Dassault Rafale, tender | News & Discussions

[kish]

Only problem for people with French fries is that they demand hefty sum for upgrades...
(However one inside gossip is that we are upgrading Mirages to make it much more capable than what is known to public..)..

I just want to see Su-30 firing METEOR whichever be the MRCA ..

but i think if we are paying so much for that upgrade then that money will really worth us
else we can also do same upgrade with Israel help in half price

 

[gubbi]

rafale is very battter in A2A from SH and much better in A2G than EF

A little correction here:
Superbug is basically employed in A2G role while EF was designed as an A2A fighter.

 

[kish]

A little correction here:
Superbug is basically employed in A2G role while EF was designed as an A2A fighter.

yes you are right

but we need a multirole fighter

which u think have creditable performance in both A2A & A2G

all fighter are very impressive and each have there unique advantages ..
..
now its time for GOI & IAF .. what they it matter more ..
but i love rafale .. [but dont hate anyone]

WHAT DO YOU GUYS THINK?----WE ARE UPGRADING MIRAGE-2000.
IS IT A +VE OR -VE SIGN FOR RAFALE?

who know what GOI is thinking ????

 

[1000VA]

Exercise Gives India Closer Look at U.K. Typhoons - Defense News

NEW DELHI - India and the United Kingdom began joint air exercises in the Indian state of West Bengal on Oct. 20. Exercise Indradhanush, which concludes Nov. 3, will see the Indian airborne early warning and control system (AWACS) aircraft participate for the first time in any joint operation.

Along with its E-3D sentry AWACS and VC-10 midair refuelers, the U.K. Royal Air Force is fielding the Eurofighter Typhoon, which is competing for the Indian Air Force's $10 billion Medium Multi-Role Combat Aircraft. The exercise marks the first time that the Indian Air Force has engaged a Typhoon and will help the service evaluate the European combat aircraft, an Indian Air Force official said.
Related Topics

The Indian Air Force is fielding its Russian-built Su-30MKI and MiG-27 and French-built Mirage 2000-H aircraft.

The joint air exercises will include operations against each other and combined maneuvers to help the pilots improve their skills.

The emphasis will be on exposing the controllers of AWACS aircraft to large-scale engagements and protection of high-value aerial assets in addition to management of logistical needs, the Indian Air Force official said.

 

[jha]

but i think if we are paying so much for that upgrade then that money will really worth us
else we can also do same upgrade with Israel help in half price

NO We CANT...Israel cant upgrade M2K to the level which we want it to..Not everything what goes on is available in public...

If you remember we had tweaked M2K during kargil to such a level that it would have been a huge violation of copyright agreements..But did you hear anything regarding this in public forums.Our relationship with France is much deeper than what it seems..

 

[dbc]

Hi, Softtech, thx for your patience, but here is the promised comparison (part 1).



Lets start with the basic specs and see if the difference in performance and capabilities is really so less:

AB thrust - Rafale 2 x 75kN / F18SH 2 x 98kN
Empty weight - 9.5t / 13.8t
internal fuel - 4700Kg / 6530Kg
=> T/W ratio - 1.07 / 0.97 (clean config + pilot + 100% internal fuel + AB thrust, I calculated them myself and not just took them from the net, because I wanted an equal base and not specs from different versions. Ratios available on the net are even better for Rafale and worse for the SH!)

You wasted your time, the thrust figures you quoted are measured engine performance on a test rack at sea level.

How this thrust translates to superior acceleration in the air depends on various factors, these are:

Aerodynamic design,air intake efficiency in varying flight regimes such as level flight,subsonic, supersonic or at high AoA, compressor performance,temperature,altitude and exhaust design.

Poor design is known to result in loss of thrust sometimes as high as 40% loss. The point I'm trying to make is the thrust figures that you have so painstakingly researched does not tell us anything about the aircraft's real performance where it matters up in the air ..

Notice I haven't mentioned weight yet!

According to NASA..

First, the thrust from the propulsion system must balance the drag of the airplane when the airplane is cruising. And second, the thrust from the propulsion system must exceed the drag of the airplane for the airplane to accelerate. In fact, the greater the difference between the thrust and the drag, called the excess thrust, the faster the airplane will accelerate.

Beginner's Guide to Propulsion

..and this is the second time I've told you that thrust to weight ratio greater than one helps the aircraft climb faster (vertical acceleration).

All dog fights spiral downwards toward the hard deck (ground). The benefit of superior climb rates in close combat is negligible. What matters is acceleration and acceleration = thrust - drag.

Concluding the Rafale is better simply because you claim it has higher T/W ratio is wrong since you don't know how aerodynamically efficient the Rafale design is (drag) nor do you know a thing about the efficiency of the air intakes.

 

[dbc]

... Part 2

Next point is BVR capability,true the SH has the longer range AESA radar and AIM 120, but latest fighters offers more than than radar and missile range only. Fighters like EF, or Rafale are designed with a very low RCS from the start, that's why they have big ammounts of composite, or RAM materials, ducted air intakes, scattered airframes (Rafale), semi stealth weapon stations (EF). The size difference is a point in this regard too, because it is not a heavy class fighter like some people mistakes it for. It is just in the size of an F16 as you can see on the following pics (check also post #2995 on page 200):

http://avionique.free.fr/IMG/jpg/rafale_f18.jpg

http://psk.blog.24heures.ch/media/00/02/2147014045.jpg


But just as Jha recently said too, the active radar of a fighter itself will give away the presents to some extend too and makes it easier to detect, but exactly here the Rafale shows its real advantages in BVR. Unlike the F18SH that is dependent on the active radar, or if available also the IRST on the external fuel tank, the Rafale can use radar, the integrated IRST, or the TV/Termal imager of FSO, or even the SPECTRA EWS itself to detect and track targets. Except of the radar of course, these features are totally passive and you can see these advantages even now in the older Rafale versions:

Your claim of lower RCS for the Rafale is dubious, close coupled canards, vertical stabilizer and refueling probe are all RCS offenders.
By your logic Rafale RCS should be lower than the B2, since the B2 is much larger. We all know that is not the case...

IRST and OSF does not provide range or velocity, again your claim of passive attack is dubious. The Rafale's OSF TV device is slaved to the radar and serves in identification of target. From your own source, it clearly states both IRST and OSF "visually identify other aircraft at ranges of more than 50 kilometres (approx. 30 nautical miles)"

Excerpt of the Rafale International from 2006

...One of the more challenging aspects of Rafale operations is how to fully exploit its capabilities, and especially its range of passive sensors. Pilots, for example, can use its TV/thermal imaging observation system (dubbed Optronique Secteur Frontal, and similar in principle to infrared scan and track) to visually identify other aircraft at ranges of more than 50 kilometres (approx. 30 nautical miles), and transmit this and other tactical data to other aircraft using their MIDS datalink.

Another unique capability, according to Col. François Moussez, the French Air force’s Rafale program officer is that it can fire missiles at targets detected and designated by its integrated Spectra countermeasures suite, again without any need for active transmissions that can give away its position...

..now Spectra ability to attack targets, true Spectra can detect a target. But can it provide range and velocity of the target? Can it probe the target to confirm friend or foe? How can you launch a BVR missile without range, heading and velocity data? For all this you need a radar, so in theory Spectra can fire a missile in the general direction of a perceived threat - true but Spectra can only provide heading and without range,velocity and IFF probe you can't be sure if you launched your missile at a cell phone tower a Doppler weather radar or a hostile.

 

[sancho]

to Sancho...

great effort my friend but.....

in this compitition we required

1) Great Air to ground fighter.

and

2) Good Air to air fighter( As we already have Su-30mki and in near future PAKFA)

So.. i think F-18 Fits very well.

Feel free to disagree.

Thx Yash, Rafale in strike role is an excellent fighter too, but has not the variety of the US weapon pack of course, but with beeing low detectable and the AASM/Hammer + Scalp combo that our upgraded Mirage fighters hopefully will get too, it has very good weapons too.
The F18SH in A2A is not bad, but I don't think it will be as good as the Eurocanards in A2A, actually even the F16IN should be better.

@Sancho... You have any information on what is offered to MMRCA in terms of F18? If requirement is 9g , T/W to have 1:1 and IRST etc etc then Boeing cannot give a product which will be not satisfying these requirement right? Although i am not supporting Boeing here... This is just a straight question.... If that is the requirement then Boeing has to upgrade and provide the same to IAF without any extra cost...

As I said, that's what the report said, maybe the shortlistings will make things clearer.

 

[sancho]

Concluding the Rafale is better simply because you claim it has higher T/W ratio is wrong since you don't know how aerodynamically efficient the Rafale design is (drag) nor do you know a thing about the efficiency of the air intakes.

Never did that, I provided, that shows it and even sources where even US pilots acknowledging Rafales advantages in that field. Same goes for US F16 pilots btw, that were fielded against Rafale in WVR combats before Red Flag. There are serveral reports about it's very good performance, but you keep denying it and claiming about less drag of the SH. However, besides your usual quotes, I think it's on you to provide a source that Rafale is inferior to SH, or at least that the SH has less drag as you claim and that's why is superior to Rafale.

Your claim of lower RCS for the Rafale is dubious, close coupled canards, vertical stabilizer and refueling probe are all RCS offenders.
By your logic Rafale RCS should be lower than the B2, since the B2 is much larger. We all know that is not the case...

Same for this claim, I backed my points with clear sources, but didn't saw anything else than doubts from you. It's ok if you have doubts, but you still have to proof that it has not a low RCS.
Btw, I never stated a number for the RCS, so how can you compare it to B2 than?

IRST and OSF does not provide range or velocity, again your claim of passive attack is dubious. The Rafale's OSF TV device is slaved to the radar and serves in identification of target. From your own source, it clearly states both IRST and OSF "visually identify other aircraft at ranges of more than 50 kilometres (approx. 30 nautical miles)"

TECHNICAL CHARACTERISTICS

IRST channel:
- Automatic Search and Track
- Air-to-Air and Air-to-Surface modes
- Infrared imagery

Identification channel:
- Detection and tracking
- Reconnaissance and identification
- Eye-safe laser range finding
- TV imagery

http://www.thalesgroup.com/assets/0/93/238/b1572ced-d842-410a-ad3b-b569dcb6d5fc.pdf?LangType=2057

..now Spectra ability to attack targets, true Spectra can detect a target. But can it provide range and velocity of the target? Can it probe the target to confirm friend or foe? How can you launch a BVR missile without range, heading and velocity data? For all this you need a radar, so in theory Spectra can fire a missile in the general direction of a perceived threat - true but Spectra can only provide heading and without range,velocity and IFF probe you can't be sure if you launched your missile at a cell phone tower a Doppler weather radar or a hostile.

It was practically shown during ATLC, so again you can have your doubts and call it dubious, but that doesn't proof it right.

 

[luckyyy]

pakistan won't take a $100ml risk to send their F-16 on a attack mission , they will better choose a $1ml missiles...

best A2A & A2G fighter winning the mmrca is not the IAF required....

 

[soaringphnx]

All dog fights spiral downwards toward the hard deck (ground). The benefit of superior climb rates in close combat is negligible. What matters is acceleration and acceleration = thrust - drag.

Wrong... Some WVR engagements start with a high speed head-on pass. Immediately after the 'merge', a pilot can either stay and fight or simply continue straight ahead and try to 'bug out'. IF the pilot decides to stay and fight, he would try to maneuver his aircraft behind his opponent (the vulnerable 6 o'clock position). As both the aircraft turn into each other, it results in a turning fight where each aircraft turns as hard as possible to get behind the other. The sustained turn causes both the aircraft to bleed airspeed and hence altitude. THAT IS WHY SUCH TURNING FIGHTS SPIRAL TOWARDS THE DECK!! The key factor here is maneuverability, not acceleration. If an aircraft manages to reach the vulnerable 6 o'clock position of the other, then it has an advantage. I fail to see how superior acceleration helps in this type of turning fights (unless you want to 'bug-out').

Moreover, if you remember,

Force = mass x acceleration​

So, for good acceleration, we need maximum force/thrust and minimum weight. In other words, we need a high thrust to weight ratio. So having a higher thrust does not guarantee that the aircraft has more acceleration. Here, the Rafale has a clear advantage as it has a higher thrust to weight ratio.

I disagree that superior climb rates are not beneficial in a dogfight. Altitude is always a great advantage in a dogfight as it gives the pilot a perched position above the battlefield and it can be easily converted to airspeed by simply diving on their opponent or by using maneuvers such as a split-S which also helps the pilot to reverse his direction of motion and give him a better position. Having a superior climb rate can allow a pilot to gain altitude more quickly which not only helps in the dogfight, but also helps him to 'bug-out'.

In a dogfight, every advantage counts - and that includes maneuverability, acceleration, rate of climb, stall speed, weapons available, active and passive countermeasures, radar, IRST, low RCS and even the range (which means extended time on station). If acceleration alone was the deciding factor in a dogfight like you, say, then interceptors like the MiG-25/31 should be the best dogfighters, but we all know that is not the case.

 

[soaringphnx]

pakistan won't take a $100ml risk to send their F-16 on a attack mission , they will better choose a $1ml missiles...

best A2A & A2G fighter winning the mmrca is not the IAF required....

Do you really think that all Indian military purchases and strategies are formulated keeping only Pakistan in mind? There are much bigger players in our neighborhood.

 

[luckyyy]

Do you really think that all Indian military purchases and strategies are formulated keeping only Pakistan in mind? There are much bigger players in our neighborhood.

china has more missiles then pakistan....

 

[ganimi kawa]

pakistan won't take a $100ml risk to send their F-16 on a attack mission , they will better choose a $1ml missiles...

best A2A & A2G fighter winning the mmrca is not the IAF required....

1.Pakistan does not have anything like 2 arty corps of China and India is not Iraq to collapse under a barrage of TLAMs.

2. Consider the no. of bases on Indian side, the dispersed deployment followed in wartime, strategic depth that India has.

3. If ballistic missiles are used, escalation of the conflict to a nuke war is a distinct possibility.

4. Indian air defences are ramping up, even Akash has anti cruise missile ability, no need to talk about the rest.

5. Missiles will be a two way traffic.

best A2A & A2G fighter winning the mmrca is not the IAF required

You may be right on this count. India may go for L1 satisfying the ASR, just not for the reasons you mentioned.


@ Sancho, great effort ,man!

I still think that the rafale design was not designed with LO as a primary objective. Too many flares fron RCS point of view. Especially with weapons load I'm still very skeptical about whether it'll have low enough RCS to make an impact vis a vis SH.

Though, the active cancellation tech, if true to it's claims could be a game changer.

P.S. Do you have any info on the Carbone pod, it's a pity if cancelled. That could have been another game changer for Rafale.

 

[dbc]

Force = mass x acceleration​

So, for good acceleration, we need maximum force/thrust and minimum weight. In other words, we need a high thrust to weight ratio. So having a higher thrust does not guarantee that the aircraft has more acceleration. Here, the Rafale has a clear advantage as it has a higher thrust to weight ratio.

You've ignored an important element of flight and that is lift. The below graphic explains the basic principles of flight.

For the sake of simplicity lets assume straight level flight. Four forces act upon an aircraft in flight, thrust is balanced by drag and weight by lift produced by the wing. The aircraft will move in the direction of greater imbalance. If weight is greater than the lift produced by the wings the aircraft will descend, if drag is greater than thrust the aircraft will not move forward as a consequence the wing will cease to provide lift and the aircraft will descend.


In the vertical (the aircraft is climbing vertically) the aircraft becomes a rocket the wing does not produce lift, so both the weight and drag must be overcome by engine thrust. Here thrust to weight ratio > 1 will allow the engine to propel the aircraft by overcoming the force of gravity and drag.