MRCA News and Discussion

rajsunder · Post by **rajsunder** » 09 Sep 2009 20:45

NRao wrote:
To be sure, for the Brazilian requirements.

Out of curiosity, are the Brazilians getting ToT of any sorts?

yes, they are and not only that any sales of Rafale craft in South America would be fulfilled by Brazil.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 09 Sep 2009 22:31

on the indirect vulnerability to a-khans policies, we are screwed for LCA as well considering current (temp) stand of getting more GE 414s. Going by the decision with snecma, (sad for EJ200s), and hope the paper is correct.. I am pretty disturbed at GTRE folks in not thinking little bit broad minded. we need a broader board in getting this straight. I would expect some one line Snecma/Rafale or EJ/EF2K folks get both Kaveri engine order as well as MRCA.

Hope IAF come up with an unbiased report.. and there is no push-pull gates from nu-del-hi.

cost is not an issue per reports.. but, politics is all the 90% of the game. The euro team is under the same push-pull gate.. its been in the records that frenchies hate our style of politics.. and the brits/german especially a backup from italian honchos, could drive where it speaks maya magic on mrca turn for $12b.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 09 Sep 2009 23:13

dorai wrote:Brazilian President on operating costs:

He added: "The Rafale is not the most expensive offer in terms of operating cost. That's the F/A-18."

http://www.france24.com/en/20090904-fra ... e?pop=TRUE
Reportedly the Super Hornet also scored lowest on technical marks below both the Rafale and Gripen.

source, Dorai ?

dorai · Post by **dorai** » 10 Sep 2009 00:23

The SH comment was written by a trade journalist on a Brazilian forum. But other rumours say the FAB actually prefers the SH.

Back to us. More from Gripen pressconf here,

In answer to request to justify the "independent choice" and EUMA restrictions, Eddy said that while it is true that 35% of the Gripen C/D was of U.S. origin, less than 18% on the advanced Gripen NG version (excluding the GE F414 engines) will be American. As for the weapon systems, unlike the competitors, they can integrate any missile systems that India chooses. Adding to this Mr Motte said that while Saab has not integrated the Gripen with Russian missiles it was quite possible to do so.

http://www.8ak.in/

vina · Post by **vina** » 10 Sep 2009 08:54

Hmm. F-16s in the air at Bangalore! . One F solah took off just some 10 minutes ago and maybe another one (or could be the same one again after a circle), flashed past my balcony.

So the MRCA stuff is really happening and not a joke. Atleast the trials dont seem to be a joke.

vina · Post by **vina** » 10 Sep 2009 10:02

Got buzzed by the F16 again, this time at low altitude. It sure is carrying targeting pods, drop tanks, and cant make out, but surely one or two bombs.. Looks like it is in strike configuration.

Bala Vignesh · Post by **Bala Vignesh** » 10 Sep 2009 10:31

vina wrote:Got buzzed by the F16 again, this time at low altitude. It sure is carrying targeting pods, drop tanks, and cant make out, but surely one or two bombs.. Looks like it is in strike configuration.

Could you please mention the direction and time of the flight???

GeorgeWelch · Post by **GeorgeWelch** » 10 Sep 2009 10:42

Just as an example of the difficulty of getting the truth out of a political process, there are articles like this that contradict early reports

Lula's decision was in defiance of the technical evaluation of the FAB

The operational cost of the Rafale was estimated at $ 16 thousand, while the American F-18, Boeing would cost $ 10 thousand and the Swedish Gripen, Saab's U.S. $ 4.5 thousand

In relation to the proposed technology transfer item in the French aircraft that would be well ahead of the competition, behind the scenes of the Brazilian aerospace information is also different. According to a source close to the military during the selection of the FX-2, Embraer, Atech, Mectron Aeroeletrônica and were called by the Air Force to make an evaluation of partnership proposals made by competitors, especially in technology transfer. According to the source, only Atech would have put the Rafale in the first place. The other placed the first fighter, the F-18 in the second and last in the Rafale.

What is the truth? No one knows, so I would caution against getting too excited by any press release on the subject.

krishnan · Post by **krishnan** » 10 Sep 2009 11:01

vina wrote:Hmm. F-16s in the air at Bangalore! . One F solah took off just some 10 minutes ago and maybe another one (or could be the same one again after a circle), flashed past my balcony.

So the MRCA stuff is really happening and not a joke. Atleast the trials dont seem to be a joke.

Funny , there was news report stating that the test have concluded

krishnan · Post by **krishnan** » 10 Sep 2009 11:02

dorai wrote:The SH comment was written by a trade journalist on a Brazilian forum. But other rumours say the FAB actually prefers the SH.

Back to us. More from Gripen pressconf here,

In answer to request to justify the "independent choice" and EUMA restrictions, Eddy said that while it is true that 35% of the Gripen C/D was of U.S. origin, less than 18% on the advanced Gripen NG version (excluding the GE F414 engines) will be American. As for the weapon systems, unlike the competitors, they can integrate any missile systems that India chooses. Adding to this Mr Motte said that while Saab has not integrated the Gripen with Russian missiles it was quite possible to do so.

http://www.8ak.in/

Engine makes a important part of an A/C so how come they are saying that less than 18 % will american. I would say unless they use their own or other engine , the A/C is atleast 50% american

b_patel · Post by **b_patel** » 10 Sep 2009 11:39

Engine makes a important part of an A/C so how come they are saying that less than 18 % will american. I would say unless they use their own or other engine , the A/C is atleast 50% american

Read the highlighted section in the paragraph you quoted. it says 18% American excluding engines!
Its odd to me that the FAB would prefer the Gripen over the Rafale. They have the money why not purchase the more capable aircraft?

Wickberg · Post by **Wickberg** » 10 Sep 2009 12:22

krishnan wrote:
Engine makes a important part of an A/C so how come they are saying that less than 18 % will american. I would say unless they use their own or other engine , the A/C is atleast 50% american

The GE414 is based on the Volvo Aero RM12 which consists of more then 50% Swedish designed and produced parts. Volvo Aero Aero owns a huge stake in F414 and produces it for the SuperHornet. Perhaps SAAB considers the engine a US/Swedish collaboration?

bhavik · Post by **bhavik** » 10 Sep 2009 14:10

Mig 35 derives from Mig29 which was first inducted in IAF in 1987!!!
Service issues are also well known .. I am sure it would be another gorshkov as it is the only plane not in production and use. Even RuAF has not ordered it.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 10 Sep 2009 14:19

Bhavik,the MIG-35 is far more modern than the F-18 and both aircraft are in new avatars far better than their originals.The MIG-35 is going to be ordered by Russia along with large numbers of "Super-Flankers" (SU-35s) and even the MIG-29K is being considered to replace the Russian Navy's SU-33s which arequite old.Read my posts taken from the latest aviation sources.In addition,the MIG-35 will cost far less than the expensive F-18SH.

As for the Brazilian order of the Rafael,here is an excellent anlaysis and the key factors could be of similar importance in the Indian context (Congressional approval for TOT,resisting US hegemony in the region,leveraging other defence deals with the fighter order).Crossposetd in the Geopolitical thread.

http://www.ipseurope.org/news/news.php? ... :15&key2=1

BRAZIL-FRANCE: ARMS DEAL STRENGTHENS MULTIPOLAR FOCUS

Fabiana Frayssinet

RIO DE JANEIRO (IPS) - With the announcement of a multi-billion-dollar military technology-sharing deal with France, Brazil is projecting itself as a future regional military supplier, while sending out a clear signal about the multipolar focus of its foreign policy.

The choice of scenario for what they described as a "strategic alliance" could not have been more symbolic for presidents Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva of Brazil and Nicolas Sarkozy of France. Against a soundtrack of military marches, the two leaders clinched their latest agreement in the Brazilian capital on Sept. 7 ? Independence Day in Brazil.

Their meeting formalised the accords reached in December, on Sarkozy's first visit, when the Brazilian government announced that it would buy five submarines from France - including Latin America's first nuclear-powered submarine ? to be built at a new shipyard in Itaguai in the southeastern state of Rio de Janeiro.

Also announced on that occasion was the purchase of 50 French EC-725 transport helicopters, to be jointly assembled at the Helibras factory in Itajubá in the southeastern state of Minas Gerais. The EC-725 Cougars are made by Eurocopter - a subsidiary of European aerospace giant EADS ? which holds a 45 percent stake in Brazil's Helibras.

Also confirmed Monday was a final element in the agreements, estimated to be worth around 12.5 billion dollars: the start of negotiations for the sale to Brazil of 36 Rafale combat jets made by French firm Dassault Aviation, which could be finalised in October, according to a joint communiqué issued by the two governments.

The announcement indicated that fierce lobbying by Sweden's Saab, which hoped to sell Brazil its Gripen NG, and by the U.S. Boeing, which was pushing its F/A-18 Super Hornet, had fallen flat, putting an end to a lengthy contest that had dragged on since 1998, under the government of Fernando Henrique Cardoso (1995-2003).

In exchange for the Rafale fighters deal, estimated at four billion dollars, the French government promised to purchase 10 KC-390 military transport planes from Embraer, Brazil's national aircraft maker.

Brazil's main argument for choosing the French company was that unlike manufacturers from other countries ? like Germany in the case of the submarines and the U.S. in the case of the combat jets ? France not only offered the sales but the transfer of technology as well, according to Brazilian Foreign Minister Celso Amorim.

"We decided to negotiate the purchase of the Rafale's because while the airplane is important to us, what is really important is having the technology to be able to build the plane," said Lula, standing next to his guest, Sarkozy.

According to professor of international relations Daniel Castelán, the transfer of technology will help make it possible for Brazil to live up to its aspiration of becoming a future military supplier not only for Latin America but for other regions as well.

Towards that end, the agreements with France will allow Brazil not only to build ? and to learn the secrets of making ? the military equipment, but also "to sell it jointly," as Sarkozy pointed out.

"The fact that the submarines and helicopters are being built in Brazilian territory signals a strategy of producing for South America in the future," Castelán, a researcher at the South American Political Observatory (OPSA) and a professor at the private Candido Mendes University, said in an interview with IPS.

Fernando Gabeira, a federal lawmaker for the Green Party (PV) and a member of the congressional commissions on foreign relations and defence, reached a similar conclusion.

"Brazil could have bought the American fighters, but not their technology, because that would have depended on authorisation by the U.S. Congress," Gabeira told IPS.

"The French understood that, and offered all of the technology so that Brazil could also produce the planes or submarines," he added.

However, Gabeira also remarked that "Brazil has the aim of becoming a producer of military equipment, but where are the wars" that would justify such a major upgrading of Brazil's own military capabilities? He pointed out that besides the planes, helicopters and submarines, South America's giant also has a fleet of warships.

Lula, on the other hand, believes the answer lies in the "new independence" that the discovery of enormous oil reserves will offer this country, set to become one of the world's top oil producers.

According to the president, the new investments in the defence industry are justified by "a question of sovereignty," to defend two important areas in this country of 190 million people: the Amazon rainforest and an 800-sq-km area of offshore oil reserves in the Atlantic ocean, off of Brazil's southeast coast, which hold an estimated 50 to 80 billion barrels of crude, found seven km below the surface of the ocean.

The oilfields, which were discovered in 2007 and have not yet been explored, lie beneath a layer of salt up to two-km thick. According to government projections, they could represent up to six times the country's proven reserves of 14 billion barrels.

Lula pointed out that oil has long been a motive for wars and conflicts. To avoid them, he said, although his government puts a priority on peace, it is also laying the foundations to make Brazil a "world power" within 15 or 20 years.

According to Gabeira, that aim reflects "a continuation of the policy of the military (who governed Brazil from 1964 to 1985) to make this country a major power, but now in a totally different world, where wars are not waged the way they used to be."

In his view, "Brazil should strengthen its role as a 'soft power' rather than seeking to become a 'hard power'." He admitted, however, that this is still not an easy argument to make in this country.

The alliance between Brazil and France has already begun to bear fruit for Brasilia at the international level. Sarkozy reaffirmed Paris's support for Brazil's aspiration to a permanent seat on the United Nations Security Council and in the Group of Eight (G8) most powerful countries, which he said was "fair."

But Castelán said that besides the aim of strengthening Brazil's defence industry, the alliance with France should be considered part of a broader foreign policy strategy guided by "a strong multipolar focus on the part of the Lula administration."

That "strategic vision," he said, is based on the "search for military and defence cooperation not just with the United States," at a time when the Brazilian Foreign Ministry has complained about the increase in the U.S. military presence in Colombia, which is lending the U.S. armed forces seven military bases.

The idea is to forge more multilateral ties as a "counterbalance to U.S. hegemony" in the sphere of the military as well as trade, the analyst said. (END)

As Brazil is wary of the US supplying arms to Colombia,so too is India very wary of US arms to Pak to fight "terror",which are actually being modified to attack India with.This key factor might very well swing the deal to wards France in like manner.

adel ansari · Post by **adel ansari** » 10 Sep 2009 15:28

Offering Source Code SAAB has played a mster stroke. I, now definitely am giving a serious thought to it. My argument is based on certain criteria
1) Reliability - All the aircraft are proven and are of high quality except MIG,We have suffered a lot because of their faulty spare parts.
2) Trust - It should come with no strings attached , i.e. should support us in future against anyone we have a conflict with. US looses big time here, EUMA and all those craps and also using their stuff against pak is a concern.. ( I think IAF and Defence ministrt know this and have already made up their minds against americans. however as symbolism maintain them in race.. also have made enough purchases already from them so if rejected they should n't feel that bad). Gripen has GE engine that will be a concern.
3) Exclusivity - This is highly important. i.e whatever we get Pakis and Chinks should not.
Here Russians and French wo'nt hesitate in selling to Chinks and Pakis respectively.
rest all for sure will elude them foreva..saudi got euro so pakis can use them but in a very unlikely situation as India too has good relatiosn with Saudi.

SO after analysing the criteria all of them have some deficiencies .. so it would depend on which factor is most important to IAF. ( i personally still feel IAF should go for split b/w eurofighter and gripen 80 each). What are your views as to what factor is more important for IAF.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 10 Sep 2009 15:59

This is BR's observer reporting from the Forward Observation Post(FOP):

Wonderful weather in Bangalore..nice hot and sunny...clear blue skies and good visibility....

Lots of flying by the F-16 twins....sharp port turns on takeoff and rapid climb all the way..heading North.....lots of Jag sorties.....even LCA managed a sortie......

Willy · Post by **Willy** » 10 Sep 2009 16:53

From a political perspective the front runners are the Typhoon and the Hornet. American muscle v/s EU muscle. If you keep sanctions and Uncle Sam's unreliability then the Typhoon has the edge. Wonder how much TOT they are willing for though.

Kersi D · Post by **Kersi D** » 10 Sep 2009 17:04

rohitvats wrote:This is BR's observer reporting from the Forward Observation Post(FOP):

Wonderful weather in Bangalore..nice hot and sunny...clear blue skies and good visibility....

Lots of flying by the F-16 twins....sharp port turns on takeoff and rapid climb all the way..heading North.....lots of Jag sorties.....even LCA managed a sortie......

Are you watching a AERO CIRCUS 2009 ?

k

Willy · Post by **Willy** » 10 Sep 2009 17:13

http://www.indiastrategic.in/topstories325.htm

There wold be a common leader but two or three different teams under him. The aircraft would go to Bangalore for “performance, systems and humidity trials, to Jaisalmer for hot weather and weapon trials, and to Leh for high altitude and cold weather trials.”

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Humidity trials in Banglore? With such a vast coastline couldnt they find any place to conduct humidity trails? Whoever heard of of a high level of humidity in Banglore?

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 10 Sep 2009 17:37

Philip wrote:..the MIG-35 is far more modern than the F-18 \,,,.

.. also, it comes with the russkie chicks.

GeorgeWelch · Post by **GeorgeWelch** » 10 Sep 2009 18:30

Philip wrote:Bhavik,the MIG-35 is far more modern than the F-18

Only in your dreams chief.

It's so modern they can't even make their own jammer.

Philip wrote:As for the Brazilian order of the Rafael,here is an excellent anlaysis and the key factors could be of similar importance in the Indian context (Congressional approval for TOT,resisting US hegemony in the region,leveraging other defence deals with the fighter order).

That was the official spin when the announcement was made, but as that link I posted shows, many people believe the Rafale offered the WORST TOT package.

Bala Vignesh · Post by **Bala Vignesh** » 10 Sep 2009 19:11

rohitvats wrote:This is BR's observer reporting from the Forward Observation Post(FOP):

Wonderful weather in Bangalore..nice hot and sunny...clear blue skies and good visibility....

Lots of flying by the F-16 twins....sharp port turns on takeoff and rapid climb all the way..heading North.....lots of Jag sorties.....even LCA managed a sortie......

Roger That FOP... similar activity observed in the southern part of the city..

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 10 Sep 2009 19:12

Jammer is least of the problem for Mig-35 , they can if need be carry the new Sorbtsiya-S wide band jammer on external pod or perhaps internally , or the IAF will prefer the now standardised Elta 8222 jammer.

And EW is a very dynamic environment , the Russian will keep coming up with something or better DRDO might just use the one developed for Tejas.

The Mig-35 is very competitive with F-18 E/F in every aspect

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 10 Sep 2009 19:19

IMHO, even though I have been very high on the Rafale, I think the Rafale should be sent packing from the Indian MRCA contest.

For one IF Brazil and France are going to jointly sell spares, etc - first to who?, then Brazil will be in direct competition with India on that one matter (for a non-extent market right now, and perhaps a very, very small market later on).

I think the decision to keep the F-18 out (for political reasons) is reasonable. But, to think that Brazil will get substantial benefits, based on the arguments they have made so far, is (IMHO) ridiculous.

The ONLY way, NOW, I see the Rafale in the IAF is IF Snecma doles out the core techs for the Kaveri engine AND THAT engine is shared between the LCA and the Rafale. Else it is not worth it.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 10 Sep 2009 20:01

X-posting:

Dmurphy wrote:Second Generation AESA for Gripen
"What we are offering is a second generation AESA (advanced extended search array radar) that incorporates a swishplate that enables it to rotate and considerably enhances its capabilities over the existing radar," Gripen International's India director Eddy de la Motte told reporters Wednesday.

"The radar will come with its software source code."

This stuff about the "swishplate" is great, but I would think that conformals would be far better.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 10 Sep 2009 20:03

On the Brazilian deal to buy Rafale, I am wondering how much of it is because of the cancellation of the US Army contract a few years ago.

GeorgeWelch · Post by **GeorgeWelch** » 10 Sep 2009 20:12

Austin wrote:The Mig-35 is very competitive with F-18 E/F in every aspect

There is a difference between 'very competitive' and 'far more modern'.

NRao wrote:For one IF Brazil and France are going to jointly sell spares, etc - first to who?, then Brazil will be in direct competition with India on that one matter (for a non-extent market right now, and perhaps a very, very small market later on).

As I understand it (but everything is so muddled it's hard to say), it was exclusive to South America only. Only they could sell to SA and they could only sell to SA.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 10 Sep 2009 20:26

F16 sorties in blr have been a lot more than F18 imo. either the IAF is very serious about it, or they are studying all aspects of it to shaft the pakis later.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 10 Sep 2009 20:44

Singha wrote:F16 sorties in blr have been a lot more than F18 imo. either the IAF is very serious about it, or they are studying all aspects of it to shaft the pakis later.

Another important point....F-18 sorties were long and few..while a typical F-16 sorties has the a/c taking off and doing a sharp turn to port side....do a circuit...head north and land back after couple of after some time...they are definitely far more numerous..at least 2X of F-18 sorties..at least what I saw during the office hours....

b_patel · Post by **b_patel** » 10 Sep 2009 21:16

http://www.eurofighter.com/po_bl.asp?id=163

Eurofighter Blog:

Whilst browsing through the different defence news pages today, we came across an article which announced that the deal between Brazil and the French aircraft Rafale has been confirmed. As a company with four core nations as customers, and Austria and Saudi Arabia as export partners, we know what a time for celebrating this must be for Rafale, if the stories prove correct. As the article pointed out, "The Eurofighter and several other very competitive aircraft have made export sales scarce".

Further on the article states that "The Rafale is more (in terms of performance and cost) than Brazil needs" which explains why the Eurofighter Typhoon was discounted from the competition early. The outstanding performance and capabilities of the Typhoon are not always a requirement for every Air Force.

The Air Forces of India, Japan, Switzerland and Greece among others, may have different requirements to Brazil, but this will become clear later next year when Switzerland are due to make a decision, and the Indian trial tests are finished. Interestingly, according to the German newspaper VDI, Delhi insiders tip 60/40 for the Eurofighter and the American competitor of F-18 aircrafts, to split the Indian contract of 10 billion dollars between the two parties.

Recent news states that the competition in Brazil is still ongoing. As stated by International news agencies, the Brazilian defence minister Nelson Jobim said yesterday “Negotiations in progress will be deepened, redefined and will be continued with the three participants.” This meaning that the deal is not done.

I wonder who these "Dehli insiders" are? I honestly don't believe that the order will be split in with the EF/SH mix. Officials have said time and time again that one vendor will win this order. If India has the money to do this, I say go for it!

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 10 Sep 2009 22:20

NRao wrote:X-posting:..but I would think that conformals would be far better.

much better than gripen..>> the E-scan Gallium Nitrate (GaN) T/R moduled AESA for MMRCA.
http://www.ainonline.com/news/single-ne ... r-modules/

100w per module.. and 1 to 20 GHz.. that can pack whole lot of ECM, ISS, and other Es possible from one single unit.

much better than APG79 from specs.. /per current info (GaAs based).

EADS is the way to go!... EJ200s for LCA!

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 10 Sep 2009 22:55

NRao wrote:X-posting:
This stuff about the "swishplate" is great, but I would think that conformals would be far better.

Its actually called a 'swashplate' configuration, not swishplate (trust DDM to screw that up, and they screwed up the full form of the AESA acronym as well) and has a definite advantage over fixed position arrays. it allows the fighter to fire a BVR missile, keep its target painted as the radar has a much larger FoV, while the launch fighter already starts to disengage, as in turn away, in order to protect itself, without breaking the lock. that allows the fighter to fire its weapons at a much longer range, and keep the bogey painted till the missile onboard seeker acquires it.

now imagine a scenario where one fighter in a pack paints multiple targets, locks and tracks them, and hands out coordinates to others in the pack, all while keeping itself safe by staying out of the engagement envelope of the enemy fighter's radar or weapons. the rest are all "nose cold", that is, have their radars in non-radiating mode, and can still fire their weapons at the targets. it would blindside any enemy, who is aware of only one fighter because it would be radiating, and their concentration would be on getting into firing position against the one radiating fighter. a Gripen NG pack would be a very formidable enemy to take on with its newer AESA and best in the business datalinks.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 10 Sep 2009 22:58

Singha wrote:F16 sorties in blr have been a lot more than F18 imo. either the IAF is very serious about it, or they are studying all aspects of it to shaft the pakis later.

They are very impressed by the Block 60, from what I've heard, even before the trials. Got this from a very reliable source.

GeorgeWelch · Post by **GeorgeWelch** » 10 Sep 2009 23:17

SaiK wrote:much better than gripen..>> the E-scan Gallium Nitrate (GaN) T/R moduled AESA for MMRCA.
http://www.ainonline.com/news/single-ne ... r-modules/

100w per module.. and 1 to 20 GHz.. that can pack whole lot of ECM, ISS, and other Es possible from one single unit.

much better than APG79 from specs.. /per current info (GaAs based).

That is NOT for the MRCA, they are talking about future developments and what they're working on. It is in no way ready-to-go. Notice this quote:

Compans believes Europe is not far behind the U.S. in GaN technology.

He is paid to put the best possible spin on things.

If the best spin they can come up with is that they don't believe they are far behind the US, well . . .

Kartik wrote:Its actually called a 'swashplate' configuration . . . and has a definite advantage over fixed position arrays

It also has disadvantages. If you note, the PAK-FA decided to go with a fixed configuration.

Fixed design is more reliable, cheaper to maintain, more stealth friendly (thought that probably doesn't matter for a nonstealth aircraft), and can maintain a continual track on a target.

JaiS · Post by **JaiS** » 11 Sep 2009 05:00

With regards to FAB's FX-2 contest

U.S Embassy Statement on FX-2 Competition

johnny_m · Post by **johnny_m** » 11 Sep 2009 07:56

They offered full ToT to us ages ago. Will this lead to Rafale becoming RaFail again ?

AnantD · Post by **AnantD** » 11 Sep 2009 08:20

Re Rafail, I say we don't need another demonstration of its capabilities after we got one from the French during Kargil over Karachi. Boy was it impressive!

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 11 Sep 2009 08:20

George Welch, I think we call allow EADS to say about future technologies that could possible be with MMRCA as upgrades.. remember they said, as a bonus they would give India the right to own EADS as a partner (the only non EU country).

Nice gestures there.. quite right its marketing but so do others as well. Some go to extent of sending attractive explosive girls to give out pamphlets etc.. and some take to boxing bouts and bickering among the contestants (example Rafale Vs. Gripen).

BTW, didn't LM say F16INs are a step towards JSF in the future?

AnantD · Post by **AnantD** » 11 Sep 2009 08:52

They are very impressed by the Block 60, from what I've heard, even before the trials. Got this from a very reliable source.

Why shouldn't we like what the Pakis are selling their soul for.

Besides, the Israelis can supply all their PGMs, standoff weapons and AtoA missiles that they've already tested on F16's

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 11 Sep 2009 09:07

so my theory was right - F16 should be cheaper than F18 (?) and without the added penalty of naval fuselage and canted pylons. in terms of wing loading neither look like great dogfighters -vs- EF/Rafale's big delta wings but perhaps thats not the customers main focus area in terms of weightage.

and as a bonus , all the stuff tested on SUFA can replace bits and pieces of
the all-american cornfed gear onboard the default config quite cheaply as its already tested for years now. python5-check, litening4-check,elisra ew-check, rafael HMS-check, rafael LGB kits-check...

the aperture of the APG80 is certainly smaller than APG79 but perhaps northrop grumann (makers of platinum coated tip-of-spear APG77/81) have better handle on things than raytheon in that dept.

and a single engine plane would surely need less groundcrew for engine upkeep than a twin even if in-the-air flight hr cost is comparable.