MRCA News and Discussion

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 06 Oct 2009 17:21

The failure of Lockheed to get US govt. clearance for consultancy in developing our naval LCA has made India open up the contract to other nations.This is a significant happening as it puts into doubt that ability of the two US MMRCA contenders to get full TOT plus the required consultancy,etc.,for the aircraft,AESA radars and weaponry.The full story is here.Cross-posted in the naval thread.
http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i= ... =ASI&s=TOP

The most likely nation that will step in and provide India with the required naval help for the LCA will be France.Britain do not any longer build their own naval aircraft and the French have the naval Rafale in service.BY providing help for the naval LCA,it will give the French a distinct advantage over the others (apart from Russia with its MIG-29K sales) in the MMRCA deal.Let's blow a raspberry for Obama.

Baldev · Post by **Baldev** » 06 Oct 2009 17:29

Philip wrote:The failure of Lockheed to get US govt. clearance for consultancy in developing our naval LCA has made India open up the contract to other nations.This is a significant happening as it puts into doubt that ability of the two US MMRCA contenders to get full TOT plus the required consultancy,etc.,for the aircraft,AESA radars and weaponry.The full story is here.Cross-posted in the naval thread.
http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i= ... =ASI&s=TOP

The most likely nation that will step in and provide India with the required naval help for the LCA will be France.Britain do not any longer build their own naval aircraft and the French have the naval Rafale in service.BY providing help for the naval LCA,it will give the French a distinct advantage over the others (apart from Russia with its MIG-29K sales) in the MMRCA deal.Let's blow a raspberry for Obama.

India would have gone with Russia to develop NLCA say for 200million along with MIG29K it would have been operational by now
if they can develop MIG29K and sell 16 such fighters in 5 years for 750million then they can also develop LCA in the same time frame for 200 million

also NLCA would do STOBAR like MIG29K does

rajeshks · Post by **rajeshks** » 06 Oct 2009 19:56

Igorr wrote:
rajeshks wrote:No posts, no unwanted discussions. Everyone got scared seeing russian...
So russian language is a means to control threads, Mods please note.

Btw can we take this as proof for the effectiveness of russian(weapons)???
I try to do it with kid skin gloves only, don't I.
If seriously, the designation 'commercial' would be a stupid name for a fighter, wouldn't it. It was a bad joke of a journalist indeed, translated to English like as being serious. It's an example how a joke can become 'truth'

That was a PJ from me.. please dont take it seriously..

RKumar · Post by **RKumar** » 06 Oct 2009 21:01

IMHO... chances of each plane

F-16 -> towards end of life from orgion country but proven - 5 points
SH-18 -> Good plane but mainly build for navy and orgion US

- 7 points
Mig-35 -> We have 30MKI, no way buying everything from 1 - 3 points
EuroF -> Have enough problem e.g. UK and slow progress - 5 points
Gripen -> Same class as LCA - 6 points
Rafale -> good plane but toooo expensive for India - 6 points

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 06 Oct 2009 21:23

pl explain in detail the problems with ef2k?

Shameek · Post by **Shameek** » 06 Oct 2009 21:26

RKumar wrote:IMHO... chances of each plane

Please explain the ranking system you have used for this. The SH-18 (I assume you meant F-18 SH) gets a sad smiley and the highest points. On what basis?

karan_mc · Post by **karan_mc** » 06 Oct 2009 21:30

my money is on Rafale or EF ,NG can make a cut if it gets orders but even swedish are not going to order them anyway so future development might have to borne by india .i am totally against F-16 we cannot be inducting them when whole of Europe is decommissioning them and waiting for F-35

rajeshks · Post by **rajeshks** » 06 Oct 2009 22:53

RKumar wrote:IMHO... chances of each plane

F-16 -> towards end of life from orgion country but proven - 5 points
SH-18 -> Good plane but mainly build for navy and orgion US - 7 points
Mig-35 -> We have 30MKI, no way buying everything from 1 - 3 points
EuroF -> Have enough problem e.g. UK and slow progress - 5 points
Gripen -> Same class as LCA - 6 points
Rafale -> good plane but toooo expensive for India - 6 points

RKumar, did you consider the political angle while calculating the points? Also there is nothing wrong in buying from one supplier if it perfectly satisfies your present & future requirements.

My favourites : Rafale > Mig 35 > SH|EF > Gripen > F16.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 07 Oct 2009 02:14

karan_mc wrote:my money is on Rafale or EF ,NG can make a cut if it gets orders but even swedish are not going to order them anyway so future development might have to borne by india .i am totally against F-16 we cannot be inducting them when whole of Europe is decommissioning them and waiting for F-35

Did the Swedish government say that? That news seems very, very odd. Any URLs? TIA.

Also, please note that even IF India goes for the F-35 IAF will get it only around 2025 or so. IF some ToT is provided , perhaps in 2020.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 07 Oct 2009 02:28

if we are to pok-3, then there is no point looking too west!

b_patel · Post by **b_patel** » 07 Oct 2009 02:51

IMHO... chances of each plane

F-16 -> towards end of life from orgion country but proven - 5 points
SH-18 -> Good plane but mainly build for navy and orgion US - 7 points
Mig-35 -> We have 30MKI, no way buying everything from 1 - 3 points
EuroF -> Have enough problem e.g. UK and slow progress - 5 points
Gripen -> Same class as LCA - 6 points
Rafale -> good plane but toooo expensive for India - 6 points

The problems the EF has faced are the same that the other fighters have faced: GLOBAL RECESSION. Due to the current economic crisis The Rafale production line has been reduced to one Rafale a month which is just enough to keep the lines open. The EF problems stem from the partner countries not being able to afford them right now. Once the global recession is over the remaining tranche orders will be completed.
India is tech hungry, whoever offers the most tech will win! Right now its between the Rafale and EF each is offering everything they can to secure the deal. Its not about the price of the aircraft, if it was the EF and Rafale would not be allowed to compete in the competition anyway.
Besides with the recent orders for additional 50 SU-30MKI's and 29 MIG 29K it seems like russia will not be getting the MRCA contract.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 07 Oct 2009 04:53

NRao wrote: Did the Swedish government say that? That news seems very, very odd. Any URLs? TIA.

Also, please note that even IF India goes for the F-35 IAF will get it only around 2025 or so. IF some ToT is provided , perhaps in 2020.

no, they didn't. on the contrary, for the Brazilian tender, Sweden has made it pretty clear that they will introduce the Gripen NG at the same time as the Brazilian AF, if they win the tender. There was a video posted on the Saab website for the Brazilian tender that makes that clear.

Patrick Cusack · Post by **Patrick Cusack** » 07 Oct 2009 06:08

Questions:
1) Will MRCA be involved in a dogfight?
2) Is it for weapons delivery Brahmos/Nuclear payload?
3) Is thrust vectoring important a dog fight? will it help?
4) Why is AESA important? Is it to help target allocation from CCC/theater view projection?
5) Is the aircraft supposed to survive and still be able to limp home? Is this even feasible because you are sitting duck.

If answer to 1,2,3 is YES, 4 is MAYBE and 5 is NO - cost will be very important as fighter is expendable. Grippen/MIG35K are the best choices.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 07 Oct 2009 06:39

Kartik wrote:
NRao wrote: Did the Swedish government say that? That news seems very, very odd. Any URLs? TIA.
no, they didn't. on the contrary, for the Brazilian tender, Sweden has made it pretty clear that they will introduce the Gripen NG at the same time as the Brazilian AF, if they win the tender. There was a video posted on the Saab website for the Brazilian tender that makes that clear.

Thanks.

That was my impression too.

BRiets need to hold their horses and verify what they post.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 07 Oct 2009 06:54

NRao wrote: Thanks.

That was my impression too.

BRiets need to hold their horses and verify what they post.

this is the mazaak thread anyway.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 07 Oct 2009 07:01

I think it will be 126 F-18E/Fs, 74 Gripen NGs, 100 T-50 (via SoKo) and 150 GE F414 EDE engines for all these planes + the LCAs, and since the F-18s supposedly did not do well in the Jaiselmer heat, Boeing will throw in a few hangers to deal with hot conditions for the F-18s. And, call it a day.

this is the mazaak thread anyway.

True. but, there are bots that pick up everything we post.

Shameek · Post by **Shameek** » 07 Oct 2009 10:04

Patrick Cusack wrote:Questions:
1) Will MRCA be involved in a dogfight? Why the doubt? Its always a possibility.2) Is it for weapons delivery Brahmos/Nuclear payload? The Su-30MKI can barely carry the BrahMos. So doubtful.
3) Is thrust vectoring important a dog fight? will it help? Yes it is.
4) Why is AESA important? Is it to help target allocation from CCC/theater view projection? Please read up on AESA.
5) Is the aircraft supposed to survive and still be able to limp home? Is this even feasible because you are sitting duck.
Why is it a sitting duck? All aircraft are supposed to survive.

If answer to 1,2,3 is YES, 4 is MAYBE and 5 is NO - cost will be very important as fighter is expendable. Grippen/MIG35K are the best choices.
There is no fighter which is expendable. The lives of our pilots are not something to be played with. On what basis did you decide on those two aircraft?

Patrick Cusack · Post by **Patrick Cusack** » 07 Oct 2009 10:34

Sir I am not implying pilots are expendable, far from it - I know there will be more planes that there are pilots

From a price and capability standpoint - India can afford more of these. More in this case does not mean useless/poor quality - India needs more squadrons of planes to stem the larger Red and smaller Green tides waiting to engulf India.

I see Grippens quick turn around in combat a huge value add - availability multiplies. This implies airframe has many times more life cycles than others, and notably can take a beating. I remember stories about Gnats from 1964.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 07 Oct 2009 11:22

NRao wrote:I think it will be 126 F-18E/Fs, 74 Gripen NGs, 100 T-50 (via SoKo) and 150 GE F414 EDE engines for all these planes + the LCAs, and since the F-18s supposedly did not do well in the Jaiselmer heat, Boeing will throw in a few hangers to deal with hot conditions for the F-18s. And, call it a day.

Seriously saar! all those birds with one powerplant from a nation that as of now has a track record that inspires only fledgling trust? Ain't happening. 200 LCA + 200 MRCA + 100 trainers all on F414s? Damn, is india getting deep, deep TOT into the 414?

CM.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 07 Oct 2009 12:33

I don't know how members are rating the chances of the Yanqui birds so highly,when the GOI has got impatient with Lockheed and given it the little upturned finger for the naval LCA development contract! Here,the US company was unable to get from the US govt. clearance for TOT,consultancy etc. for our very own LCA's naval variant.If the US govt. is so unsure about providing India with high-tech aircraft tech,while it is ever ready to sell Pak the same,why should we hope for any positive attitude form the US? The naval LCA snub by the US to India will have its ramifications in this contest mark my words.There is just no way that the US will give India full TOT,even technology for prophylactics!

Nihat · Post by **Nihat** » 07 Oct 2009 12:57

Very true , without ToT once of the basic purpose of MRCA i.e to integrate diverse technologies for future enhancement of Indian Aeospace industry is not fulfilled , leave alone the threat of sanctions.

rajeshks · Post by **rajeshks** » 07 Oct 2009 13:51

NRao wrote:I think it will be 126 F-18E/Fs, 74 Gripen NGs, 100 T-50 (via SoKo) and 150 GE F414 EDE engines for all these planes + the LCAs, and since the F-18s supposedly did not do well in the Jaiselmer heat, Boeing will throw in a few hangers to deal with hot conditions for the F-18s. And, call it a day.

T-50!! Accidently both the South Korean trainer and PAKFA are called T-50

Btw as per wiki T-50 trainer uses GE404 engines and not 414.

karan_mc · Post by **karan_mc** » 07 Oct 2009 15:14

i was just doing some reading on Gripen NG ,SAAB will not be able to deliver first true Gripen NG until 2012-14 period will it be ok for MMRCA requirements ??

kit · Post by **kit** » 07 Oct 2009 15:21

Well, what i was saying about american participation in the MRCA shoot out is still valid ! The F16s and F18s have no place there., they should not have been in consideration at all., especially one that requires significant transfer of technology.Leaves just the Gripen,Typhoon and Rafale., in that order taking into account price,technology.'Political' correction would make it Typhoon,Rafale and Gripen.Have not included Mig for more reasons than one, but i am sure people here know about that.

prabir · Post by **prabir** » 07 Oct 2009 16:26

MIG 35 will also part of the deal with some understanding with Russians on LCA export and items that no one will sell.

RKumar · Post by **RKumar** » 07 Oct 2009 17:03

SaiK wrote:pl explain in detail the problems with ef2k?

As I explained,

slow progress.
UK is trying to pull out of the euro fighter.
Some other partner countries have shown interest in F-35.

RKumar · Post by **RKumar** » 07 Oct 2009 17:07

shameekg wrote:
RKumar wrote:IMHO... chances of each plane
Please explain the ranking system you have used for this. The SH-18 (I assume you meant F-18 SH) gets a sad smiley and the highest points. On what basis?

The reason for the sad smiley is US origin, it has too many strings attached and many unknown unknown (Which we will know only with time). But it is the plane which can bring new technology and fits in our budget.

Here need which fulfils our requirement is more important then do we like a country and its ever changing rules.

RKumar · Post by **RKumar** » 07 Oct 2009 17:11

rajeshks wrote:
RKumar wrote:IMHO... chances of each plane

F-16 -> towards end of life from orgion country but proven - 5 points
SH-18 -> Good plane but mainly build for navy and orgion US - 7 points
Mig-35 -> We have 30MKI, no way buying everything from 1 - 3 points
EuroF -> Have enough problem e.g. UK and slow progress - 5 points
Gripen -> Same class as LCA - 6 points
Rafale -> good plane but toooo expensive for India - 6 points
RKumar, did you consider the political angle while calculating the points? Also there is nothing wrong in buying from one supplier if it perfectly satisfies your present & future requirements.

My favourites : Rafale > Mig 35 > SH|EF > Gripen > F16.

That is also a reason for awarding one extra point for SH-18 beside good plane. Basically all are good but which one to choose. Personally, my bet is on Refale but it can't win (good plane but toooo expensive for us.)

Oh yes it is wrong to put all eggs in one basket. It is not a s strength but expose our weakness. Another example, please remember Kargil what MiG could not do some other plane did.

RKumar · Post by **RKumar** » 07 Oct 2009 17:21

b_patel wrote: The problems the EF has faced are the same that the other fighters have faced: GLOBAL RECESSION. Due to the current economic crisis The Rafale production line has been reduced to one Rafale a month which is just enough to keep the lines open. The EF problems stem from the partner countries not being able to afford them right now. Once the global recession is over the remaining tranche orders will be completed.

Sorry I don't agree with recession logic. It might have side impact. Please notice EF was started during cold war and today cold war is over. So they don't need anymore originally thought number of planes. So everyone is cutting down on the numbers and number make the factories and research going on. As I mentioned, UK will has the least capable planes. The best planes series 3, they have sold to some Arab country

And as I mentioned even some are looking for F-35 in stead of EF.

b_patel wrote: Its not about the price of the aircraft, if it was the EF and Rafale would not be allowed to compete in the competition anyway.

Do you think we are going to buy all 6 planes??? You get idea about + and - points of each plane

and it is an asset to collect.

b_patel wrote: Besides with the recent orders for additional 50 SU-30MKI's and 29 MIG 29K it seems like russia will not be getting the MRCA contract.

Totally agree.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 07 Oct 2009 20:36

Ajatshatru wrote:Bhailog, with reference to the article ‘Rafale deal takes jets to new level’

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_o_no4M2xEPY/S ... 00-h/1.JPG

If UAE indeed signs for 60 Rafale fighter aircrafts and UAE insists on ‘a more powerful engine, a new air-to-air missile and cutting-edge radar system’ as stated in the article and if India also eventually chooses Rafale in the MRCA competition, I was wondering:

1. Would India get the Rafale being flown right now by French air force or the new upgraded version as would be eventually supplied to UAE? The article says UAE is considering delivery of Rafale around 2014. This would be, in and around, approx. the same time as India starts getting deliveries of MRCA.
2. If India gets the upgraded version of Rafale, then what sort of TOT would India get from Rafale?

Neither the French AF based rafale, nor the UAE defined Rafale. The MRCA RFP should have defined ALL that is needed by the IAF.

rajeshks · Post by **rajeshks** » 07 Oct 2009 20:36

RKumar wrote: Another example, please remember Kargil what MiG could not do some other plane did.

Thats bcoz the best Mig we had was optimised for A2A role and other Migs didnt have PGM capability. This is not the case with russian machines now.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 07 Oct 2009 20:39

We can expect - and hope it does not happen - with the MiG-35 too. In fact the MiG-35 should be worse than this. Just an observation.

shetty wrote:Induction of upgraded MiG-29 hit by delay at Russian end

The Indian Air Force’s plans to induct upgraded MiG-29 by March next year has been hit due to delay at the Russian end with the first lot of six aircraft likely to come in only by early 2011.

“Originally, the upgraded MiG-29s were to join the IAF squadrons at Adampur airbase in Punjab by March 2010. But now, there will be a delay of another eight to 10 months and hence, we expect it only in early 2011,” a senior IAF officer said on Sunday. Under the US $ 950-million contract signed in March 2008 for upgrading 60-odd MiG-29s operated by IAF’s three squadrons, the IAF planned to fit Series-3 version of RD-33 engine to increase its thrust from 8.3 ton to over 9 ton, apart from improved avionics, modern weapon systems and Beyond Visual Range missiles.

“The idea is to upgrade the MiG-29 from an aerial interceptor, air superiority aircraft to a multi-role fighter-bomber aircraft capable of striking mobile and stationary targets on the ground and at sea with high-precision weapons in all-weather conditions beyond visual range,” the officer said. While the first six aircraft would be upgraded by the original equipment manufacturer, the remaining aircraft would be attended to at the IAF’s Nashik-based 11 Base Repair Depot with kits supplied by RAC-MIG. The upgrading is happening on the basis of the new requirements for the MiG-29s that IAF had indicated to the
OEM, based on an assessment it had made for the future role of the fighter aircraft.

“The upgrade will increase the service life of MiG-29 from the existing 25 years to 40 years. The upgrade of all the aircraft was originally envisaged within three years. But now, it could take another year or more to complete,” he added. This will include replacing existing on-board radars with the advanced multi-functional Zhuk-ME radar and a new weapon control system. The package is also expected to include state-of-the-art avionics and cockpit ergonomics, along with an increase in fuel capacity.

The twin-engine MiG-29s will carry sophisticated air-to-air and high-accuracy air-to-ground missiles such as R-27, R-60Mk and R-73, and ’smart aerial’ bombs. The upgrade programme ran into rough weather after a Russian Air Force MiG-29 crashed in December last forcing the IAF to ground all its aircraft to carry out extensive checks.

With Russia identifying structural faults in the aircraft’s tail fins, the IAF went about checking the tail fins of the MiG-29s in its squadrons.” Half-a-dozen of the MiG-29s in our fleet were found with faults in the tail fin and these had to be replaced. On the MiG-29s from the same batch of aircraft as the Russians, we did further checks to rectify structural faults completely,” an IAF engineer said.
Did not notice the bolded part until now.

rajeshks · Post by **rajeshks** » 07 Oct 2009 20:40

NRao wrote: Neither the French AF based rafale, nor the UAE defined Rafale. The MRCA RFP should have defined ALL that is needed by the IAF.

Sometime back there was a news that France offered around 40 rafale from their inventry as a stop gap measure. That will help us with numbers and an opportunity to know the machine before our own custom built arrives.

Shameek · Post by **Shameek** » 07 Oct 2009 20:45

Patrick Cusack wrote:I see Grippens quick turn around in combat a huge value add - availability multiplies. This implies airframe has many times more life cycles than others, and notably can take a beating. I remember stories about Gnats from 1964.

Based on the 5 points you raised earlier:
1. The Gripen is not proven to be the best dogfighter.
2. Probably will not be used to carry the Brahmos.
3. No thrust vectoring.
4. So far no AESA.
5. Still dont know what is meant by sitting duck. The Gripen is a single engined aircraft though. So there it takes a hit against your survivability theory.
So why do you think the Gripen is the one?

RKumar wrote:The reason for the sad smiley is US origin, it has too many strings attached and many unknown unknown (Which we will know only with time). But it is the plane which can bring new technology and fits in our budget.

Thats the case with the F-16 also. Which new technology are you looking at? Just the AESA or something else?

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 07 Oct 2009 20:46

rajeshks wrote:
NRao wrote:I think it will be 126 F-18E/Fs, 74 Gripen NGs, 100 T-50 (via SoKo) and 150 GE F414 EDE engines for all these planes + the LCAs, and since the F-18s supposedly did not do well in the Jaiselmer heat, Boeing will throw in a few hangers to deal with hot conditions for the F-18s. And, call it a day.
T-50!! Accidently both the South Korean trainer and PAKFA are called T-50

Btw as per wiki T-50 trainer uses GE404 engines and not 414.

True.

But, please note that I mentioned the GE F414 EDE engine. A derated version has been proposed for the T-50.

This new engine is proposed for the F-18E/F and Gripen too.

I tagged the LCA on to the list.

Same engine for all of them.

rajeshks · Post by **rajeshks** » 07 Oct 2009 20:55

NRao wrote:True.

But, please note that I mentioned the GE F414 EDE engine. A derated version has been proposed for the T-50.

This new engine is proposed for the F-18E/F and Gripen too.

I tagged the LCA on to the list.

Same engine for all of them.

I was wondering, cant we even use kaveri powered LCA as jet trainer? Do we really need another trainer. Thats really sad about our machine.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 07 Oct 2009 23:06

Ajatshatru wrote:Bhailog, with reference to the article ‘Rafale deal takes jets to new level’

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_o_no4M2xEPY/S ... 00-h/1.JPG

If UAE indeed signs for 60 Rafale fighter aircrafts and UAE insists on ‘a more powerful engine, a new air-to-air missile and cutting-edge radar system’ as stated in the article and if India also eventually chooses Rafale in the MRCA competition, I was wondering:

1. Would India get the Rafale being flown right now by French air force or the new upgraded version as would be eventually supplied to UAE? The article says UAE is considering delivery of Rafale around 2014. This would be, in and around, approx. the same time as India starts getting deliveries of MRCA.
2. If India gets the upgraded version of Rafale, then what sort of TOT would India get from Rafale?

the MRCA RFP offer by Dassault were made quite a long time back, before the technical evaluation was done by the IAF. these lay out what specifications the Rafale will be offered with (the Rafale F3+, with AESA RBE-2 radar)- and if they do get selected for price negotiations, the IAF can ask for more specific equipment and customise it as they wish (such as a Thales Top Sight HMDS, because the Rafale doesn't have a HMDS as of now, or an Indian RWR, or Indian EW equipment, or a newer M-88-3 engine)- however, the price and time for integration will escalate as more and more engineering work is involved in customising it to IAF specs and hence in-service date will slide further to the right. It may make more sense to order it in batches, similar to the MKI program with the final batches being the specs that the IAF wanted- and then progressively upgrade all fighters to one spec.

these requirements of the UAE (mainly newer M-88-3 engines with more thrust and the MBDA Meteor integration) are still under negotiation and IF they do sign the deal, there will be significant research that is required before it can enter service with the newer engine (there is still very little headway in this matter, AFAIK).

nevertheless, the Rafale F3 is now in Adl'A service and its specifications are really quite good. one very useful fact that the IAF will surely take notice of (although may not specify it in the MRCA requirements list due to the US presence) is that the Rafale will replace the Mirage-2000N in the Adl'A in the nuclear strike role. The September issue of Air International has a good article on the Rafale F3 and gives details on the ASMP-A integration on the F3. While the ASMP-A is a French specific missile and not offered for export, the very attractive feature of the Rafale F3's RBE-2 (PESA) was this- it can be used for air-to-air and ground strike modes WHILE being used in terrain following mode. This was not there on the Mirage-2000N, which was a drawback because nuclear strike roles always meant penetration into enemy territory at extremely low altitudes to avoid radar detection (and so the dark green/gray camo on the Mirage-2000N. from a look-down perspective, the Mirage-2000N almost became invisible against ground clutter, especially in areas with foliage)

Also, the Mirage-2000N had a very short detection/tracking range in air-air combat and this meant it likely required escort, even though nominally, it could self-escort with MICA IRs. the Rafale can easily carry a nuclear payload, while also carrying MICA IR and MICA EM missiles, giving it a very credible self-defence capability that would be priceless for the IAF. simultaneous air-to-air and ground strike modes on the AESA radar it chooses would surely be something that the IAF would want, so the backseater would target the ground while the front seater would scan the airspace for any bogeys.

This would mean that the Mirage-2000s that are now tasked with the nuclear strike role can be replaced by the Rafale and offer the IAF a significantly stealthier, more capable platform that has more payload as well, which allows for it to carry self-defence air to air missiles.

please read up on how long it took for the F-16 Block 60 to enter UAEAF service after it was signed for. LM took a few years to complete R&D and flight testing of the AESA, and other goodies on the Block 60.

Maybe India should start work on modifying the Brahmos air-to-ground missile to become a nuclear strike missile like the ASMP-A instead of depending on free-fall nuclear bombs that put the platform that carries it under significantly higher risk of being shot down. the advantage of stand-off range on the Brahmos would mean that the Pakistani cities could be targeted well out of the range of fighters on defensive CAP.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 07 Oct 2009 23:34

would france and russia allow a nuke brahmos be put on rafale?

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 08 Oct 2009 00:54

SaiK wrote:would france and russia allow a nuke brahmos be put on rafale?

The point is moot. There is little chance that rafale airframe would be able to support bramhos. Even for MKI (which is a heavy figher), it was not easy.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 08 Oct 2009 00:59

T-50!! Accidently both the South Korean trainer and PAKFA are called T-50

strangely enough the early 5gen TD for the Russkis, the Su-47, also got the monicker "Golden Eagle" or Berkut. Crazy.

CM.