array radar

.

Dassault’s bid had the strong backing of the Nicolas Sarkozy Government.

Piloted by IAF and French pilots, the two trainer aircraft will be based in Bangalore for the next fortnight, flying over, and in and out of Bangalore as they take part in the first phase of the flight trials. During the two weeks the aircraft will fly to Leh for the high altitude/cold weather trials and Jaisalmer for the hot weather trials.

Dassault’s technicians, pilots and maintenance crew will train and show IAF test pilots and flight test engineers the capabilities and uniqueness of the Rafale.

Besides the IAF test crews, the specially formed Indian Evaluation Team has representatives from the Ministry of Defence, Hindustan Aeronautics Limited, the Defence and Research Development Organisation, Directorate-General of Aeronautical Quality Assurance and Air Headquarters. Two evaluations teams have been formed for the MMRCA flight trials.

The next phase of flight trials will involve weapon firing trials in the country of the aircraft’s manufacturer. Besides the Rafale the other aircraft in contention for the $ 10 billion to $12 billion deal are Boeing’s F/A-18, Lockheed Martin’s F-16IN Super Viper, the European Aeronautic Defence and Space Company’s Eurofighter Typhoon, Russia’s Mikoyan MiG-35 and Sweden’s Gripen JAS-39.

can anybody get some pics of this beast(or beauty

) as it is in bangalore for the first time anyone please

saptarishi · Post by **saptarishi** » 28 Sep 2009 00:54

everybody loves rafale, here ,i love it, some favour mig-35 like shankarosky and igorr

,phillip,nrao,rahul m prefer F-18,,but if there is any jet everyone loves to see in IAF COLOURS,THAT IS RAFALE , i wish the FRENCH reduce its price tag i seriously hope so,RBE2-AA aesa is one of the mmrca radars that will come with full tot along with zhuk-ae

vijyeta · Post by **vijyeta** » 28 Sep 2009 01:29

chiru wrote:
http://www.hindu.com/2009/09/26/stories ... 470500.htm

Rafale has been around since Tuesday and this thread notices it today

The unkil fanboys vs. everyone else is really crowding out news.

Are there any references for Rafale being operational/tested at high altitude?
Is Jean still around or have the 'I-received-MBA-as-prasadam' types chased him away...

Sriman · Post by **Sriman** » 28 Sep 2009 01:34

saptarishi wrote:everybody loves rafale, here ,i love it, some favour mig-35 like shankarosky and igorr ,phillip,nrao,rahul m prefer F-18,,but if there is any jet everyone loves to see in IAF COLOURS,THAT IS RAFALE , i wish the FRENCH reduce its price tag i seriously hope so,RBE2-AA aesa is one of the mmrca radars that will come with full tot along with zhuk-ae

Baldev · Post by **Baldev** » 28 Sep 2009 01:53

They pointed out that the Rafale had a functioning Active Electronically Scanned Array radar

.

http://psk.blog.24heures.ch/media/01/02/10003143.jpg

my dear fiends please try to count how many t/r modules in the rafale's aesa radar in the above picture

try this picture too because in the above pic guy is standing in front of radar to get exact count of modules

http://img72.imageshack.us/img72/3149/laad07179zk4.jpg

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 28 Sep 2009 04:22

saptarishi wrote:everybody loves rafale, here ,i love it, some favour mig-35 like shankarosky and igorr ,phillip,nrao,rahul m prefer F-18,,but if there is any jet everyone loves to see in IAF COLOURS,THAT IS RAFALE , i wish the FRENCH reduce its price tag i seriously hope so,RBE2-AA aesa is one of the mmrca radars that will come with full tot along with zhuk-ae

Oi, just because I do not visit this thread often does not mean you misrep me!!!! Grrrrrrrrrrrrr.

: ), NP.

My "choice" is the Rafale, but I think the decision will be political and go to the F-17 (16+18)/2.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 28 Sep 2009 05:11

Baldev wrote:They pointed out that the Rafale had a functioning Active Electronically Scanned Array radar .

http://psk.blog.24heures.ch/media/01/02/10003143.jpg

my dear fiends please try to count how many t/r modules in the rafale's aesa radar in the above picture

try this picture too because in the above pic guy is standing in front of radar to get exact count of modules

http://img72.imageshack.us/img72/3149/laad07179zk4.jpg

the second picture is not terribly clear either. However, I suspect it has around 850+.

AESA Radar Successfully Tested on Rafale Fighter Aircraft

comprising some 1,000 gallium-arsenide T/R modules

Talk around town is that the IAF is pleasantly surprised by the advancements Dasault has made with their AESA.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 28 Sep 2009 05:13

When is the MiG-35 supposed to be in town? I was under the impression it was after the F-16.

Baldev · Post by **Baldev** » 28 Sep 2009 05:25

NRao wrote:the second picture is not terribly clear either. However, I suspect it has around 850+

i know there are 1000 t/r modules in rafale's aesa

i posted second picture so that the number of t/r modules could be count which were hidden in first picture because guy was standing in front of radar

Baldev · Post by **Baldev** » 28 Sep 2009 05:27

NRao wrote:When is the MiG-35 supposed to be in town? I was under the impression it was after the F-16.

probably by November and weapons trials in Russia next year March/April.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 28 Sep 2009 05:29

OK. (The layout of T/R module are symmetrical, so all one needs is one half of it.)

So, do you have the right answer? How many modules does that radar have?

Also, for the MiG-35 Fazotron one too?

TIA.

Baldev · Post by **Baldev** » 28 Sep 2009 06:05

NRao wrote:OK. (The layout of T/R module are symmetrical, so all one needs is one half of it.)

So, do you have the right answer? How many modules does that radar have?

Also, for the MiG-35 Fazotron one too?TIA.

thanks for answering

archan · Post by **archan** » 28 Sep 2009 06:08

vijyeta wrote: The unkil fanboys vs. everyone else is really crowding out news.

Hello! I have little stake in the debate and have no opinions. Now with that out of the way I am trying to find out why statements like these are made here.
1) does this mean that anyone who has a preference for an American jet is unkil's fanboy?
2) some other people have preference for non-American jets, so do they become French fanboys, Russian fanboys, etc?
3) who, afterall are eligible to be called fanboys here? can we have some names please? helps keep discussion transparent.

Now if we are going to duck these points, I would expect there will be no such comments made anymore and simply merit-based discussion on the jets be made. Failing with, I may have to take action.

Jai ho.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 28 Sep 2009 06:35

phillip,nrao,rahul m prefer F-18

eh what ?

trying to defame me ?
everyone knows I want the MRCA to be canceled. failing that, any of the euro birds. amriki birds are at the bottom of my list.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 28 Sep 2009 07:46

OK, let us get some sanity back to this thread:

Dmurphy wrote:India Air Chief Warns of Slipping Fleet Strength
IAF sources said it will take at least five years for the purchase of 126 Medium Multirole Combat Aircraft (MMRCA) to work its way through the Defence Ministry bureaucracy. The IAF is in the process of procuring 126 MMRCA at a cost of more than $10 billion.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 28 Sep 2009 08:25

enough time for EADS to perfect its GaN AESA radar... way to go! is EF2K.. with Indian version ef2k.in been done as a partner with the eurofighter.

I am still reading..EADS is a cheap as F18s.

saptarishi · Post by **saptarishi** » 28 Sep 2009 10:59

mig-35 will be here in october after IAF is done with rafale,
i don't think eurofighter is as cheap as f/a-18 whose unit flyway cost is around 53 million dollars compared to 110-120 million dollars of eurofighter, eurofighter has a shorter life,, i dont't think iaf needs the high performance of eurofighter and mig-35 since it is already going to induct SU-30MKI and PAK-FA in large numbers, gripen will not win because of its proximity to LCA MK2 and also lack of political clout of the swedish,,porkis have the f-16 so no matter how much lockheed have upgraded the vipe or the super viper,,f-16 are f-16 india's biggest foe,so its between rafale and super hornet,i hope the government is clever enough to understand the controls US DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE has over arms exports,,so its rafale all the way ..only if rafale's cost was 20-30 million dollars,like lca and j-10.

negi · Post by **negi** » 28 Sep 2009 11:02

Phillip prefers F-18

.
Somebody is gonna get hurt .

AmitR · Post by **AmitR** » 28 Sep 2009 12:16

Has anyone been able to capture a photo of Rafale that has come to Blore for testing?

Jean_M · Post by **Jean_M** » 28 Sep 2009 15:04

I'm still here, didn't bother enough to answer the "infamous spectra" statement (check your sources people, begin by the manufacturer website rather than unknown info agregators).
I'll take the opportunity here, SPECTRA is fully french and was developped by THALES (software, electronic sensing and warfare) and MBDA (decoy aspects) on their french sites. THALES has a widely known & strict intellectual property control politic which is necessary to operate in critical/strategic tech areas for different states. (I worked for them on RF transmitters so I'm well aware

I can tell you that we never saw code/blueprints of the US ones as well as they never saw our french ones - both states are also checking all that in deep)
http://www.thalesgroup.com/Group/Corpor ... _approach/
http://www.thalesgroup.com/assets/0/93/ ... gType=2057

While I'm at it, RBE2 facts:
http://www.thalesgroup.com/Press_Releas ... _of_tests/

22 April 2009
Loading...

Thales announced today that its RBE2 active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar has successfully completed a new series of tests on the Rafale at the Cazaux flight test centre in Southwest France from February to March. These tests, carried out jointly by Thales and the French defence procurement agency (DGA), provided functional validation of the radar’s operating modes.

This milestone marks the latest step towards qualifying the RBE2 AESA radars this year in readiness for delivery of the first two units to Dassault Aviation during the first quarter of 2010. The radars will be installed on the aircraft in 2011 for delivery to the French Air Force early in 2012.
The successful tests are the latest in a long line of key milestones. Thales began developing an AESA radar demonstrator in the 1990s and conducted exploratory tests at the flight test centre in 2002 and 2003 to refine the concept. In 2004, the French defence procurement agency DGA backed the project with a contract to develop a prototype of an operational active-module radar.

At the end of 2006, Thales completed its first active phased array, comprising some 1,000 gallium-arsenide T/R modules manufactured by European firm United Monolithic Semiconductors (UMS).

The active phased array, which replaces the passive array in the RBE2 currently operating on the Rafale, offers many advantages:

- range extended by over 50% for future compatibility with new weapon systems like Meteor
- higher module reliability for reduced cost of ownership (no array overhaul required for 10 years)
- waveform agility for high-resolution synthetic aperture (SAR) imagery in air-to-ground mode and better resistance to jamming.

Pierre-Yves Chaltiel, Senior Vice President in charge of Thales's Aerospace Solutions for Governments Sector, commented on the achievement of this new milestone: "The success of this latest series of tests on the RBE2 AESA radar consolidates Thales's European leadership position. Moreover, it will help to affirm the Rafale's technological superiority as the omnirole aircraft performs flight demonstrations for potential export customers, confirming its excellent performance as it has recently in Switzerland and the United Arab Emirates."

About Thales

Thales is a leading international electronics and systems group, addressing Defence, Aerospace and Security markets worldwide. The Group's civil and military businesses develop in parallel and share a common base of technologies to serve a single objective: the security of people, property and nations. Thales's leading-edge technology is supported by 22,500 R&D engineers who offer a capability unmatched in Europe to develop and deploy field-proven mission-critical information systems. The Group builds its growth on its unique multi-domestic strategy based on trusted partnerships with national customers and market players, while leveraging its global expertise to support local technology and industrial development. Thales employs 68,000 people in 50 countries with 2008 revenues of €12.7 billion.

(Guess you'll have your weather mode if needed - radar full code transfer has been allowed to Brasil)

It seems Rafales are at bangalore since the 18th, it should have seen some land since then, anyone saw them ?

PrithviRajChauhan · Post by **PrithviRajChauhan** » 28 Sep 2009 15:47

gripen will not win because of its proximity to LCA MK2 and also lack of political clout of the swedish

Saarji, kindly see Vishnu Som post on Gripen. Its miles miles ahead of LCA MK2. I am not sure if its a good idea of comparing a paper plane with Gripen. Just because both falls in Light Combat Aircraft category , we should not equate LCA with Gripen.
Regarding political clout, there is nothing we can extract more from Roosies and French. Irrespective of this deal, our strategic relationship with both these countries would remain intact. Euro consortium is just like an assorted confectioneries box, no clear advantage their. The F teens are the only fighters which may bring some political and strategic advantage to us. Again it depends upon the strategic goals of unkil and right now the situation does not look so bright here.