India selects Typhoon & Rafale for MMRCA shortlist - Part 2

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 26 Oct 2011 23:09

I did ask this earlier on katrina, is there structural diagram showing the side lobes /edge that blends into the canards? I was wondering if there is any space there to pack side facing aesa t/rs?

Taygibay · Post by **Taygibay** » 27 Oct 2011 02:27

Both the black rectangle in front of the canard's root below the cockpit
and that green front facing "square are already SPECTRA elements.

So at first thought, they would be ideal locations.

Diagram :

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 27 Oct 2011 04:19

Yes, the Rafale does it for me too, for numerous reasons (apart from the more obvious advantage in strike missions):

1) Better platform imvho to codevelop AMCA, esp. since Fra was willing to mix Kaveris for Rafale and the French/Snecma involvement in said engine development (JV). With some stealth measures already incorporated and CFTs that have already been tested, it is ahead in evolutionary roadmap. And we know, that unlike the Euro consortium for the EF, who will have a VLO JSF soon enough, Dassault will keep upgrading the Rafale, it'll have to since this is the ADla and Aeronavale's premier fighter in the foreseeable future - good for India.
2) Commonality with M2k. Esp. in terms of weapons - I think the weapons package for the M2k has not been announced precisely for this reason. If it was, I'd have given up on the Rafale as MRCA
3) With smaller engines/weights, the Rafale is closer to the Medium mix that the IAF so desires, in fact it is lighter than the single engined F-16/60. I'd expect fuel costs to be lower for this bird.
4) Along with the Mica IIR and AASM it offers a versatility a2a and a2g, that the EF does not seem to have.
5) Purely my opinion here - but from DACT with different a/c and even the F22, the Rafale seems to be the most survivable.
6) Purely in good taste, it certainly looks the better!
7) Frankly, as a strategic partner, Fra has been rather more trustworthy than Brits or nuke hating Germans. The POK II response/gesture from Fra should not be forgotten.

CM.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 27 Oct 2011 04:31

Based on this, I think the Rafale has a serious chance to run away with it - it seems the cheaper of the two:

It is perhaps safe to assume that if the difference between the two bids is 15 per cent or more, then the lower bidder would ultimately be the winner. But if the difference is only marginal, or around four to five percent, then the associated costs on spares, tooling, maintenance and operating costs per hour in terms of fuel, manpower, maintenance and lifecycle would play a role in determining the winner.

http://bharat-rakshak.com/NEWS/newsrf.php?newsid=16273

Wonlee problem is Dassault seems the least flexible when it comes to negotiation -rather stiffnecked sometimes. That'll be that. They have certainly not been good sellers so far. Obviously the product is good, but someone from Saab/LM needs to get into the Dassault marketing/sales dept!

Cm

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 27 Oct 2011 09:53

the financial condition of italy and spain is well known. these two would be unable to kit their EFs with proper spares let alone fund expensive next-gen MLUs. the UK is better off, but in midst of a massive defence cut, temptation is strong to ride on Khans r&d muscle and just go with JSF, limiting EF upgrade funding and keeping it mostly a north sea CAP alert white elephant. germany does have the money but also on a hook funding and backstopping the unruly packs of PIIGS running around. not being adventurous in foreign policy and enjoying friendly relations with all neighbours they dont have a urgent need to beef up the tiffy.

france has money but is also on the hook for PIIGS backstopping, but is not going for JSF and has only the rafale and m88 to play with.

overall between france and germany, france has the proven track record of delivering stuff to india , longer history of working with us and supportive on nukular / missile issues . both are equally mercantile and will sell anything to china if Khan allows. but neither will break ranks with Khan and sell to china without memo from potus.

I say 'make it large' and 140 rafale (60 rafale1 and 80 rafale2 aka silent rafale with the leather upholstery and nakamichi sound system.

silent rafale - stronger less emissions engine, better stealth, side looking radar , spectra2, meteor , CFT, stealth AAM launchers, 360 spherical maws, OSF2 (finally!), improved range on Mica-EM , Astra1, Helina,....

Taygibay · Post by **Taygibay** » 27 Oct 2011 20:09

Generally agreed, Singha ( save that numbers could move in that deal of yours )
but for the British temptation to rely solely on the F-35.
The UK has taken exception to the source code sharing limitations on the Lighting II.
Not strong enough to my liking yet but if you check the dates, the faster
multi-role development came around when the revelation sprang up that
the USA would not allow its number one partner in the venture to freely
modify and complement and upgrade their own planes.
If the Typhoon was not an Eurofighter, they may have reduced their F-35
order quite a bit more then. In a sense, they are stuck with Ge/It/Es now.

And if your order supposes a "silent Rafale" then the merge with AMCA that
I loosely invoked may hold more air than previously thought about.
If that was the way to go, only precise timelines would give us a proper idea
of the effectual split between Rafale and Rafale 2 as you put it.
In that scenario, India aeromili industry would grow at maximum speed IMHO.

Good day all, Tay.

member_20029 · Post by **member_20029** » 27 Oct 2011 20:33

Just a novel thought,

Boeing's new F-15S (Silent Eagle) has conformal weapons bays (but I think it's at the cost of CFTs)

which is more "worth" it?
CFTs? or Conformal Weapons Bays?

Anthony Hines · Post by **Anthony Hines** » 27 Oct 2011 22:01

Given the precarious situation of the EU - I would think Rafale is a better bet - putting money in France and having it firmly on India's side is better than spreading money across 4 countries some of which may soon be holding their begging bowls in China's front door..

Taygibay · Post by **Taygibay** » 27 Oct 2011 22:42

which is more "worth" it?
CFTs? or Conformal Weapons Bays?

It depends on what is your priority mission-wise!
If you cover little distance ( borderline air defence ),
go weapons' bays.
If you cover distance to do AtoG, well CFTs!

It of course also depends on the plane itself and its
most evident "lack". Short legs imply CFTs and if not ...
The Rafale compensates its "non-stealthiness" by being
designed to go in low-low-low on deep strikes missions.
If the enemy do not "see you slipping under the rug" ...

member_20029 · Post by **member_20029** » 28 Oct 2011 02:49

Taygibay wrote:
which is more "worth" it?
CFTs? or Conformal Weapons Bays?
It depends on what is your priority mission-wise!
If you cover little distance ( borderline air defence ),
go weapons' bays.
If you cover distance to do AtoG, well CFTs!

It of course also depends on the plane itself and its
most evident "lack". Short legs imply CFTs and if not ...
The Rafale compensates its "non-stealthiness" by being
designed to go in low-low-low on deep strikes missions.
If the enemy do not "see you slipping under the rug" ...

true, it also depends on what type of role the fighter is expected to have.
Like, it would make sense for Interceptors to have CFTs, but it would make more sense for attackers or hunter-killers to have CWBs....

Nick_S · Post by **Nick_S** » 28 Oct 2011 03:19

Sorry, but I dont think buying Rafale is appropriate. Dassault will squeeze a crap load of $$$'s from India.

It cost $3 billion just to do a minor upgrade for 50 Mirage 2000s (ie, jets from the 1970s) with tech from the 1990s. Thats $60 mill a plane... about the same cost as a brand new Gripen.

Can you imagine what the cost for upgrading Rafale's and the cost of their spare parts would be in future? With close to 200 MRCA's being bought at above (mirage) upgrade costs that would work out to $12 billion... just for minor upgrade.

You can expect Rafale's MLU later to cost a heck of a lot more than M2k minor upgrade cost.

----

While Eurofighter on the other hand is being operated by 5 countries. Upgrade costs for it in future will be shared by the partner nations. They are building some 600 odd jets as of now. Thats a lot of fighters whose development/upgrade cannot be ignored.

The EF has way better A-A profile and as for A-G it can be integrated with all those weapons (or their equivalents) that Rafale has. So future EF tranches would be just as capable as Rafale in A-G profile.

While for the Rafale, its simply never going to reach EF in the A-A domain.

Nick_S · Post by **Nick_S** » 28 Oct 2011 03:25

Singha wrote: silent rafale - stronger less emissions engine, better stealth, side looking radar , spectra2, meteor , CFT, stealth AAM launchers, 360 spherical maws, OSF2 (finally!), improved range on Mica-EM , Astra1, Helina,....

Sorry Singha-ji, but before we can consider a "silent rafale" we need to consider what the cost implications of French jets may be. Do read my above post. The silent rafale that you are talking about will probably cost over $15 billion just for the upgrade, not for the jets themselves.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 28 Oct 2011 07:31

ef is owned by three bankrupt nations and one guy with money. they do not have any public support to fund upgrades and complete the ef to full spec when funding for social pgms is being cut harshly.
basically we would need to fund so no cheap deal there.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 28 Oct 2011 08:21

For the current generation of AESA radar panels, EF2K has a larger surface to house them.. however, if Rafale seriously thinks on getting an AlGaN one board, then thinks should be sharper for Rafale.

Other than the retractable sensors, and refueler, and other interesting sensor & weapons packages in Ef2K, Rafale equally matches up. Again, we are not sure what is the offer in the packet that would be opened soon.

Economically downward looking nations, might decrease cost to increase sales.

Taygibay · Post by **Taygibay** » 28 Oct 2011 08:35

Wow, Nick_S,

While Eurofighter on the other hand is being operated by 5 countries. Upgrade costs for it in future will be shared by the partner nations. They are building some 600 odd jets as of now. Thats a lot of fighters whose development/upgrade cannot be ignored.

The EF has way better A-A profile and as for A-G it can be integrated with all those weapons (or their equivalents) that Rafale has. So future EF tranches would be just as capable as Rafale in A-G profile.

While for the Rafale, its simply never going to reach EF in the A-A domain.

Are you sure you've followed recent news?
Starting with Tranche 2, EF have been dumped by these counties which
made them, exports coming from leftovers from downsized orders.
The Germans do not even want their Tranche 3B at all.
So I would bet on the UK finishing development of theirs as said before
but apart from Captor AESA, don'T wait up for upgrades.

EF being just as capable as Rafale in AtoG will not be verifiable
until 2018 when its armaments for that role are finished integrating.
Even then, being optimized for AtoA, fat chance it can best a plane
low-speed enabled for its carrier duties and deep strike conceived!
Lybia showed the difference.
The Rafale did its own SEAD, reco, AASM IR first shots fired on top of
GPS version, refueling service, all things the Typhoon cannot do!

What's more, in two major exercises, namely Al-Dhafra and Corsica
before that with 7-1 and 8-1 results in favor of the Rafale so that your
theory about Typhoon being a better air to air platform, huh, duh ???

More powerful motors and longer ranging radar are recognized as areas
where the EF has the upper hand, the rest ...............

It'S all nice to love your favorite, we all do but let's not invent stuff.

Good night all, Tay.

rajanb · Post by **rajanb** » 28 Oct 2011 09:04

Singha wrote:ef is owned by three bankrupt nations and one guy with money. they do not have any public support to fund upgrades and complete the ef to full spec when funding for social pgms is being cut harshly.
basically we would need to fund so no cheap deal there.

And the first thing those countries will do, if India buys the EF, is wriggle and downsize their number commitments for the EF. We will be left holding the baby and the expensive and rising cost of its nappies. A2G will suffer, whereas we have the Su 30s for our A2A.

I would think that Katrina will come in at 10-15% cheaper than the EF. Assuming that the MoF and MoD will be smart enough to ensure that there are no hidden costs.

Will · Post by **Will** » 28 Oct 2011 11:04

Rafa Rafa Rafa

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 28 Oct 2011 11:08

I think the indian buy would cover pretty much all of italy and spain commitments with some left over to help UK wriggle out?

and we'd still get the arrogant lectures and drain inspectors reports from london. and rough treatment in italy and spain as wogs. not that the frenchies are any better, but its better to have one monkey on our back than 4

Nick_S · Post by **Nick_S** » 28 Oct 2011 11:45

Taygibay wrote: The Rafale did its own SEAD, reco, AASM IR first shots fired on top of
GPS version, refueling service, all things the Typhoon cannot do!

Tay, do tell how many emergency landings EF had as compared to Rafale? What? None eh? lol. By that Libyan record, can we say Rafale is an unsafe jet as compared to EF?

All the other stuff you said about EF is pure BS.

Anyway, I am not a "fanboy" of either jet; just want whats best for India given budget constraints. Given Dassault's proven greediness, I doubt we would get a reasonable priced fighter jet (over its lifetime).

Also, I read your posts on Keypub forum and seems like talking to you is like talking to a brick wall. So thats my last response to you.

---------

Singha wrote:ef is owned by three bankrupt nations and one guy with money. they do not have any public support to fund upgrades and complete the ef to full spec when funding for social pgms is being cut harshly.
basically we would need to fund so no cheap deal there.

France is just as bankrupt as the other EU nations. At least for EF, there are several nations, one of which (Germany or UK hopefully) which would continue funding its development.

And in terms of EF developments, its only certain additional A-G weapons which need funding for integration. The AESA radar and Meteor have already been committed to.

PS: Rafale is not fully compatible with Meteor. Meteor has a two way data link in place when launched from EF/Gripen but Rafale only supports one way.

-----------

rajanb wrote:
And the first thing those countries will do, if India buys the EF, is wriggle and downsize their number commitments for the EF. We will be left holding the baby and the expensive and rising cost of its nappies. A2G will suffer, whereas we have the Su 30s for our A2A.

I would think that Katrina will come in at 10-15% cheaper than the EF. Assuming that the MoF and MoD will be smart enough to ensure that there are no hidden costs.

There is no proof that that would happen. What we do know is that Dassault is willing to and will most definitely screw India over any upgrade cost.

Nick_S · Post by **Nick_S** » 28 Oct 2011 12:02

SaiK wrote:For the current generation of AESA radar panels, EF2K has a larger surface to house them.. however, if Rafale seriously thinks on getting an AlGaN one board, then thinks should be sharper for Rafale.

Other than the retractable sensors, and refueler, and other interesting sensor & weapons packages in Ef2K, Rafale equally matches up. Again, we are not sure what is the offer in the packet that would be opened soon.

Economically downward looking nations, might decrease cost to increase sales.

AlGaN TR modules are not available right now and when they will be, EF would have an equal chance of getting them. So thats a non-argument. The Rafale radar is inferior to the EF's Captor radar.

EF will always have the dominant position in an A-A role. Thanks to its better kinetics, it will get into a favourable firing position (higher altitude & at higher speed) as compared to Rafale; thus allowing better kinetics for the missile. And this advantage is enhanced since EF's radar detection range is better.

Another thing is that Meteor is fully compatible with the EF while Rafale is not.

Do remember that we are talking about a multi-role platform, so dont bring in the MKI into the picture for the Rafale's defense. MKI need not have to baby sit all the time a brand new fighter that we are buying.

PratikDas · Post by **PratikDas** » 28 Oct 2011 12:32

Perhaps I'm a naive optimist, but the relative incompleteness of the EF makes me think of it as more suitable to our interest in having the ability to put the weapons of our choice on it, be they Indian, Israeli or Russian. I think we have better bargaining power with the EF and thereby, hopefully, the ability to fully integrate exotic weapons with on-board sensors.

That coupled with the raw potential of the platform in terms of engine thrust, radar range (due to the nose diameter), and simpler streamlining tells me there is a lot of room to grow so that it too may look as butt ugly as the F-16E/F when enhancements have been added on.

kelesis · Post by **kelesis** » 28 Oct 2011 12:54

France is just as bankrupt as the other EU nations. At least for EF, there are several nations, one of which (Germany or UK hopefully) which would continue funding its development.

And in terms of EF developments, its only certain additional A-G weapons which need funding for integration. The AESA radar and Meteor have already been committed to.

PS: Rafale is not fully compatible with Meteor. Meteor has a two way data link in place when launched from EF/Gripen but Rafale only supports one way.

Well, France is in a better situation than US, UK, Spain and Italy according to Moody's and S&P...
Rafale is fully compatible with Meteor, according to MBDA, it has been maid to be compatible with Rafale (and others).

http://www.mbda-systems.com/products/ai ... meteor/26/

2004
• Successful trial fit to a Gripen and Rafale;

2005
• Live catapult take-off and landings performed by Rafale from the aircraft carrier
Charles de Gaulle to confirm METEOR handling characteristics;

My point of vue regarding MMRCA is that the Rafale has already been chosen and the Tiffy is in final just to make sure Rafale is the L1. Remember that according to Shiv Aroor, Rafale was the first choice of IAF... And a 15% cheaper price is possible to reach because a part of the price has been probably included in the M2000 deal.

Texafr · Post by **Texafr** » 28 Oct 2011 13:08

Nick_S wrote:At least for EF, there are several nations, one of which (Germany or UK hopefully) which would continue funding its development.

This will not happen, the German government just announced Eurofighter orders will be cut.
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/ ... nse%20Cuts

European countries are not committed to the Eurofighter : the UK and Italy now favor the American F-35 and have renounced their EF orders. Germany, and soon Spain, have also cut their orders because they have no real need for, and no interest in, the Eurofighter.

Eurofighter is already extremely expensive and yet has limited capabilities (as seen in the 2011 Libyan campaign), upgrading this cold war aircraft into a modern multirole aircraft will be a long road that will cost an arm and a leg and European countries have other priorities. So, the situation will not change.

Nick_S · Post by **Nick_S** » 28 Oct 2011 13:09

kelesis wrote:
PS: Rafale is not fully compatible with Meteor. Meteor has a two way data link in place when launched from EF/Gripen but Rafale only supports one way.
Rafale is fully compatible with Meteor, according to MBDA, it has been maid to be compatible with Rafale (and others).

Did you read what I wrote? I will write it again for you:

Meteor has a two-way datalink. The Eurofighter & Gripen support the two-way datalink with Meteor while Rafale has only a one-way datalink with Meteor. Ie, Rafale presents a reduced capability with Meteor as compared to Eurofighter.

Meteor's are also carried/attached in semi-conformal pylons on the EF; thus reducing RCS and drag.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 28 Oct 2011 13:13

One good thing about Eurofighter I learnt is that it can supercruise with all A2A weapon and 2 drop tank at M 1.2-1.3 , Is the Rafale capable of supercruising with usefull weapon or say similar to Eurofighter weapons configuration ?

Nick_S · Post by **Nick_S** » 28 Oct 2011 13:20

Texafr wrote:
This will not happen, the German government just announced Eurofighter orders will be cut.
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/ ... nse%20Cuts

European countries are not committed to the Eurofighter : the UK and Italy now favor the American F-35 and have renounced their EF orders. Germany, and soon Spain, have also cut their orders because they have no real need for, and no interest in, the Eurofighter.

JSF orders are also being cut. Does that mean it will not be supported/upgraded in future?

Total EF order's may have come down from 600 to 500 (i dont know the exact count, just guessing), that doesnt mean that they are worth nothing. Thats still a lot of fighters and a lot more than current Rafale orders. When the time comes EF would be upgraded as it presents a significant part of operating countries air defenses.

Texafr wrote: Eurofighter is already extremely expensive and yet has limited capabilities (as seen in the 2011 Libyan campaign), upgrading this cold war aircraft into a modern multirole aircraft will be a long road that will cost an arm and a leg and European countries have other priorities. So, the situation will not change.

Lol. Please do look up the time frame for this "cold war" jet design...

(Hint - Its the same as Rafale).

EF already has some A-G capabilities; including PGMs. India may only need to fund a particular A-G weapon of its choice. That may only be the taurus/storm shadow and its possible that the cost will be shared with UK/Saudis.

arthuro · Post by **arthuro** » 28 Oct 2011 14:56

Dassault view on the competition :

Dassault and Eurofighter selected by India to equip its Air Force
Le Monde , Oct 28

Dassault and the European consortium Eurofighter unveil November 4 to the Indian authorities their commercial offers on a bid of 126 jets, a contract estimated at $ 12 billion, according to a source in the French group. "We been invited to open our commercial offers 4 November, "said Friday that source within Dassault, which attempts to export its Rafale.

Both groups were screened in late April for one of the largest defense contracts in the third economic power in Asia that seeks to modernize its army.
The American heavy industry, Boeing and Lockheed Martin, the Swedish Saab Gripen and Russian MiG had been placed out of play after a fierce competition. "The decision can be taken in one day if the difference between the two offers is important but it can take months if the difference is minimal, "said the source." I think the difference will be important and will be in our favor. " In India, the lowest bidder candidate usually wins the contract.

http://www.lemonde.fr/economie/article/ ... _3234.html

For the record Dassault CEO said during lattest Paris air show conference that he expect the difference in price to be around 60%

saptarishi · Post by **saptarishi** » 28 Oct 2011 16:40

such a big outburst of emotion seeing this,,i hope this dream comes true,,rafale in iaf colours..with the venerable su-30mki
can someone size down this image

GopiD · Post by **GopiD** » 28 Oct 2011 16:51

Hi Friends,

I have been following this thread for a long long time now..... and I would like to put in my thoughts here.

Its my opinion that EF would be selected instead of Rafale for various reasons which are as below...

1. By observing the recent decisions of GOI like rejecting the american fighters and gifting them with deals for other secondary role platforms like C-17 and C-130s etc; rejecting Mig-35 and gifting the russians with PAK-FA and MTA projects, I think GOI wants to spread the risks evenly and with already the scorpene deal, M-2000 upgrade in French kitty, it would be too many eggs in french basket if we hand them the MMRCA deal.

Swedes are not an influential identity on the international stage to count them on the high table to divide the defence pie, so nothing to them.

(I think rejecting the American fighters and gifting them the secondary role platforms was a master stroke, bit like the tamil saying "oru kallula rendu manga", coz the decision pacified the leftist internally and denied the strategic depth the americans were seeking in our offensive capabilities).

2. As many others have pointed that the EF countries are in a very bad economic shape and wouldn't want to invest much in EF and I concur. But, I think this as a positive for us which would give the GOI a better bargain and the EF countries will be much more flexible than the inflexible french (as seen in M-2000 upgrade). I think the EF countries would expect india to invest in EF and they will try to reduce their financial obligation for the EF, but that is precisely what India wants, the western Tech. This financial crisis in Europe is more a blessing in disguise for India and we will try to capitalize on this. India will invest in EF but will bargain for a cheaper EF upfront and will join them in the upgrade learning the western tech as we have learnt very well that the TOT is not much better than screwdriver tech. that'sy all the joint development noise in all DRDO MOUs with other countries and organizations.

3. For India, only 3 countries matter in the EF consortium and they are UK, Germany and less so Italy (the maino effect). And having influence on these 3 important countries in Europe is better than having a bit more influence on Fench (on whom we already have a large influence with the other deals). And believe me, from here on its only strategic/political/financial decision in that order and all the tech eval is over and there is simply no point discussing that now.

4. If decision is left to IAF, I think they will also choose EF coz IAF will be more inclined to Hot-Rod Fighers than mud-movers and if they would have wanted a mud-mover, they would have opted for the F-18 ( and I know F-18 was rejected for many other factors as well), though Rafale can't just be stated as a mud-mover, but it's more a mud-mover than a hot-rod compared to EF.

Finally, I personally would like the French being punished for their greed, inflexibility and in the process playing with our national security by delaying the M-2000 upgrade deal.

My 2 paise only.......

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 28 Oct 2011 16:52

saptarishi wrote:http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-mSmqk9bJiVY/T ... _india.jpg

Let me guess! It's Holi.

arthuro · Post by **arthuro** » 28 Oct 2011 18:13

I believe the idea that India would give consolation prizes not to upset anyone is wishful thinking.

In the case of the mirage 2000 deal this costly modernization makes only sense if india goes for the rafale to amortize the costs (weapons, spare parts, support facilities etc). Otherwise you’ll have to go for a whole new package (weapons, spare parts, support facilities) which will inflate the bill considerably. Especially considering the typhoon is already the costlier aircraft of the pair.

My opinion is that regardless of typhoon and rafale qualities (technical evaluation is over), going for the Typhoon makes little sense after the M2K upgrade deal.

The IAF has already a very large fleet of different aircrafts types. Synergies between the M2K fleet and the rafale makes a lot of sense. Besides the rafale is a serious contender for the Indian Navy unlike an hypothetical naval Typhoon. That’s again a lot of potential synergies to make economies of scale.

Throwing by the window several billions of $$$$ to try to keep everybody happy would be a very very very poor management of the Indian Armed Forces resources.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 28 Oct 2011 18:22

Cain Marko wrote:Yes, the Rafale does it for me too, for numerous reasons (apart from the more obvious advantage in strike missions):

1) Better platform imvho to codevelop AMCA, esp. since Fra was willing to mix Kaveris for Rafale and the French/Snecma involvement in said engine development (JV). With some stealth measures already incorporated and CFTs that have already been tested, it is ahead in evolutionary roadmap. And we know, that unlike the Euro consortium for the EF, who will have a VLO JSF soon enough, Dassault will keep upgrading the Rafale, it'll have to since this is the ADla and Aeronavale's premier fighter in the foreseeable future - good for India.

The only way the IAF will consent to the Kaveri replacing the M88 is if its performance far exceeds the M88. Both the Tejas and eventually the AMCA need an engine ideally in the 100kN+ region. So its unlikely either of them will ever share a engine with the Rafale.

2) Commonality with M2k. Esp. in terms of weapons - I think the weapons package for the M2k has not been announced precisely for this reason. If it was, I'd have given up on the Rafale as MRCA

AFAIK only the MICA is set to be integrated to the Mirage-2000 as a part of the upgrade. I haven't seen AASM integration mentioned anywhere, and given its unit cost I'm not surprised.

3) With smaller engines/weights, the Rafale is closer to the Medium mix that the IAF so desires, in fact it is lighter than the single engined F-16/60. I'd expect fuel costs to be lower for this bird.

True enough. But given that fuel economy is a function of drag and engine SFC as much as it is the aircraft's weight, the difference may not be very stark.

4) Along with the Mica IIR and AASM it offers a versatility a2a and a2g, that the EF does not seem to have.

The AASM is an expensive piece of kit. The IAF will likely prefer to stick with the Paveway and/or Sudarshan glide bombs. And then there's still the option of the HOPE/HOSBO PGM.

I'm still uncertain about the MICA-IR. Technically, its not too challenging to create an MRAAM with an IR seeker. Israel could have fielded the Derby with a Python IV seeker, just as the Americans could have with an Aim-9/Aim-120 hybrid. The IR variant of the Aim-7 was cancelled and the R-23R/R-24R has been out of production for decades. That they haven't raises a question mark on the utility of an IR MRAAM at BVR ranges. It is possible though the MICA-IR's function is in lieu of the Magic-2, in a role analogous with the Aim-9X and ASRAAM.

5) Purely my opinion here - but from DACT with different a/c and even the F22, the Rafale seems to be the most survivable.

I wouldn't read too far into purported results from such setups. Factors like crew experience, rules of engagement, simulated conditions all play a part but rarely elaborated upon. In addition, some exercises have been played up while other similar ones remain unheard of.

We've heard about the supposed results from exercises in Al Dhafra and Corsica repeated ad nauseam (never mind that one of them was WVR at low altitudes and the other had the Rafales simulating a 'degraded' missile that outranged the EF by a factor of 2. How well know for example is this -

Besting the Rafale

Speaking of the Eurofighters close-in combat prowess, Major Marc Grüne, CO of 742 (Zapata), the second squadron of the wing, described to assembled aviation journalists how, on a recent visit to France to demo the aircraft, he had won ‘two out of two’ battles against the Dassault Rafale in mock withinvisual range dogfights. Both fights were a ‘standard set-up’ and merge at 21,000ft and 30,000ft he recounted, adding that the “higher the fight the better the Eurofighter liked it”. He singled out the Eurofighter’s excess power as its trump card over the Rafale in this admittedly ‘controlled’ test but did concede that the Rafale’s EW systems would be highly effective in a real conflict situation. He also noted that the Rafale was able to keep control at lower speeds — due to the ‘automatic’ pull-out and recovery system that the Eurofighter is equipped with and which takes control away from the pilot if it thinks a departure or stall is imminent.

http://www.raes.org.uk/pdfs/AI_0811.pdf

Or mixed results from any of the numerous other DACT exercises that have occurred since. In simply gauged terms of hardware the EF is clearly superior - higher agility, higher speed, comparable or lower RCS in a loaded configuration, better AESA radar and capable of supercruise with stores.

6) Purely in good taste, it certainly looks the better!

Well... you know... eye of the beholder and all that. Also depends on the aspect from its being viewed. It looks good from the front but the air intakes spoil it a bit when viewed from the side. Its the other way round for the EF.

Picture in point. Classic lines. For some reason (bubble canopy perhaps), reminds me of the Spitfire.

7) Frankly, as a strategic partner, Fra has been rather more trustworthy than Brits or nuke hating Germans. The POK II response/gesture from Fra should not be forgotten.

Well the French have been good to everyone - Israel and Egypt, India and Pakistan, Taiwan and now China. I don't see how India merits any particular warmth from France. Not that the state of affairs is bad. All I'm saying is India's concerns didn't mitigate French support for lifting the EU military embargo on China, similarly a strategic relationship shouldn't earn the Rafale any brownie points as far as the MRCA contract is concerned.

arthuro · Post by **arthuro** » 28 Oct 2011 18:40

Technical evaluation is over but the fact that rafale has always beaten the typhoon in technical evaluations (Korea, Singapore, Dutch, Brazil, and recently Switzerland) stands for a reason.

Superior agility, superior range, superior multirole capabilities, superior weapon system (data fusion) superior FCS superior EW system and lower RCS and SC are the main reasons.

It is worth to note that the rafale is today in a much better position for export chances: UAE, Brazil, Switzerland and india. The first three are heavily inclining for the rafale, we will soon know for india. Considering the technical and offsets aspects are cleared for both the typhoon and rafale, the rafale seems to be in a better position to win the deal (L1 criteria).

Dassault and Eurofighter selected by India to equip its Air Force
Le Monde , Oct 28

Dassault and the European consortium Eurofighter unveil November 4 to the Indian authorities their commercial offers on a bid of 126 jets, a contract estimated at $ 12 billion, according to a source in the French group. "We been invited to open our commercial offers 4 November, "said Friday that source within Dassault, which attempts to export its Rafale.

Both groups were screened in late April for one of the largest defense contracts in the third economic power in Asia that seeks to modernize its army.
The American heavy industry, Boeing and Lockheed Martin, the Swedish Saab Gripen and Russian MiG had been placed out of play after a fierce competition. "The decision can be taken in one day if the difference between the two offers is important but it can take months if the difference is minimal, "said the source." I think the difference will be important and will be in our favor. " In India, the lowest bidder candidate usually wins the contract.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 28 Oct 2011 19:14

Can we equate 1 Rafale = 3 M2K upgraded ones? How many take this equation right? If not what is your equation?

IMHO, That M2K upgrade deal is a bad deal when it comes to our wallets.

I would go for 150 Rafales, and leave the M2K upgrades to DRDO/HAL and Israeli supplies. Don't forget the Kaveri upgraded ones will be ready for M2Ks as well.

I want to up the ante on canceling the upgrade deal.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 28 Oct 2011 19:34

arthuro wrote:Technical evaluation is over but the fact that rafale has always beaten the typhoon in technical evaluations (Korea, Singapore, Dutch, Brazil, and recently Switzerland) stands for a reason.

Most of the technical evaluations required an aircraft with a mature air to ground capability which India's induction timeline allowed for.

Although the passive electronically scanned array (PESA) RBE2 radar offers many advantages, its range was inadequate, and to remedy this France is reviewing its 2004 order for 59 Rafales, and is likely to reduce this to 51 aircraft "for the same overall cost", with the sacrifice of eight to 12 aircraft paying for radar development work.

For Eurofighter’s Typhoon, the problem was different. It has been widely acknowledged that the aircraft performed well in Singapore’s evaluations, with performance, agility and radar performance coming in for particular praise. The Typhoon also demonstrated impeccable serviceability during the evaluation, and was able to demonstrate everything that the Republic of Singapore Air Force wanted to see, including supercruise, when its competitors could not.

The aircraft was able to climb to operating altitude without making a tortuous series of turns to avoid Malaysian airspace, on one occasion blasting off from Paya Lebar and flying to 26,000ft (7,930m) before reaching the airfield boundary.

Typhoon’s problem was that BAE Systems put in what insiders called "a shambolic performance" during the early part of the bidding process, and that the Singaporeans were concerned about delivery timescales and the inability of the Eurofighter consortium to define the Tranche 2 capability package, putting Singapore’s required air-to-ground capabilities in doubt.

Integration of an initial air-to-ground capability is now making rapid progress, however, and like Dassault, Eurofighter has flown captive Meteor test rounds under Typhoon.

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/20 ... efeat.html

Superior agility, superior range, superior multirole capabilities, superior weapon system (data fusion) superior FCS superior EW system and lower RCS and SC are the main reasons.

The Eurofighter is the more agile of the two(though the Rafale may have an edge in ITR especially at low speeds), its range is more than adequate for all regional threats. There is nothing to suggest its data fusion or PIRATE/DASS systems are any less capable than the Rafale's OSF/SPECTRA. With regard to its radar signature - put a combat payload on each aircraft and all the sawtooth edges wouldn't prevent any perceived RCS edge from evaporating (at least partially because of the EF's recessed weapon stations).

It is worth to note that the rafale is today in a much better position for export chances: UAE, Brazil, Switzerland and india. The first three are heavily inclining for the rafale, we will soon know for india. Considering the technical and offsets aspects are cleared for both the typhoon and rafale, the rafale seems to be in a better position to win the deal (L1 criteria).

The Eurofighter has 560 confirmed orders compared 180 for the Rafale. And the challenges facing the Rafale in India are very very different from those it faces in Switzerland.

The offset requirement is in excess of $6 billion and that's not something you shrug away. And while the offset proposals have been 'cleared', they haven't stopped being a factor. The higher the offset requirement, the higher the premium on the company's financial bid. So the L1 position for the aircraft is far from assured.

Taygibay · Post by **Taygibay** » 28 Oct 2011 19:35

Tay, do tell how many emergency landings EF had as compared to Rafale? What? None eh? lol. By that Libyan record, can we say Rafale is an unsafe jet as compared to EF?

All the other stuff you said about EF is pure BS.

Anyway, I am not a "fanboy" of either jet; just want whats best for India given budget constraints. Given Dassault's proven greediness, I doubt we would get a reasonable priced fighter jet (over its lifetime).

Also, I read your posts on Keypub forum and seems like talking to you is like talking to a brick wall. So thats my last response to you.

Wow, angry young man aren't we, Nick_S?
OK then, debunking time :

6 Mirage F1 and one Super-Étendard made emergency landings during the
Lybian ops ... how does that relate to the Rafale please, my charming noob?*

Al-Dhafra and Corsica's results are so much BS that those claims were never
contested in any clear form

One wonders why?

So much for BS, lol.

Your contention for prices brought forth by Dassault is your only valid agreement
and I can only say that India should write a careful contract to insure that foreseable
money expenditures be included and penalties provisioned.
That is how a government protects itself in such cases.

Well, that is very telling of your attitude, calling one a "wall" for reading their posts.
I bring forth informations to back my claims, lad. If you hit those for refusal of
considering reality, that is your unsafe practice, not mine.
Some people have learned to avoid that and others know better.

* Un prêté pour un rendu, jeune homme.

As or wanting the best for India, getting an AtoA dedicated platform when the IAF
already plans to go from SU-30 to PAK-FA sounds dubious at best.

will most definitely screw India over any upgrade cost.

Ah, anonymity in fora, a journo would be sued for this.

And I'll do you the courtesy of answering you anytime in the future ( as below )
if that promise ends up being a fibble cause hey, this is a forum after all.

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

EF will always have the dominant position in an A-A role. Thanks to its better kinetics, it will get into a favourable firing position (higher altitude & at higher speed) as compared to Rafale; thus allowing better kinetics for the missile. And this advantage is enhanced since EF's radar detection range is better.

But but why didn'T it then?
Since you read Keypub, they came out with a report on that
in Air Forces Monthly 's April 2010 issue on page 40
titled : Justifiably proud where Lt-Col Grandclaudon,
leader of the Escadon 1-7 Provence explains it all.
May I suggest you read it?

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

kelesis & texafr answered your claims already.
You answered back with the dual datalink and on
that point you are quite right, the Rafale does not
have it at present. That situation can be corrected
though and the point is moot until the Meteor is in
service.

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

EF already has some A-G capabilities; including PGMs.

You had to come back to it, lol.
Yes suree, the very reason why the Typhoon dropped 500lbs LGB only
in Lybia and the platform of choice for AtoG was the Tornado Gr4??

Your comparison to the JSF in the same post is also very telling.
A very badly mismanaged program sees its prospective orders
diminish and you try to use that to hide the fact that the builders
of an existing plane are dumping already made orders??? Wow!

Oh, and :

That may only be the taurus/storm shadow and its possible
that the cost will be shared with UK/Saudis.

Lol, already in use by the Raffy, were fired in Lybian campaign.

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

Good day all, Tay.

arthuro · Post by **arthuro** » 28 Oct 2011 19:36

Arguably the mirage 2000 upgrade is a costly deal. My intuition is that it is perhaps a way to secure a rafale deal with the IAF in order to allow a dumping on the price on the MMRCA commercial offer from Dassault. I can’t see the logic of paying so much if you don’t eventually go for the rafale.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 28 Oct 2011 19:44

Think about it... hard. The M2K upgrade is also a learning platform for DRDO labs. And our boys are really excelling at integration of various LRU and components. It is like having a cake and eating it all.

Either Rafale or Ef2K numbers could be bumped up for the numbers. I don't see any justifications or politics here. If that were to be true, then no way we could have pissed off unkil crafts at earlier stage itself.

If we can p!ss off unkil, then we are professional enough to follow a well defined business process.

arthuro · Post by **arthuro** » 28 Oct 2011 19:46

viv s,

The article you mention was written by Jon Lake a BAE lobbyist and was never reported anywhere else. Bottom line is that the typhoon did not make the cut after singaporean technical evaluation. The rafale and the F15K did. None of them were fully developped and the rafale was not even operational in the French AdA.

Rafale, the French fighter, scrambles for export orders
By Christina Mackenzie
International Herald Tribune
Published: July 16, 2006 Paris

Riddle: Which combat aircraft outperforms its competitors in dogfights, is frequently classed first on technical merit in international tenders, is capable of covering a broad spectrum of air missions and is competitively priced, but has yet to win a single export order from a foreign air force? Answer: the Rafale, the French fighter developed and manufactured by Dassault Aviation.

In development since the mid-1980s and in French naval carrier-based service since 2004, Rafale is a so-called fourth-generation fighter, a sophisticated multirole jet with advanced avionics and weapons systems, but less able to avoid radar detection than "fifth generation" stealth fighters like the Lockheed-Martin F-22 Raptor or the U.S.-European F-35 Joint Strike Fighter.

Competitors include the U.S.-made F- 15 Eagle, in service in various versions since the 1970s, the F-16 Fighting Falcon and F-18E/F Super Hornet, the Eurofighter Typhoon and the Swedish-built JAS-39 Gripen, marketed in collaboration with BAE Systems of Britain.

Dassault and the French Ministry of Defense hope that exports may now take off after Prime Minister Dominique de Villepin declared operational a first French air force squadron of 20 Rafales on June 27.

"It's almost impossible to sell a combat aircraft not operational in its own air force," Gérard David, head of communications for Dassault said during an interview by telephone. "The doors are now open to Rafale's export career."
Within the French military, the Rafale eventually would replace existing air force and naval fighters and fighter- bombers, including the Mirage IV, F1 and 2000; the Jaguar; Crusader; Etendard IV and Super-Etendard.

"This is going to reduce our operating costs tremendously through rationalization of maintenance," said General Patrick Dufour, director of the Rafale program at the Délégation Générale de l'Armement, France's defense procurement agency.

Colonel François Moussez, a pilot who has flown 150 hours on the Rafale, said that two could do the work of six existing air superiority/defense and air-to-surface attack jets. "With the Rafale," he said, "we can do simultaneous multimission management: air-to-air, air-to- ground, reconnaissance at the same time."

Moussez said that in dogfight exercises, the Rafale had outflown F-15, F-16 and F-18 opponents, and in technical and performance evaluations "we have systematically won against the F-15 and the Eurofighter Typhoon."
Yet it lost to the F-15 in competitions to sell to South Korea and Singapore. Moussez said it was outflanked in the former case on political grounds and in the latter case on costs, noting that the dollar had depreciated 30 percent over the period of the Singapore competition.

In competitions to sell combat aircraft, "the principal criterion is political. It has little to do with aircraft performance," Moussez said.

Richard Aboulafia, an aerospace analyst with Teal Group in Fairfax, Virginia, also says that politics play a major role in fighter procurement. "Aggressive U.S. foreign policy" was a primary cause of export wins by U.S. military jets, he said during an interview by telephone.

Bob Kemp, director of sales for the Gripen, was not so sure. "There is no doubt a political factor," he said during an interview. But "the first thing is, the aircraft must be able to do the job, and the second is financial."
The Gripen, in operation with the Swedish Air Force since 1997, has been sold or leased to three countries and is quietly adding more orders, partly because it is "half the price of our competitors," Kemp said.

Pricing combat aircraft is notoriously complex, with deals often involving industrial offsets and seldom reflecting full aircraft development costs. While Dufour put the average cost of a Rafale at €50 million, or $64 million, and the Typhoon - a collaboration grouping Italy, Germany, Spain and Britain - at about £65 million, or $120 million, Kemp said both aircraft had been offered to Singapore and South Korea at about $95 million each, compared with a basic price tag of $45 million to $50 million for the Gripen.

Combat aircraft technology "costs what it weighs," Kemp said. "The Typhoon is basically twice the weight of the Gripen - and costs twice as much."
The Typhoon, although lacking air-to- ground capacity in its current version, already has one export customer. Austria signed for 18 aircraft in August 2003 and Britain has signed a preliminary agreement with Saudi Arabia to supply at least 24 Typhoons from the British production run of 89 aircraft, although no final deal has been sealed.

Meanwhile Gripen has sold 28 aircraft to South Africa, the first of which left Sweden by ship in early July for the Overburg test flight center near Cape Town. Hungary has signed a lease and purchase agreement with Sweden for 14 aircraft, of which the first five were handed over in March. And the Czech Republic has leased 14 aircraft, all of which have been delivered. Norway and Denmark have also requested information on the Gripen from Saab, its manufacturer.

French procurement officials, comparing the sales prospects of the Gripen and Rafale, said the Gripen was designed for a different type of mission. The Rafale, a twin-engine aircraft with a maximum takeoff weight of 24.5 tons, can carry 9.5 tons of weapons slung under its wings, while the single-engine Gripen, with a maximum takeoff weight of 14 tons, carries only 5 tons of weapons.

Kemp agrees. Buyers of the heavier fighters "pay for longer range and heavier weapons loads," he said, fitting them for a strategic defense role that some air forces may find less relevant than it was at the height of the cold war.

Still, by 2030, many countries will need to renew their combat aircraft fleets including some, like India and Japan, that may face significant strategic challenges. Saudi Arabia may finalize its Typhoon deal at the Farnborough Airshow, and analysts say other likely customers in the near future include Morocco and Brazil.

Excluding the United States, Russia and China, the open export market is estimated by analysts at around 3,000 aircraft. France traditionally holds between 10 percent to 15 percent of this market. Based on political preferences and past performance, France could hope to export about 300 Rafales, analysts say.

Now from dassault CEO :

The Typhoon, whose development also started in 1998, was fielded as an air defence aircraft in December 2005. This fighter will not have a true omnirole version (enabling, for instance, to lift and fire a cruise-missile) before the next decade.
Ever since the beginning of the decade, the Rafale has always been deemed superior to the Eurofighter« Typhoon » by the countries concerned (i.e. the Netherlands, South Korea and Singapore), whenever it has been in competition (or has been submitted to comparative evaluations) with this rival. In the Netherlands, for instance, the Rafale’s score differed by a scarce 2% from that of a « paper JSF ». A number of elements enables us to tackle the future with confidence, such as the imminent fielding, in the Air Force, of Rafale upgraded to F2 omnirole standard, the fact that a number of foreign experts recognize that the Rafale offer is superior to the Typhoon offer, and the doubts remaining about the F-35/JSF programme.

And then you Then you still have Korean, dutch, Brazil or Switzerland who considered the rafale as the superior option between the two.

Taygibay · Post by **Taygibay** » 28 Oct 2011 20:16

In the case of the mirage 2000 deal this costly modernization makes only sense if india goes for the rafale to amortize the costs (weapons, spare parts, support facilities etc). Otherwise you’ll have to go for a whole new package (weapons, spare parts, support facilities) which will inflate the bill considerably. Especially considering the typhoon is already the costlier aircraft of the pair.

My opinion is that regardless of typhoon and rafale qualities (technical evaluation is over), going for the Typhoon makes little sense after the M2K upgrade deal.

The IAF has already a very large fleet of different aircrafts types. Synergies between the M2K fleet and the rafale makes a lot of sense. Besides the rafale is a serious contender for the Indian Navy unlike an hypothetical naval Typhoon. That’s again a lot of potential synergies to make economies of scale.

That is a thought out opinion.
I agree with all of those who mentioned it that the M2000 upgrade was excessively priced
and thus would only make sense in the context Arthuro outlined.

---------------------------------------
Viv_S, you said :

The only way the IAF will consent to the Kaveri replacing the M88 is if its performance far exceeds the M88. Both the Tejas and eventually the AMCA need an engine ideally in the 100kN+ region. So its unlikely either of them will ever share a engine with the Rafale.

But Alain Habrard, Directeur de la Branche moteurs militaires de Snecma said :
/ Snecma's military motor sector director /

Le M88 est conçu pour générer une famille très large de dérivés pour avion de combat : avec le même corps HP, il peut conduire à des dérivés à 9 T pratiquement dans le même encombrement et jusqu’à 12 T avec un système BP plus conséquent.

http://www.stratisc.org/Moteurs_10.htm

jusqu’à 12 T/up to 12 tons
If you don't mind, I'll trust him on that.
But nothing says that the Kaveri or its successor need to be the same as the M-88.
It would be nice for India to equip many fighters with a locally ( co- )produced
engine but it only makes sense if the Rafale is chosen which is not yet done.

The AASM is an expensive piece of kit.

... that does things others can't, hence the price.
It all depends on the use made of it. If there is no need for it,
use LGB, that's what the Armée de l'Air does, did in Lybia.

I'm still uncertain about the MICA-IR. Technically, its not too challenging to create an MRAAM with an IR seeker. Israel could have fielded the Derby with a Python IV seeker, just as the Americans could have with an Aim-9/Aim-120 hybrid. The IR variant of the Aim-7 was cancelled and the R-23R/R-24R has been out of production for decades. That they haven't raises a question mark on the utility of an IR MRAAM at BVR ranges.

Not too challenging and could have? sounds antinomic

The high off boresight of the MICA IR coupled with the HMCS called for
in the MMRCA should prove quite efficient.

About the exercises value, ok no problem, Let's be fair and ditch them all then.
This remains :

In simply gauged terms of hardware the EF is clearly superior - higher agility, higher speed, comparable or lower RCS in a loaded configuration, better AESA radar and capable of supercruise with stores.

That is an opinion that has no basis in reality.
higher agility, laughable at best, please provide a source

higher speed, sure, as per need for high altitude AtoA

comparable or lower RCS, you must be joking?? please provide a source

better AESA, do you realize how untrue and borderline ridiculous that is?
Present, no AESA for each, next year AESA for Rafale not for EF so your
sentence is self-defeating, from 2015 : then Captor over RBE2 in size of
antenna and so range IF you discount power source and modes which one
should not.

On the opinion parts of the same post, no problem, your
view is as good as mine.

But next post comes at it again :

put a combat payload on each aircraft and all the sawtooth edges wouldn't prevent any perceived RCS edge from evaporating (at least partially because of the EF's recessed weapon stations).

Please explain to me how those recessed weapons station can reduce the RCS
of a plane laden with LGBs under wing pylons?

On orders for EF :
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forum ... ain/68247/
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/10/ ... 4Y20111018
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/03/03 ... print.html
http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=4768387

The number of Rafale to be ordered is still up to initial predictions
and rearrangements of Tranche numbers mean very little since the
Raffy fleet grows in standards, not Tranches.
Explained another way, reducing numbers in a Tranche makes money
available now for upgrades that are then carried over to the next one.
A Rafale is a Rafale and all of them are F3 standard as all of them will
be F3+ and F4 and so on.

Good day all, Tay.