Dassault Rafale, tender | News & Discussions

[rajeev]

And what that decision is and if decision is made, why waste time. Common sense says that waiting might give us better options.

My guess is India will choose F18SH.

Why waste time? Is that a question? This is India. Even for filing to create a corporation, it takes 6 months. This is 10b$ - so many stakeholders have to get rich, if you know what i mean...

 

[deckingraj]

But I think India has already made decision on this and we will be choosing based on strategic need/support rather than military need.

Well even if we have made up our mind(which is stupid) the minimum we can do is to bargain by citing this example...Also there has to be a reason that EuroFighter is offering that much - May be it still see's a chance...Who can say...we need to wait and watch... though i must say this wait is getting more and more frustrating...

 

[Hulk]

My guess is India will choose F18SH.

Why waste time? Is that a question? This is India. Even for filing to create a corporation, it takes 6 months. This is 10b$ - so many stakeholders have to get rich, if you know what i mean...

I beg to differ that we have made our minds, if that was the case EF should have known it. They all have access to insider information.

 

[vnomad]

Not important, the point was US supported them for years and not us, even with military power against us (unlike France). To me that means they have to show us that they are reliable first.

So show meaning what exactly?

Let's see, they gave us Mirage 2000, which is one of the best fighters in our fleet at the moment and didn't had the quality problems like Russian techs.

They didn't really give it(they charged us a hefty bundle for them). And Mirage 2000 was available to everyone, with the exception of perhaps USSR, PRC, Cuba and a few others.

They gave us Scorpene class subs,

And ink had barely dried on that contract before they were marketing the Marlin to PN(as superior to the Scorpene).

offered now Rafale with full ToT and source codes, something that no other country except Russia will offer.

EF, Gripen offer that I believe. Just a question of degrees really.

Also, they'd have offered that to anyone(like say Pakistan) for a substantial order of aircraft.

They cleared the nuclear deal right after Russia and provided us civil nuclear power plants.

The US support enabled a waiver for India in both the IAEA and NSG which is no mean achievement and is something no other country could have done.

They support us for a permanent seat in the UNC,

What they have to lose? France is the most passive member of the UNSC P5 by a long long stretch.

we already have co-developments in avionics and they offered a co-developed Kaveri-Snecma engine.

Sure but India has strong military-industrial relations with other EU countries as well.

But most important they were reliable during sanction times!

I can confidently say sanctions aren't going to happen again. Times have changed. Tomorrow if Japan were to conduct nuclear tests it wouldn't be sanctioned. While India's situation isn't exactly the same, the logic remains the same. On the global stage, India's standing is a leagues ahead of what it was in 1998.

BTW with regard to the Eurofighter; UK didn't sanction India either.

Looks like they sold and sell us state of the are arms, gives us the chance for co-developments, support us politically and in the civil nuclear field,

Like I said.. they support everyone. A Rafale purchase isn't going make any major difference to India's equation with them.

so everything that Russia offers us too!

After the arm-twisting the Russians have engaged in with regard to the Gorshkov, and considering the fact the MiG-35 seems to be the 'budget fighter' relative to its competitors, I don't think that the MiG-35 is anywhere close to winning the contract (or atleast I'm praying its not).

Can you name me another country that can offer us the same, especially co-developments and nuclear power?

Everyone. Except for shared R&D with the US; they don't need any collaboration.

MMRCA is the chance for us to get France even closer to us than ever before, on levels like we have with Russia and Isreal.

Err ......... not going to happen. While not quite Switzerland, they're a pretty hands-off country.

Are they? Or do they only open the door for US arms with buying less important patrol and transport aircrafts in smaller numbers? MMRCA is a totally different thing and US have to come up with more, if they want to get a part of this market.

That's over $5 billion worth of contracts and big affirmative on the govt./IAF's confidence vis-a-vis the US.

Also, I don't think you appreciate the kind of performance the P-8 brings to the table. Its going to be the first defence against the PN's Agostas and U-214s. At ASuW it will be a generation ahead of anything and everything flying today; its absolutely cutting edge and speaks volumes about the progress, India's politico-military ties with US, have made.

You still didn't understand it, it means that the aircraft is wired to the use such weapons, but it still needs integration and testing of them. That exactly is what the members are doing with Paveway 4 at the moment:

This is Block 10, but only IRIS-T is integrated so far Paveway 3, ALARM, Brimstone and the cruise missiles will only come in Block 15, or even later in Tranche 3A.

Unless, major obstacles are encountered(extremely unlikely), individual weapons integration trials are generally pretty short. The JDAM/Paveway being a possible exception since they are free-fall and can be carried in clusters. But, as your link said, the Paveway IV tests concluded in July this year.

India's deliveries as I've stated before are expected over three years from now.

That's what I try to make you understand, the integration is delayed and nobody knows if all the claimed weapons will be integrated at all.

Where did you get that notion from? It would be pretty mind-boggling to see the wiring and software upgrades completed, tests completed and then the whole plan scrapped? Only the Storm Shadow and Brimstone remain to be integrated.

Intended is the key word and with RN having F35 on their carriers, it should be clear that integrating a2g and anti ship weapons on them will be more important, than on any other land based fighter, because they will be the first to fight in any future UK war.

They're not mutually exclusive objectives. Integrating A2G weaponry on the F-35 doesn't come at the cost of doing the same with the EF or vice-versa.

Integration and testing of weapons, see above!

Did that.

Funny but not correct, the one is mainly for air superiority, with secondary strike capabilities. The other mainly for strike with BVR capabilities. This is a normal concept that you can see in several forces. F22 and F35, Su 35 and Su 34, even FGFA and a hypothetical MCA are intended for the same kind of roles. Of course all of them are multi role fighters, but always one mainly geared with capabilities for air superiority and the other for mainly for strike.

How about the F-16, Mirage-2000, Tornado, F-15E? I don't see how the Rafale is similar to them and the EF is not, except in terms of time-frame?

Unless EF has integrated heavy a2g payload you are right. Rafale instead already uses heavy payloads:

http://kovy.free.fr/temp/rafale-super-nounou.jpg

Rafale in buddy refueling mission with 2x 2000l and 2x 1250l, centerline refueling pod + 2 Mica ~ 6t

That's the heaviest mission profile and an unlikely one considering the availability of air to air refuelers in the IAF. In a typical scenario, the payload would be lower and matched by the Eurofighter.

Rafale in long range strike mission with 3x 2000l tanks, 2 Scalp and 4 Micas ~ 8t

Well in the regional scenario, the long range strike role is likely to be carried out by the Su-30MKI, which is inherently better at it.

Any source for that claim?

The Eurofighter's flyaway price is expected to be about €63 million.

For EADS, India represents perhaps the next and certainly the biggest potential customer for the Eurofighter Typhoon. Though Typhoon’s £42m/€62m unit flyaway cost make the aircraft more expensive than the US, Swedish and Russian contenders, the aircraft offers low support and through life costs, and a compelling mix of capabilities. Typhoon is claimed to have better air-to-air capabilities than its rivals, with its mechanically scanned radar offering better range than the other fighters’ AESA radars.

Flight Global: ILA 2008: Indian bids add spice

The Rafale's cost varies from €64 million to €70 million. The naval variant is likely to be at the higher end of that spectrum while the air force version will be cheaper.

Google Translate


(Its a English translation of French document tabled in the parliament).

Point is that the Rafale is far from being an economical alternative to the Eurofighter.

 

[sancho]

Yes, Eurofighter is best aircraft that can have atleast a shot against F22.

But I think India has already made decision on this and we will be choosing based on strategic need/support rather than military need.

Can you explain how?

 

[rajeev]

Can you explain how?

I read an article which had information about military war games. The planes for the games were F22, F16 , F15, Eurofighter, Rafale and Su-35.

What was said, it would need 4.5 Eurofighters for taking down 1 F22. 10 F15 were needed to take down 1 F22, etc., 4.5 Su-35 was needed to take down 1 Eurofighter, F15 was found to be inferior to Su-35 at 1/1.3 ratio, etc. Thus after this military war game, Eurofighter tranche 3 started getting rated just below F22. Ofcourse, AESA was not used which is inferior in Eurofighter.

I saw this explained in detail by the gurus on worldmilitaryforum.

This link below has another war game whether Eurofighter took down F15.
Schein-Luftkampf: Eurofighter besiegt zwei US-Jets - SPIEGEL ONLINE - Nachrichten - Wissenschaft

 

[vnomad]

Yes, Eurofighter is best aircraft that can have atleast a shot against F22.

Not really my friend. The F-22 is the closest thing to 'invincible' that's ever flown in sky.

Its scored kill ratios of 144-0 at Ex. Northern Edge and over 120-1 at Red Flag.

Nothing comes close.

 

[vnomad]

I read an article which had information about military war games. The planes for the games were F22, F16 , F15, Eurofighter, Rafale and Su-35.

What was said, it would need 4.5 Eurofighters for taking down 1 F22. 10 F15 were needed to take down 1 F22, etc., 4.5 Su-35 was needed to take down 1 Eurofighter, F15 was found to be inferior to Su-35 at 1/1.3 ratio, etc. Thus after this military war game, Eurofighter tranche 3 started getting rated just below F22. Ofcourse, AESA was not used which is inferior in Eurofighter.

The DERA simulation was just that ... a simulation. The real acid test of the F-22 was when it went to participate in air force exercises. Some of the best US pilots from the USAF's aggressor squadrons were eager to take the F-22 on. They were simply blown away. The only time they knew a F-22 was around was when the RWR in their cockpits was blaring and the Raptor had a lock.

 

[rajeev]

Not really my friend. The F-22 is the closest thing to 'invincible' that's ever flown in sky.

Its scored kill ratios of 144-0 at Ex. Northern Edge and over 120-1 at Red Flag.

Nothing comes close.

I am unable to find the link where they detailed the war games.

I am not saying F22 is an easy shot. What I'm saying that in the war game, there were about 1 F22 fell for 4.5 Eurofighters in close combat. None of other fighter plane even close.

As you know, besides being high performing, F22 is also stealthy. For our concern, I see Eurofighter as the best and most expensive plane available for MRCA acquisition.

Source:
The Eurofighter Typhoon beat the F22 in real tests!

"The MoD said it would not be putting Typhoons up against the Indian Airforce Su-30s as a one on one fight. However, it did happen and there is HUD video to prove it. Apparently two inexperienced Typhoon pilots returned with big grins on their faces, the Su-30s were toasted, all the Su-30's air display antics amounted to nothing, the Typhoons proved too nimble and too powerful for the Russian aircraft. The Typhoons were also not clean configured.
During the Typhoon's visit to the US in 2005 it was pitted againt the F-22, this was not officially confirmed. The Typhoon could not see the F-22 but could detect that it was being painted by the F-22 and took "appropriate" measures with defensive aids. In one on one combat the Typhoon did the same job as on the Su-30, the F-22 could not handle the Typhoons close in and were shocked. It did not go all the Typhoon's way but the Americans had a sobering encounter, with the F-22 sacrificing much for stealth"........................

Source: Fourth-generation jet fighter - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Aircraft Odds vs. Su-35
Lockheed Martin/Boeing F-22 Raptor 10.1 : 1
Eurofighter Typhoon 4.5 : 1
Dassault Rafale C 1 : 1
McDonnell Douglas F-15C Eagle 0.8 : 1
Boeing F/A-18+ 0.4 : 1
McDonnell Douglas F/A-18C 0.3 : 1
General Dynamics F-16C 0.3 : 1

Eurofighter vs f-22

 

[sancho]

Can't reply you in the next few weeks, so only the important parts and if you want reply via PM.

So show meaning what exactly?

With something that really make a difference, like F35 instead of upg F16.

EF, Gripen offer that I believe. Just a question of degrees really.

EF maybe, Gripen no, because of too many important parts from other countries.

Everyone. Except for shared R&D with the US; they don't need any collaboration.

What??? Only Russia, China and US can offer all arms and nuclear power like France can, but China won't, US won't share techs, so co-developments are not possible and always will have restrictions and Russia already provide us everything. Getting such a second alternativ in all these fields, without any strings and totally independent would get India out of the overdependance of Russia, with increasing western quality techs and even France officials said that they want to go way beyond a normal buyer seller relationship.

With Russia, Israel and France as stratigic partners, India could remain independent, getting co-developed arms, instead of simple buys and moreover improve our own indsutrial capabilities with ToT. Three points where US can't compete these countries!

That's over $5 billion worth of contracts and big affirmative on the govt./IAF's confidence vis-a-vis the US.

Also, I don't think you appreciate the kind of performance the P-8 brings to the table. Its going to be the first defence against the PN's Agostas and U-214s. At ASuW it will be a generation ahead of anything and everything flying today; its absolutely cutting edge and speaks volumes about the progress, India's politico-military ties with US, have made.

I didn't say those techs are bad, but they clearly won't have that much influence on our security like MMRCA.

But, as your link said, the Paveway IV tests concluded in July this year.

Concluded that series of tests with:

a sequence of fifteen Paveway IV jettison drops. To date 3 successful drops have been performed.

Only 3 succsessful drops of 15, what does it say to you how much more time it will needed? Btw German and Spanish EFs did the same test this year too and still that weapon is not operational.

Where did you get that notion from? It would be pretty mind-boggling to see the wiring and software upgrades completed, tests completed and then the whole plan scrapped? Only the Storm Shadow and Brimstone remain to be integrated.

Wiring is ready in any tranche 2 fighter, but not the software upgrades, or the tests! Again look at Paveway 4, the fighters are wired for that weapon, but only after the integration (like you said software upgrades and testings) the weapon will be operational.
Similar case for Rafale F2, it is wired for AMRAAM and any export customer that want to use that weapon and fund the integration can have it, but without integration, no AMRAAM.

Integrating A2G weaponry on the F-35 doesn't come at the cost of doing the same with the EF

Exactly, it will be cheaper, because it is an US fighter that uses mainly US a2g weapons, so US will take the big part of the costs anyway. US weapon for EF instead must be funded from member countries alone. Again, why should UK and ITA integrate them on EF, if F35 will have them anyway and will be much more useful in that role?

Point is that the Rafale is far from being an economical alternative to the Eurofighter.

Not on unit cost of course (doubt the same price but still it's clear that Rafale is the second costliest), but on logistic and maintenance! Maintenance of Rafale is said to be on Mirage 2000 level (reported by Greece airforce too), because that was the aim of Dassault from the beginning.
IAF upg M2k and Jags (together nearly the same number as MMRCAs) can use the same weapons as Rafale, so logistic will be the same and cost can be reduced.
And now think about if a Kaveri-Snecma engine could be integrated! More indigenous parts, less costs!
Again something that no other country can offer!

 

[vnomad]

Can't reply you in the next few weeks, so only the important parts and if you want reply via PM.

Take your time no hurry. Its just a friendly debate.

With something that really make a difference, like F35 instead of upg F16.

India can buy the F-35 if it wants but the delivery schedule doesn't really suit the IAF's urgent need for replacement aircraft as the MiGs are phased out.

As for ToT, forget it... good ties is one thing, but its something the US isn't going to share and for good reason. Not that India can afford it; the F-35 development cost was over $50 billion. Similarly, the British aren't going to share the ToT for Astute class submarines or the French the Trioumphant class.

What??? Only Russia, China and US can offer all arms and nuclear power like France can, but China won't, US won't share techs, so co-developments are not possible and always will have restrictions and Russia already provide us everything. Getting such a second alternativ in all these fields, without any strings and totally independent would get India out of the overdependance of Russia, with increasing western quality techs and even France officials said that they want to go way beyond a normal buyer seller relationship.

Since, India got an exemption from the IAEA and NSG, the Indian nuclear power sector is now a civilian concern. Its a free market system, the best bid to generate power will win the contract, the bid's open to all and its completely independent of the military establishment. You can't have Areva and Dassault delivering a joint bid. Its beyond the MoD's scope and irrelevant to the IAF.

With Russia, Israel and France as stratigic partners, India could remain independent, getting co-developed arms, instead of simple buys and moreover improve our own indsutrial capabilities with ToT. Three points where US can't compete these countries!

Well Russia and Israel are already strategic partners and we have a host of joint development programs with them.

With regard to France, like I mentioned before India has far more in common strategically with the US and UK than it does with France. And taking a pro-active role in global affairs isn't something France is interested in. Creating a strategic partnership with India isn't too high on its to-do list.

I didn't say those techs are bad, but they clearly won't have that much influence on our security like MMRCA.

Point was that sanctions aren't a worry as is clearly evident from the scale of India's defence purchases from the US.

Concluded that series of tests with:
Only 3 succsessful drops of 15, what does it say to you how much more time it will needed? Btw German and Spanish EFs did the same test this year too and still that weapon is not operational.

I believe you've misinterpreted those remarks. The entire sentence is:

Further recently successful testing saw IPA 1, the UK owned Typhoon aircraft, commence a sequence of fifteen Paveway IV jettison drops. To date 3 successful drops have been performed.

The author probably means 3 missions of employing 5 Paveways each, or maybe a series of 15 tests of which 3 are over, or something similar, though he shouldn't have used the word 'drop' for both.

Wiring is ready in any tranche 2 fighter, but not the software upgrades, or the tests! Again look at Paveway 4, the fighters are wired for that weapon, but only after the integration (like you said software upgrades and testings) the weapon will be operational.

Reading from your link, the Paveway IV is already operational.

Exactly, it will be cheaper, because it is an US fighter that uses mainly US a2g weapons, so US will take the big part of the costs anyway. US weapon for EF instead must be funded from member countries alone. Again, why should UK and ITA integrate them on EF, if F35 will have them anyway and will be much more useful in that role?

The process of integrating air to ground weapons isn't very expensive. Firstly, relative to the entire development expenditure, the cost involved is simply peanuts. And secondly, its already been done and except for the Storm Shadow and Brimstone(for which its already committed), the EF is a working multi-role fighter.

Not on unit cost of course (doubt the same price but still it's clear that Rafale is the second costliest), but on logistic and maintenance! Maintenance of Rafale is said to be on Mirage 2000 level (reported by Greece airforce too), because that was the aim of Dassault from the beginning.

Well I'm still to see anything that suggests its maintenance cost is lower than the Eurofighter's.

IAF upg M2k and Jags (together nearly the same number as MMRCAs) can use the same weapons as Rafale, so logistic will be the same and cost can be reduced.

The IAF is planning to replace the Magic AFAIK and have (I might be wrong) deployed the Derby on the Jaguar(I believe). The MICA will probably be common to the Rafale and Mirage-2000 but I believe the saving in costs because of munitions is minimal and certainly not worth tipping the scales in the Rafale's favour.

BTW the Paveway is employed by the Mirage-2000, Jaguar, MiG-27 and Eurofighter.

And now think about if a Kaveri-Snecma engine could be integrated! More indigenous parts, less costs!
Again something that no other country can offer!

I don't have high or for that matter even mediocre expectations from the Kaveri. Certainly not worth replacing the reliable and excellent M-88 on the Rafale, with the Kaveri to save money.

 

[Tejas-MkII]

Eurojet could develop thrust vectoring with India

Eurojet could develop thrust vectoring with India
By Murdo Morrison

The consortium behind the Eurofighter Typhoon's engine has hinted strongly that it could partner a non-European country - possibly India - to develop and demonstrate a thrust-vectoring version of the EJ200 as part of a technology-sharing deal.

Eurojet is keen to source funds to test its thrust vectoring nozzle (TVN) on a flight demonstrator. It believes if it can obtain enough in-flight data, it will be able to prove the lifecycle cost benefits of the technology - which has been in development for over a decade - to current and future customers.

However, military budget pressures facing the four Eurofighter launch nations - Germany, Italy, Spain and the UK - and scepticism about the advantages of a capability associated more with spectacular air show manoeuvres than operating prudence will make it difficult to secure backing from existing customers.

Instead, the four-nation industrial combine and Eurofighter plan to discuss with possible export customers offset and technology transfer packages that would include "growth potential" for the fighter.

"We are evaluating future markets and a number of RFPs [requests for proposal] have asked for potential growth," says Adrian Johnson, senior vice-president sales for Eurojet. "TVN is in there. It might be that a customer outside Europe could come on board and embrace that technology."

Although Eurofighter has secured Austria and Saudi Arabia as export customers and is pitching the Typhoon at countries such as Greece, Japan, Romania, Switzerland and Turkey, India is the most likely partner because of the size of its requirement and the fact that it is determined to develop its aerospace industrial base.

Another factor is that Eurojet is separately bidding against General Electric to supply the EJ200 for an improved version of India's single-engine Tejas light combat aircraft. A combined offer could provide sufficient economies to persuade India to fund a demonstration programme.

Johnson says Eurojet could be ready for a flight demonstration within 18-24 months, but stresses that the emphasis will be on obtaining data that backs the TVN's economic benefits rather than its enhanced dogfighting capability.

"Increasing agility isn't going to cause [potential customers] to back TVN," he says. "What will cause them to back it is a reduction in lifecycle costs. That's what we have to demonstrate and build a cast-iron case around."

 

[vnomad]

I am unable to find the link where they detailed the war games.
I am not saying F22 is an easy shot. What I'm saying that in the war game, there were about 1 F22 fell for 4.5 Eurofighters in close combat. None of other fighter plane even close.
As you know, besides being high performing, F22 is also stealthy. For our concern, I see Eurofighter as the best and most expensive plane available for MRCA acquisition.

Nothing comes even remotely close to the performance of the F-22:-

F-22 near perfect in combat exercises
By Seamus O’Connor - Staff writer
Posted : Tuesday Jul 31, 2007 15:56:56 EDT
The F-22 Raptor is the world’s most advanced fighter, but is it invincible?

Internet rumors have swirled for months over whether any F-22s had been taken down in simulated combat exercises. Discussion forums are rife with Navy pilots touting a controversial photo appearing to show an F/A-18F Super Hornet gunning down a Raptor.

The F-22’s debut combat exercise was at Northern Edge in June 2006. According to Air Force data, the dozen F-22s in attendance racked up an unprecedented kill record of 144-0 the first week alone and suffered no losses overall.

The Raptor’s only other combat exercise so far was Red Flag 07-1, held Feb. 3-16 at Nellis Air Force Base, Nev. The Air Force released no data indicating an F-22 shootdown.

But according to the March 5 issue of Aviation Week & Space Technology, one Raptor got blasted.

In the article, Col. Tom Bergeson, the exercise’s air expeditionary commander, described the situation: When one aggressor went down, it was able to fly out and regenerate so quickly that an F-22 pilot thought the enemy was still “dead,” and got shot down himself for the mistake.

One thing is for sure: The plane that took down the Raptor was an F-15 or F-16, but not an F/A-18F. When asked whether a Superbug might have claimed a kill, one Air Force public affairs officer scoffed, “Not bloody likely.”

Though the Raptor may not have a perfect record, it still got high praise during the exercise.

“The thing denies your ability to put a weapons system on it, even when I can see it through the canopy,” said one Australian aggressor pilot at the time. “It’s the most frustrated I’ve ever been.”

F-22 near perfect in combat exercises - Air Force News, news from Iraq - Air Force Times

Taxing the F-22
"Northern Edge was not an Air Force-only test of the F-22. It was a no-kidding joint exercise," says Lawson. "The scenarios were what the F-22 would do in a real fight: escorting B-2s in, protecting the skies, and operating with and against other fighters."
In contrast, Red Flag was set up to tax the F-22, he says. "It was focused on putting it at a disadvantage and trying a lot of different tactics."



F-22s of the USAF's 1st Fighter Wing have completed three key developments

In Alaska, the F-22 achieved an unprecedented 144:0 kill ratio in the first week of Northern Edge. "In the first week of the fight, the preponderance of engagements were beyond visual range. In the second week they got into the merge and took a couple of shots," says Lawson, pointing out that the pilots averaged less than 100h on the aircraft. The final tally was 80:1.
Northern Edge included an air-to-air mission involving a "blue" team of 24 F-15Cs, eight F-22s and two F-15Es against 40 F-16s and F/A-18s that were allowed to regenerate to produce a total "red" air force of 103 aircraft.
The USAF says the blue team was able to achieve an 83:1 kill ratio, losing one F-15. Over the two-week exercise, the F-22 accounted for 30% of the blue force and 49% of kills.

Export Ready? The F-22

Inside the War Games for U.S. Air Force Fighter Pilots

Brenton (call sign "Gripper") has flown the F-16 for 20 years and has close to 4000 hours, including 750 hours of combat. He is also a former Weapons School instructor pilot at Nellis, the same program in which the 174th today is testing its mettle against the Raptor. He doesn't like to lose, but against the F-22 he has little choice. "Fighter pilots are competitive by nature. When the F-22 first became operational, most F-16 and F-15 pilots relished the challenge of going up against it," he says. "I know I did. That is, until I actually did it and discovered how humbling an experience it really was."

The Art of Losing

No U.S. airplane—or any other in the world—can match the F-22 in a dogfight during combat training. To get experience in realistic battle conditions, Raptor pilots—always the Blue Team— are training with U.S. pilots who serve as adversaries, or "Red Teams." Last week, Raptor pilots finished training against Navy F-15s and F/A-18 Super Hornets in Japan. From February through April, Nellis hosts F-22s at the 2009 Red Flag wargames, a six-week, multinational training exercise held at Eielson Air Force Base in Alaska and at Nellis.

F-22s dominate at Red Flag as well. Red Teams flying F-16s and F-15s take them on. Those who train to be the adversaries at Red Flag belong to the 64th and 65th Aggressor squadrons. These seasoned Red Team veterans find it frustrating to fight what they can't see. "Aggressor pilots are not typical Air Force line units. They tend to have much more experience," says Mike Estrada, a spokesman at the air base. "And I can tell you that our Aggressor pilots are getting very tired of always getting shot down by the F-22."

The reputation of the Raptor is evident in the pride that some take in downing one in simulated combat. A photo surfaced on an aviation website that recently caused a stir when the unnamed pilot of a surveillance aircraft said the silhouette of a warplane he painted on his fuselage was an F-22 that he helped locate and shoot down during an exercise. "Some Navy pilots like to brag if they even lock on to a Raptor," says one Air Force officer.

Learning Potential of a One-Sided Fight

"My F-16 is still a formidable weapons system in its own right. But it is not even in the same league as an F-22," Brenton says. "Technology keeps the F-22 a virtually undetectable and untouchable regime. It is fair to say that unless an F-22 driver makes a mistake, or has a critical system failure, I will always lose a fight against him. That is a good thing. As a nation, we want it this way. We also want him to be able to handle two, six or eight of us completely on his own."

Into the Fight

Simulated gun and missile shots are tracked by the controllers on the ground. When a target is killed, the deceased pilot receives a radio call telling him that he is dead. The pilot will often be sent to a location that simulates an enemy alert airfield, where he is "regenerated," simulating that the enemy has launched another aircraft. (The trainees go back to the base and land if they are killed.) When it comes to fighting Raptors, regeneration is an expected occurrence for WIC Red Teams. "We do everything we can to try and challenge them: We increase our total numbers, we regenerate, we electronically jam the environment. And we die," Brenton says. "We die wholesale. We are kill-removed repeatedly and then regenerated, and then we are killed again. The process would be demoralizing if we didn't maintain proper perspective. This is our job while we are here. What motivates us is the fact that we are training our brethren—and they are damn good at what they do."

F-15s and F-16s take on the F-22 in Air Force War Games - Fighter Pilot Training - Popular Mechanics

 

[vnomad]

eurofighter ... is probably the best among the lot. but is still has to develop aesa . project may delay upto 2014-15. saudi has it giving paf easy access to its technologies and weakness.

None of the aircraft except for the SH have an AESA in production. Also, the KSAF doesn't have ToT for the aircraft, so they aren't likely to leak the technology to Pakistan.

FA 18 ... the worthy adversary. has proved its might in afghan. but against an enemy who does not even have an airforce. for sure not upgradable or modifyable coz of end user agreement. we peek into its circuits and engine the americans will shout . so y to go for a product that we cant suit according to our own needs.

Its the best of the lot as far avionics go, even better than the Eurofighter and Rafale. And it features the most cost effective munitions. Also, the US has always been ahead of the curve as far as military R&D goes, so you can expect upgrades and add-ons with greater frequency than with its competitors.

saab gripen jas 39 .... though an underdog.. has all the potential that iaf wants. saab is ready to give entire technology to india. also partnering with tata. ready for upgrades and modification the gripen in future. they basically say "do anything with it... its urs "

Rafale, Eurofighter and MiG-35 are all offering that. The SH may withhold the AESA's technology.

. with aesa radar already tested and ready... supercruise ... the demo

The AESA isn't going to enter service till 2012-13 same as the Captor-E and RBE2AA on the EF and Rafale. All three AESA's are ready in the sense they're undergoing flight-testing and further development, but none are on the verge of production.

saab also gives option fitting any weapon of its choice... something none of the above fighters give.

Actually they all can field any weapon of western origin. I'm guessing even the R-77 can be mated on request.

Difference is that in the case of the Saab all munitions will have to be sourced from a third party(US), while the other suppliers will offer a steady supply of their munitions to go with the aircraft.

we have to buy weapons ( missiles ) that the supplier says we need to buy .

No we don't actually. Theoretically, we can field the Rafale with the Aim-120 but practically speaking we'd go for the MICA. In the case of the Saab we have to go to the US or France for the munitions.

also its has amazing maneuverability .

This part is debatable but AFAIK the MiG-35 is the most maneuverable aircraft while the EF is the most agile.

 

[sudhir007]

Gripen interest to India

Google]Google Translate Translate

---------- Post added at 10:45 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:44 AM ----------

Eurofighter will last 30 to 40 years: German envoy IDRW.ORG

Eurofighter, one of the six contenders for the multibillion-dollar tender for 126 medium multirole combat aircraft (MMRCA), offers a cutting-edge technology without the End User Monitoring clause, German ambassador Thomas Matussek has said.

“It is really a next generation plane and it will be in service for the next 30 to 40 years,” he told The Hindu. “It also comes without any End User Verification, complete transfer of technology and production.”

End User Monitoring, which created a political controversy earlier this year, is a requirement the United States insists countries to which it supplies sensitive military equipment must agree to. American firms Lockheed Martin (F16) and Boeing (F/A18) are in the fray along with the Russian MiG, Swedish SAAB (Grippen) and French Dassault (Rafale).

Barring the first batch that will be supplied off-the-shelf, all fighters will have to be made in India under transfer of technology. Mr. Matussek said the European Aeronautic Defence and Space Company (EADS) would shift its entire technology, which means that in the event of war, the country will not have to worry about supplies from overseas.

As for software code supply, the ambassador said it would be much higher than what some competitors, including U.S. companies, might offer.

Germany has been nominated by the four-country consortium of EADS, which produces the Eurofighter, as the lead country to pitch for the fighter aircraft in India.

Mr. Matussek, while admitting that the Eurofighter was described as “expensive” by competitors, said the life cycle maintenance cost would even out the initial high price.

According to the Defence Procurement Policy, the offset clause makes it mandatory for the manufacturer to source 50 per cent of the value from India.

Strategic partner

Mr. Matussek said Germany was keen on supplying military equipment, including submarines, for the Navy. It preferred to have India as a strategic partner and, precisely for that reason, shelved the decision to supply similar equipment to Pakistan, he said.

As for the IAF’s mid-air refuel tanker, Mr. Matussek said the deal appeared to have hit a snag, with clearance stuck in the Defence Ministry. Although there is no official confirmation, reports indicate that Airbus A330 is preferred to Boeing.