Dassault Rafale, tender | News & Discussions

[sancho]

All it proves is your ignorance, did you hear a sonic boom?

LOL and the next denial! Check the quote girl, you claimed about drag, but as you can see the Rafale don't seems to have any drag issue at all in the same low level flight, so by your logic the engine performance seems to be no issue too. I'm still waiting to see any real proof about it, that really says something about Rafale, or F18 Superhornet + drag.

I have a doubt here.. in Visual Range these days pilots fire short range missile or still the old ways of cannon?... Nowerdays Short range missiles are more maneuverable than the fighter right? or i am wrong?
As per my calculations if the above facts are true.. single engine fighters will be toast in WVR.... correct me if i am wrong

That's what I meant, when the opponent has the same weapon and same HMS, what advantage in WVR is left for the SH?
Not sure if I get you right, why should a single engine fighter tast in WVR?

 

[sancho]

@ ganimi kawa

In additon to what I wrote in my last post to you, here from the Dassault aviation site:

...Minimising the RCS has also been a design driver in order to make stealth tactics possible. Most of the stealth design features are classified but some of them are clearly visible such as the serrated patterns on the trailing edges of the wings and canards.

Dassault Aviation has a long praised tradition of designing sturdy airframes that sustain over 30 years of operation without heavy structural retrofit.
Thanks to a Dassault Aviation unique know-how in finite element modelisation, the RAFALE airframe fatigue is monitored with a gauge-free concept. The operational Mirage 2000 fleet daily demonstrates the relevance of this concept.

Composite materials are extensively used and account for 70% of the wetted area. They also account for the 40% increase in the max take-off weight to empty weight ratio from traditional airframes built with aluminium and titanium.

Optimized airframe

 

[wali87]

guys can anyone tell me if the IAF has chosen an airplane yet from the mrca??

 

[softtec]

should be the system cost, including spares..., the cost of P8I is pretty much what we have paid. However, if we keep in mind how many F18SH the USN bought it is indeed pretty much.




As I explained before, mainly in WVR, because it has the same tech/weapon combo, but is more manouverable as a fighter. Only the Europeans offer a missile that is a generation ahead and that is the METEOR. PAF will have the same AIM 120 and AIM 9, with the only difference that we might get a bit more range and possibly the 9X version, but that are only minor upgrades and not a completelly new missle.



Because, you said we should leave WVR combats to MKI/Pak Fa and ground attacks to SH, but that's not the way it should be, because we are searching for fighters that will be useful in all roles (although not equally good for all roles), that is the difference between a multi role fighter and a dedicated A2A or A2G fighter like the jags!
MMRCAs should have a focus on strikes true, but air defense as well and it will be our 2nd frontline fighter besides the MKI for a long time. With our close proximity to Pakistan and China, you simply can't rule out WVR combats, that's why we need a fighter that will offer an advantage in this field too and is not dependent on MKI to cover it. That's why I said, if we just wanted a ground attack fighter, without multi role capabilities we could simply build more Jags.

As I said, I don't want to speculate!


First of all, IAF don't ask for ToT, secondly the US never said they will offer critical ToT, all that might be on offer is ToT of non critical parts than can be produced in India, while the critical parts will be supplied by the US . They don't share their techs, not even with allied countries, same goes for source codes, which are not at all on offer from the US. Not even UAE, which fundend parts of the development and integration of AESA radar into F16 B60 got the source codes!



True I forget about the engine, but that's the only point where we have commonality and can be reduce costs, on all other parts of it we will remain completelly dependent on supply from the US and we have to pay more for upgrades and building new logistics...





Again, I showed it in the comparison itself that Dassault has even an advantage in availability and production over Boeing and your point here is only based on your opinion, but not on facts!
We got 51 Mirage fighters and I never heared that they were delayed, or that we had other problems with them. The licence production of Jaguars went so good, that we produced the last batch only a few years ago and they were developed partly from Bréguet, which now is Dassault Aviation. IAF is even praising the French for their good fighters, quality and maintenance, Thales supplies parts for half of the fleet and has JV with Samtel and so on. So based on our experience, we never had problems with them other than costs possibly!
What you also seem to forget is the fact that only 1 squad of MMRCA should be delivered from the wining country and the rest will be produced in India anyway, so the production capacity in the vendor countries are not important, compared to how fast and smooth we can start licence production. Now tell me, what will be easier, start it with the US where we have simply no experience, or common base, or with France, where we have several licence productions, parterships and JV running for years now, not to forget the available supply routes?
I agree with you that they are more expensive, but it's simply wrong to say that the French can't handle it when the facts are stating exactly the opposite:

1) Long time GOOD experience with French arms, as well with supplies, licence production, co-developments and JV
2) Rafale will be available with full techs way earlier than SH, so delivery and licence production can start in time, or even earlier
3) Dassault has offered early delivery of 40 fighters if we want
4) With more ToT and integration of Indian techs, we can build more of Rafale in India itself and are not dependend on supplies, the same advantage that we now have with the MKI production

1)Absolutely wrong.SH has much much stronger radar(don't think radar only for range) and much more advance avionics, ecm etc than f16.US says aim9x is the 5th gen missile.There must be much differences than what paf has.All these will give big advantage in wvr fight.

2)Huh..you still not getting.What I said Rafale will be superior in wvr and SH is enough for asian environment in A TO A mode. And what I also meant as mki and pakfa will be used for air superiority role, so let SH concentrate more for strike role.That never means that they will not fight wvr. And I also said that SH will be superior to Rafale in BVR fight.Now you tell me how did u come to know that SH don't have multi role capability?

3)Wrong..IAF asked for limited TOT and boeing providing them.Even IAF also know if they want the best equipment they willn't get the TOT for those.And you have wrong assumption for source code.These limited Source code don't help you to replicate anything.And unlike France for US ,where u will get the best arms in cheaper rate, you don't need to integrate other countries arms.

4)Strange..Engines are one of the most important and one of the biggest part in a fighter.Tell me what bigger and more important commonality you will get in between mirage and rafale!!

For all the parts boeing like thales will provide tools to manufacture equipments in India.Tell me how for Rafale, we don't have to create more logistic than SH.A fighter has thousands of parts and in mirage and rafale has very less comonilities.
And please don't talk about upgrade cost.We havn't forget how much we have to shell out for mirage updates and how rigid France is.You can't imagine how much they will ask for Rafale upgrade.


5)I can show you the recent scorpean and mirage upgrade instance.Its not the same as earlier.They have to create the full supply chain system in India making all the indian factories up and running to manufacture thousands of parts.They have to train all the indian technicians with necessary technologies.It's more critical and risky than upgrading their own factories at home.In five years they have to make more than 100 fighters.Even at home they don't have experience of producing more than 12 fighter a year!
The work and manpower experience what US vendors have handling and making huge number of products in faster way, will help immensely while setting up factories and training indian technicians in a short time.Unlike France companies, they respect and deliver the deal in time or before time rather than giving excuses and sucking more money after deal.

 

[dbc]

LOL and the next denial! Check the quote girl, you claimed about drag, but as you can see the Rafale don't seems to have any drag issue at all in the same low level flight, so by your logic the engine performance seems to be no issue too. I'm still waiting to see any real proof about it, that really says something about Rafale, or F18 Superhornet + drag.

I just realized I'm arguing with a guy possibly a child who does not know the basics of flight. A guy who can't tell the difference between subsonic and supersonic flight. Where's the sonic boom? A seven second video and you can tell the Rafale has no 'drag issues' - incredible!!

Here is a question, how do you know the Rafale in the 7 second video did not gain air speed from a high altitude dive? Or, how can you tell it did not labor from a great distance to transonic flight?

You could argue the same about the video evidence I presented earlier. So here is another video forward to 3.23 notice how the F/A-18 E/F achieves near supersonic speeds in under 5 seconds after a low speed turn. Grow up kid, the Hornet was designed to replace one of the fastest interceptor in aviation history.

For those interested don't miss the impressive take off at 1.28

YouTube - Superhornet High Speed Pass

 

[razgriz19]

gripen with meteor...

meteor in flight

meteor on rafale!

 

[SpArK]

U.K. Move Could See French Aircraft on British Carriers​

PARIS - London's decision to fit catapults on its planned second aircraft carrier opened up the prospect of French Rafale strike fighters flying off a British flattop, with reciprocal rights for British aircraft off the French carrier, French Defense Minister Hervé Morin said Oct. 26 at the Euronaval trade show.

Morin asked the French military staff to assess whether the installation of catapults would allow French aircraft, such as the Rafale, to operate off the Royal Navy vessel, and the answer was: "Yes, it's technically feasible," he told journalists.

FRENCH RAFALE STRIKE fighters, such as the one shown above, could fly off a British flattop, with reciprocal rights for British aircraft off the French carrier, the French defense minister said Oct. 26. (File photo / Agence France-Presse)



That opened up potential opportunities of interoperability and mutual interdependence between the British and French fleets, he said. With such cross-deck operations came the possibility of a "permanent presence at sea," he said.

"We have a complementarity to play with," he said.

Morin, however, said a French decision on whether to build a second carrier, dubbed porte-avions 2 or PA2, would be made at the end of 2012 or early 2013.

Up to now, President Nicolas Sarkozy has said such a decision would be made in 2011 or 2012.

But money is tight, and a presidential election is due to be held in 2012, which was probably why Morin reset the timetable, a defense official said.

Morin is positioning himself as centrist party candidate for the presidential ballot.

Privately, senior French Navy officers are delighted at the prospect of Britain operating a conventional carrier, rather than the through-deck vessel designed for vertical-takeoff aircraft such as the Sea Harrier.

One officer said it takes something like 25 years to learn how to operate a true carrier.

"I'll be happy to speed it up by 10 to 15 years" the officer said. The French Navy, which operates the Charles de Gaulle carrier, could help with cross training of crews.

The French Navy has been without the use the Charles de Gaulle for three years following a scheduled overhaul of its nuclear reactor and working up period. In that time, French Fleet Air Arm pilots flew in the United States to keep up their flying hours.

Expectations are high that announcements of military cooperation will be made at the Anglo-French summit on Nov. 2, when Sarkozy and British Prime Minister David Cameron meet in Portsmouth in Britain.

U.K. Move Could See French Aircraft on British Carriers - Defense News

 

[kingdurgaking]

That's what I meant, when the opponent has the same weapon and same HMS, what advantage in WVR is left for the SH?
Not sure if I get you right, why should a single engine fighter tast in WVR?

Surely a twin edge fighter will have more survival option than a single engine fighter right? One missile if it hits the engine altogether it becomes a dead chicken... Where as Twin engine can still hold on and will be able to fly home to some extent dont you think so...
As per your comment on same weapon and same HMS... WVR will add some advantage for a twin edge dont you think so?

 

[soaringphnx]

the Hornet was designed to replace one of the fastest interceptor in aviation history.

Wrong. F-14 was not the fastest interceptor in aviation history. The F-14 had a top speed of about Mach 2.35. The MiG-25/31 had a top speed of Mach 2.8+ with typical intercept speeds around Mach 2.35 ( which is the F-14s top speed) to increase engine life.

 

[dbc]

Wrong. F-14 was not the fastest interceptor in aviation history. The F-14 had a top speed of about Mach 2.35. The MiG-25/31 had a top speed of Mach 2.8+ with typical intercept speeds around Mach 2.35 ( which is the F-14s top speed) to increase engine life.

gimme a break, I said "one of the fastest interceptor" clearly that does not exclude the MIG-25.

 

[Dash]

If Mirage never had problem with us and we succesfully operated those in Kargil, then rafale being an advanced version of Mirage will certainly do the same and do more. I have no doubt about it.

Mirages scored higher points over Mig-29 and every one else when it came to combat then. The Mig-29 were made to compete with F-16 and F-18s. if they can be beaten down by Mirage then I think Rafale will definitely score better points against anyone.

 

[kingdurgaking]

Mirages scored higher points over Mig-29 and every one else when it came to combat then. The Mig-29 were made to compete with F-16 and F-18s. if they can be beaten down by Mirage then I think Rafale will definitely score better points against anyone.

Do you have any proof for it? are you talking about Pilot work load here? Mig 29 is the most agile air superiority aircraft next to MKI in our inventory... It can fry Mirage for lunch for sure.. I dont think Mirage can score over Mig 29... But Rafale can surely win... but still it will be in BVR... in WVR i doubt it against Mig 29..

 

[CONNAN]

Do you have any proof for it? are you talking about Pilot work load here? Mig 29 is the most agile air superiority aircraft next to MKI in our inventory... It can fry Mirage for lunch for sure.. I dont think Mirage can score over Mig 29... But Rafale can surely win... but still it will be in BVR... in WVR i doubt it against Mig 29..

yup you are right i want to support your argument with the below link IAF actually did this exercise mig 29 vs m 2000 and the mig won the exercise

Mirage 2000 Vs MiG-29: Rivals from the same team

sorry its not clear ill try to get a better one

 

[CONNAN]

now its better

 

[CONNAN]