Dassault Rafale, tender | News & Discussions

[sancho]

I think we are coming round and around and around... First of all explain me .. if a hard point is limited to 300 kg and 12 hard point will come around 3.5 tonne ... so as per official site it can carry 8 tonne of external load.. so means there are hard points configured for more pay load.. do you accept?

That's what I'm telling you from the start!

oke assume Eurofighter and Rafale as the capability to carry multiple missiles like MKI.. but do they have the range?...

Yes, because as I told you before, the EF can carry up to 10 AAMs + additional fuel tanks!

Here is a pic of a fully loaded EF, now replace the bombs with your hypothetical multi pylons and it still carries them, 6 AAMs and 3 fuel tanks.

I also told you before that the MKI on internal fuel, has a ferry range of 3000Km, EF with external fuel tanks even up to 3700Km.

You try and try even with hypothetical scenarios that MKI would have a clear advantage, but it hasn't because these modern designs offers high capabilities as well. EF more for the A2A role, while the Rafale, or Gripen NG designs offers good A2G load configs. And you just need to look at the changes made on the Su 35BM to understand, where the MKI lacks, because neither the number of hardpoints, nor the external payload were changed to make it better, the focus instead was on lower RCS and higher TWR mainly.
Adding a better radar and integrated EWS features are another point, which we will see through the MKI upgrade as well, but compared to Su 35 and EF, MKI remains with the higher RCS and lower TWR.

 

[luckyyy]

EF is good but does that fits the bill.....in initial cost of precurment as well as flying hour cost & maintanence cost ?

as far as comparision of MKI to EF , i think IAF having a very clear idea on it after many inderdanush excercises....
but does Gripen ever fielded in front of EF , like to know othe result there...?

 

[kingdurgaking]

I also told you before that the MKI on internal fuel, has a ferry range of 3000Km, EF with external fuel tanks even up to 3700Km.

yes thats what i am saying MKI has clear internal fuel advantage which has helped in freeing up the hard points to carry more pay load... which ultimately boils to payload advantage.. so far i have never seen a MKI with a external fuel tank.. do you have any pic of it? but Rafale and EFT do carry fuel tanks... which is the heaviest hard point.. which ultimately reduces the pay load.... i hope you are getting what i am debating on

You try and try even with hypothetical scenarios that MKI would have a clear advantage, but it hasn't because these modern designs offers high capabilities as well. EF more for the A2A role, while the Rafale, or Gripen NG designs offers good A2G load configs. And you just need to look at the changes made on the Su 35BM to understand, where the MKI lacks, because neither the number of hardpoints, nor the external payload were changed to make it better, the focus instead was on lower RCS and higher TWR mainly.
Adding a better radar and integrated EWS features are another point, which we will see through the MKI upgrade as well, but compared to Su 35 and EF, MKI remains with the higher RCS and lower TWR.

yeah i accept RCS is the big issue.. but it has been negated with a huge radar with which it would be able to detect EFT and Rafale at a great distance .. and the best missile like Archer , Brahmos it has always been a clear advantage for MKI... because of more payload and more internal fuel.. it is a clear advantage for MKI..

 

[Agnostic_Indian]

don't you think india also would like to have cost effective and easy to use fighter..?

we are going to use it to counter china..and they have upper hand in quantity and quality wise also they are close..so more than cost and easy to use factor quality should be factor.we have enough money to spend now so that should not be a concen.

 

[sancho]

yes thats what i am saying MKI has clear internal fuel advantage which has helped in freeing up the hard points to carry more pay load... which ultimately boils to payload advantage..

MKI: 9t total fuel + 8t total payload on 12 hardpoints (- 2 with ECM pods, leaves 10 for AAMs)
EF: 7.4t total fuel + 7.5t payload on 13 hardpoints (leaves 10 for AAMs)

MKI fuel fraction with total fuel: 0.34
EF fuel fraction with total fuel: 0.40

MKI TWR dry with total fuel: 0.55
EF TWR dry with total fuel: 0.67


Conclusion: EF offers same load of missiles, longer range and better TWR, just some examples where it is better.

so far i have never seen a MKI with a external fuel tank.. do you have any pic of it?

Because it don't carry them, otherwise the huge internal fuel would not make sense anymore. The only Flanker that I saw with a fuel tank is the Su 34.

yeah i accept RCS is the big issue.. but it has been negated with a huge radar with which it would be able to detect EFT and Rafale at a great distance ...

As I explaind before, not against fighters that have such small RCS and comparable radars!

 

[kingdurgaking]

MKI: 9t total fuel + 8t total payload on 12 hardpoints (- 2 with ECM pods, leaves 10 for AAMs)
EF: 7.4t total fuel + 7.5t payload on 13 hardpoints (leaves 10 for AAMs)

MKI fuel fraction with total fuel: 0.34
EF fuel fraction with total fuel: 0.40

MKI TWR dry with total fuel: 0.55
EF TWR dry with total fuel: 0.67


Conclusion: EF offers same load of missiles, longer range and better TWR, just some examples where it is better.




Because it don't carry them, otherwise the huge internal fuel would not make sense anymore. The only Flanker that I saw with a fuel tank is the Su 34.



As I explaind before, not against fighters that have such small RCS and comparable radars!

and read the link

http://vayu-sena.tripod.com/info-su30mki.html

First of all EF fuel fraction is 0.31 not 0.4 while su -27 has fuel fraction of 0.36 ... assuming MKI is bigger we can say it can have 0.34 lets assume 0.31 itself... with external fuel tanks EFT/Rafale performance is going to be very bad....

secondly as per wiki MKI hard points can be increased to 14...

TWR of EFT is good because of higher use of composites.. and less loading .... secondly it has to compulsorily have 2 external fuel tanks of 1000 liters to cover a distance as compared to MKI ... secondly these external tanks reduces the load weight of EFT and Rafale by 1.5 tonnes... Even in air shows EFT and Rafale carry one drop tanks compulsorily.. while MKI goes up without anything.. while each air shows happens for 30-40 mins max.. MKI can loiter with internal fuel for full 3.5 hours


Finally with weapons and fuel tanks increases the RCS of the fighters tremendously... enough to have MKI to have a competitive edge because of its powerful radars...

 

[KEETARP]

Hehe, distracting from EFs shortfalls with F16 B60 capabilities now?

Really , or it's other way round . If i remember correctly you claimed something for all MRCA jets .

Sancho wrote -
Unique capabilities that EF and several other MMRCA contenders simply don't offer yet, or even will not have at all!
http://www.defence.pk/forums/india-defence/4347-mrca-news-discussions-post1527356.html#post1527356

Yes I remember and I thanked you for those infos back then, but we both also agreed on the fact that the F16 IN won't have the Northrop EWS and avionics the UAE has, but new developed versions by Raytheon, which will be the base for upgrades of older F16 in future.

Still ,you can't deny that such tech exists in F16 developed in 2000-02 time frame .
And if India asks for customization to get these sensors , We can always have them . like - CFT with refuel probe for MRCA , Datalink-2 for IAF grid developed for IAF specifications.
No wonder when oliver Prince claims F16IN is the most advanced block ever developed . If tech in SPECTRA is such a game changer (even greater than AESA radar) then IAF won't ignore it .
Until then EWS on F16/every other jet is compliant and acceptable to IAF .

from your post earlier
http://www.defence.pk/forums/india-defence/4347-mrca-news-discussions-290.html#post1525753
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-VQMh1GhIehY/TWldNwnBHUI/AAAAAAAAM1s/Q0EQOK1VqOc/s1600/GP1.jpg
2nd page 5th para .

Lets sum up the facts once again! SPECTRA has interferometry techs to not only detect threats, but also geolocate them.
Yes, UAEs F16 B60 has similar techs, but that EWS was specially developed for them (also funded by them), not for India, or other F16 operators. F16IN has the Raytheon ACES EWS, without such locating capabilities, just like EFs DASS, or the normal F18SH (the Growler might have it, by the fact that it carries more specialised EW equipment, for example in the ESM wingtip pods) don't have it. The only other MMRCA apart from Rafale is Gripen NG that is planed to have similar techs in future, or at least available for us, but with SPECTRA beeing an operational system for nearly a decade now and still beeing improved, it should be clear which system is the best.

See , now you explore possibility of three jets having similar sensors , contrary to

[Sancho wrote -
"Unique capabilities that EF and several other MMRCA contenders simply don't offer yet, or even will not have at all!"]

note - not at all .
As i said earlier - If IAF wants and feels is a necessity- to be compiant as per contract .
Other manufacturer's have to install it

If you want to admit it or not, it is more than a normal self- protection system and offers more defensive and offensive capabilities.

Of course all modern EWS suites are more than normal - simple protective gears , my post earlier
middle bold part and links about EW suites

http://www.defence.pk/forums/india-defence/4347-mrca-news-discussions-147.html#post996995

These are unique so far and are the key to make Rafale more suited alongside MKI and LCA than any other MMRCA contender!

That is your personal opinion and not necessary to be in coherent to IAF view . You think Rafale is best suited while I think Gripen is much more suited .
we can continue to argue on that , for years with any conclusion .

As I said from the start, Rafale will have less AESA radar range than other fighters in the competition (while not beeing worse at all!), but they did that on purpose, because they don't wanted to rely on a single sensor only, but make full use of all sensors and weapon capabilities they have and the key to this is SPECTRA!

Any source to confirm or just your logic -----------
I say, lack of enough volume in nose forced to install a 700 TRM radar . Now prove it otherwise .
BTW before i forget again and take a break for 48 hrs , my queries still unanswered from prev below post,.......

http://www.defence.pk/forums/india-defence/4347-mrca-news-discussions-290.html#post1526165

 

[KEETARP]

While we're talking about sensors the F/A-18's are currently being used in Afghanistan to detect IED(s) from the air.
I can PM you the details if interested.

Appreciate that - looking forward for details on that sensor

 

[KEETARP]

SIMPLY WOW !!!!!!!!

Stunning , many thanks for the pic

 

[the rafter]

Combat aircraft vendors still wait for setting up of price negotiation panel

New Delhi: Vendors vying to win one of the biggest defence deals of $10.4 billion for 126 medium multi-role combat aircraft (MMRCA) are yet to get any indication from the ministry of defence (MoD) for the price negotiations.
“Ahead of the price negotiations, a price negotiation committee has to be set up, which is a complex process,” an industry sources told FE on condition of anonymity. “So far, neither has the committee been set up, nor the qualifying vendors been informed. Therefore, there is no possibility of the negotiations starting by the month-end.”

Last week, Air Chief Marshal PV Naik, the Indian Air Force chief, had announced that the price negotiation for the deal would begin later this month. But according to the person cited earlier, “Those who have been shortlisted have to be given enough time to get ready for the talks and even those who have failed to make the cut would get point-wise explanations from the MoD for not qualifying.”

The IAF has given the MoD its report on the technical and field trials of the six aircraft in contention: Lockheed Martin’s F-16IN, Boeing’s F/A-18 E/F, the Typhoon from the multi-nation consortium Eurofighter, France’s Dassault Rafale, the Swedish Gripen IN and Russia’s MiG-35.

An MoD Technical Oversight Committee (TOC) is currently looking at the ‘offset’ proposals, a requirement that the winning contractor source a certain amount of the value of each aircraft that India buys from Indian industry. Their proposals for transfer of technology are also being examined.

After this, the TOC will select three companies to go to the next stage of the bidding process.

The lowest bidder will be called by a contract negotiation committee to finalise the terms of the deal. After this is done, the MoD, the finance minister and finally the Cabinet committee on security will have to sign off on it.

At the recent Aero India show, the air chief said this will be done by September, but MoD officials have told FE it is likely to happen only at the end of the year or early next year.

 

[localoca]

Stunning , many thanks for the pic

what is so stunning? two old design fighter, one design dated back to the 1960s...

 

[GORKHALI]

what is so stunning? two old design fighter, one design dated back to the 1960s...

one of older design fighter plane is frontline of your airforce and Copy reference to J 11

 

[luckyyy]

we are going to use it to counter china..and they have upper hand in quantity and quality wise also they are close..so more than cost and easy to use factor quality should be factor.we have enough money to spend now so that should not be a concen.

Gripen with 3000kg internal fuel will be having the same range as that of any other twine engine fighter with 6000kg internal fuel..
also with a 5000kg payload is well enough to carry weapons , missiles and a external fuel tank...take a note that to extend range , a twine engine will be required to carry two drop tanks as compare to only one by Gripen...

 

[sancho]

And your point is?

First of all EF fuel fraction is 0.31 not 0.4

The earlier with internal fuel only, the latter with the external fuel, so as I said, with total fuel it has longer range than the MKI.

these external tanks reduces the load weight of EFT...

And it still carries the same missile load and you simply can't deny that!

Finally with weapons and fuel tanks increases the RCS of the fighters tremendously... enough to have MKI to have a competitive edge because of its powerful radars...

When you keep ignoring that MKI will still have the clearly bigger RCS and will be detected by EFs radar way above the 160Km detection range it has for normal fighters.
Not to forget that you are talking about these maximum load configs, a normal A2A config contains just a single external fuel tank and 6 AAMs.

 

[sancho]

Really , or it's other way round . If i remember correctly you claimed something for all MRCA jets

Then read that quote again, "several others", not "all" and I even stated before that Gripen E/F have similar on offer, but those you claimed has not (EF, F16IN...), so yes you are distracting from the facts!

Still ,you can't deny that such tech exists in F16 developed in 2000-02 time frame

I said it to others too, we can speculate about what could be possible, or we take those techs and capabilities to account that are available. That's why I don't take SC, CFTs, active cancelation, or other things to account, that might be developed, or claimed for Rafale, till they are not officially integrated, or available.
And from the infos yourself provided, F16IN don't has these capabilites, that's a fact, you can go on and speculate, but I'm not joining there.

That is your personal opinion and not necessary to be in coherent to IAF view . You think Rafale is best suited while I think Gripen is much more suited .
we can continue to argue on that , for years with any conclusion

Of course it's my opinion, but based on facts about Rafale and on the infos available about the needs of our forces, be it IAF, or IN (RFP requirements, official statments...) and still I keep saying that at the end the deal might be done for political reasons with the US. For our forces however, Rafale is the best and obvious choice!

However, the shortlistings will show what route MoD will go for, politics, or the needs of our forces?