Dassault Rafale, tender | News & Discussions

[sudhir007]

i think it is 3time is news has been posted

 

[sancho]

i donno why but i have this feeling that SH is more suitable for carrier borne operations than air force ones..

Of course, because it was designed for that aim. Stronger airframe and gears, a hook for arrested landings..., but for the strike role in IAF it wouldn't a bad choice. However, I think the time for dedicated ground attack fighters in IAF should be over now.

 

[atul0408]

i donno why but i have this feeling that SH is more suitable for carrier borne operations than air force ones..

GUys by when we are expecting the decision to come for MRCA>>>???

R WE wating for OBama to arrive in sept/October...???

 

[sancho]

COLUMN: M-MRCA, A Difficult Choice For The IAF

By Air Commodore (Retd) Ramesh Phadke

The trial phase of the proposed purchase of the Medium Multi-Role Combat Aircraft (MMRCA) is nearing completion. Last heard, the Swedish JAS-39 Gripen was not able to take part as the company had brought a different (older?) model for trials supposedly because the new Next Generation model proposed for India was undergoing some trials in Sweden. Whatever the truth, the competition is heating up.

What should be the criteria for the final choice? The IAF strength has dwindled to some 30 squadrons in the last few years. But the effect has been mitigated to some extent by the induction of the Su-30, which, with its multi-role capability, long range and highly advanced avionics and armament suite, is far more capable than the phased out fighters such as the MiG-25, MiG-23 (MF/BN), MiG-21 and some others. In any case the Su-30, Mirage-2000, MiG-29 and Jaguar combination have proved themselves in many joint exercises with the air forces of Singapore, the UK and US. Does it then mean that simply getting more Su-30s, and according to the Air Chief, some 150 more are being ordered, would make up the shortfall?

The Su-30 is a very large and heavy twin-engined fighter in the 30 ton class (empty weight: 18,400 kg, loaded weight: 24,900 kg, and maximum take-off weight: 38,000 kg), two engines of 131 kN max after burner thrust each) which gives a thrust to weight ratio at loaded weight of 1.07 and 1.15 with 50 per cent fuel. Its price is reportedly in the US$ 34-53 million range. That is not something to be scoffed at. Given such sterling qualities and a long, if at times uneven relationship with its manufacturer, Russia, why is the IAF looking for another fighter?

The main reasons could be to diversify the sources of foreign supply, access Western technologies, work out mutually beneficial Joint Venture (JV) deals and perhaps leverage the buy for larger foreign policy goals. Given the rapidly changing regional geopolitical scenario, the last factor seems critically important. Having set the background straight, let us now look at the six contenders for the MMRCA competition.

All six contenders are equipped with state-of-the-art avionics and AESA (Active Electronically Scanned Array) airborne radar with only marginal differences in performance. There is also little difference in their armament carrying capacity and, where needed, such changes/modifications should be possible.

The French Dassault Rafale, the European Consortium Eurofighter Typhoon and the American Boeing F/A-18 Super Hornet are all twin-engined fighters in the 25-30 ton class. All of them are reportedly very expensive, with reported prices ranging from Euro 48 million for the Rafale to Euro 88 million for the Eurofighter and US$ 58 million for the Super Hornet. Admittedly, these are only notional figures and no vendor/buyer is likely to divulge the real/actual price and the services, equipment, spares/maintenance support that it might include. Would the IAF want to purchase such ‘heavy duty’ and expensive (?) aircraft?

The MiG-35 is a further development of the MiG-29K version that the Indian Navy is now inducting. It was first unveiled at Aero India Show-2007 at Bangalore. While it no doubt has some extra wing area (8-10 per cent?), smokeless (?) and supposedly the latest version of the RD-33 engine fitted in the MiG-29, the Phazotron Zhuk AE- AESA radar with additional provision for the ground attack role, LCD Multi Function Displays (MFD) and possibly the option to fit Western avionics if needed, it is not exactly a proven design nor are its life cycle costs known. Its official price is not known but going by our past experience it is likely to be low.

That leaves us with the F-16 IN Super Viper (F-16 E/F Block 60) described by Lockheed Martin as, “the most advanced and capable F-16 ever,” and the JAS-39 NG Gripen. Both these are relatively lighter aircraft at a maximum all up weight of just 16,000 kg and yet each carries an external/armament load of around 8,000 kg. They are highly manoeuvrable multi-role fighters.

The F-16 has been around for nearly 40 years but it still commands respect among the experts. It is combat proven, has operated in all parts of the world in very demanding conditions and like the freak if admirable design of the venerable MiG-21 and DC-3 Dakota, is destined to be remembered as the best multi-role fighter ever. It comes with conformal external fuel tanks to reduce drag, and the GE F110-132A engine giving a maximum afterburning thrust of 143 kN. About 4400 F-16s have been sold to 25 countries so far. The aircraft has a total accumulated flight time of some 4.5 million hours and hence the Mean Time Between Failures (MTBF) is likely to be very high. Snags and technical problems are likely to be more predictable. It should also help reduce life cycle costs to a large extent. The Saab JAS -39 Gripen is also reportedly as good. It is relatively new on the scene and has an American GE F 414G engine, which means that Sweden would have to get US permission before it is sold to India.

The issue of access to technology and how each vendor fulfils the ‘offset’ commitment is not yet known, but it is reasonable to assume that no country is likely to transfer the latest technologies without necessary safeguards and confidentiality/end-user agreements. The main issue, therefore, is one of continued reliable spares and maintenance support throughout the projected life of at least 30-40 years. Would Lockheed Martin keep the F-16 line open that long? Another sticking point may be that Pakistan also flies the same fighter. But then the Chinese air force (PLAAF) also flies the Su-30 in fairly large numbers and is likely to use them for another 30-40 years and that did not deter India from buying it in 1996. The Gripen has been offered at reduced cost to Bulgaria, so some further bargaining might be possible. The F-16 could also cost India less if the Foreign Military Sales (FMS) route is followed but one cannot predict how the Obama administration would handle the deal and, who knows, Lockheed Martin might even transfer the entire production line to India as was once promised in the case of another American fighter the F-5.

There was some talk of the contract being split between two vendors and a separate tender for the AESA radar. This, in my opinion, might have been conjectured to meet the Tejas LCS radar requirements. India is already committed to buying six C-130J, 10 C-17 Globemaster heavy lift aircraft and other equipment from the US and hence it might become somewhat easy to buy additional GE 404 or more powerful engines for the indigenous LCA.

In the final analysis, it seems that the political factor is likely to influence the choice of the MMRCA more heavily than just the performance parameters. As an old fighter pilot, however, I would always pitch for a light, easily manoeuvrable, agile and relatively inexpensive fighter that delivers every time, generates high sortie rates and is easy to maintain and train on a day to day peace time schedule. What counts in war is the number of fighters one can launch every hour, every day, day after day, with full confidence and ease of operation.

LiveFist - The Best of Indian Defence: COLUMN: M-MRCA, A Difficult Choice For The IAF

 

[sudhir007]

LiveFist - The Best of Indian Defence: FLASH! Gripen Demo Clears Leh Trials!

The Gripen Demo aircraft, which landed at Air Force Station Jamnagar, Gujarat on Monday, cleared its high altitude trials in Leh today. Air Force sources confirmed to LiveFist that the aircraft went through the full routine of tests that the Gripen-D did earlier this year. IAF pilots already got a chance to fly the Gripen Demo in the first week of April at Linkoping, Sweden, but calling the Demo airplane to India was necessary to complete all the demands in the field evaluation test (FET) plan.

 

[KEETARP]

A Recent IAF ex-Fighter pilot's view on MRCA and his views.
Must read
MMRCA: A difficult choice for the IAF | Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses

IDSA COMMENT

MMRCA: A difficult choice for the IAF
Ramesh Phadke
May 19, 2010
In the final analysis, it seems that the political factor is likely to influence the choice of the MMRCA more heavily than just the performance parameters. As an old fighter pilot, however, I would always pitch for a light, easily manoeuvrable, agile and relatively inexpensive fighter that delivers every time, generates high sortie rates and is easy to maintain and train on a day to day peace time schedule. What counts in war is the number of fighters one can launch every hour, every day, day after day, with full confidence and ease of operation.

 

[FlyingSpagetti]

^^^^^^^^
Great news Sudhir , thanks

Like to share a Recent IAF ex-Fighter pilot's view on MRCA and his views.
Must read
MMRCA: A difficult choice for the IAF | Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses

Sadly Indian politicians are more about satisfying others rather than protecting their motherland eg nehru, chidambram etc etc

 

[FlyingSpagetti]

I hope u ppl buy MIG-35

 

[sancho]

^^^^^^^^
Great news Sudhir , thanks

Like to share a Recent IAF ex-Fighter pilot's view on MRCA and his views.
Must read
MMRCA: A difficult choice for the IAF | Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses

Hi Prateek, I posted the same report, but from livefist above and the requirments that he sees as most important, are pretty much the same that I found important (besides the capabilities of the fighter itself):

The main reasons could be to diversify the sources of foreign supply, access Western technologies, work out mutually beneficial Joint Venture (JV) deals and perhaps leverage the buy for larger foreign policy goals. Given the rapidly changing regional geopolitical scenario, the last factor seems critically important.

Diversify the sources of foreign supply, access Western technologies, eliminates the Mig of course and should prefer western fighters with most possible ToT. The US fighters will have a big problem here, because the US gov will not share their techs with us, so that will be very limited, which leaves only the Europeans.
The only European fighters that can offer full ToT are Rafale and EF, the US fighters instead are only the best for the last criteria, political benefits for foreign policy goals.

But what I found interesting is his final conclusion:

As an old fighter pilot, however, I would always pitch for a light, easily manoeuvrable, agile and relatively inexpensive fighter that delivers every time, generates high sortie rates and is easy to maintain and train on a day to day peace time schedule. What counts in war is the number of fighters one can launch every hour, every day, day after day, with full confidence and ease of operation.

So his choice would be F16 IN, or Gripen NG, because he seems to see numbers as most important. But as we know, the Gripen NG won't give any political benefits, which is mostlikely the same reason why they will lose in Brazil.

At the end, every fighter has its pros and cons of course and without knowing the real requirements of MoD, I would say every fighter except the Mig 35 has a chance.

OT. not sure if you saw it, but I answered you regarding the Bombs kits that were embargoed for the Mirage in Kargil, but the thread was deleted, so not sure if you saw it.

 

[KEETARP]

Sancho , thanks for clarification
Like you to post that Paveway links here for benefit of others.

And regarding your Analysis, its quite on the same line i believe MRCA will go
But one thing i would disagree i dont see Eurofighter having a chance more than Rafale .
It always will be toss up between what Brazil's is like . Eurofighter cost is high and is having lot of problems recently. Its A2G capability and weapons are still a big ??????

 

[sancho]

But one thing i would disagree i dont see Eurofighter having a chance more than Rafale .
It always will be toss up between what Brazil's is like . Eurofighter cost is high and is having lot of problems recently. Its A2G capability and weapons are still a big ??????

I also don't see the EF with good chances, but when the requirement is like it was mentioned in that article, only these 2 fighters fullfil them, but of course when you add the performance of each fighter the Rafale is preferable.
Yes, as I said before, Gripen NG, F18SH and Rafale should be in the final stage.

 

[Jade]

First, Americans are about too much self Interest, so F16 and F18 should not be considered at all

Regarding Rafale and Euro fighter, there are very costly and heavy, and it make sense to buy more MKI’s

MIG 35’s should not be considered as one of the main objective is to diversify supply sources

That leaves Grippen and IA should go for Grippen as TOT of Grippen would help fine tune LCA and even help build MCA

We have to remember that the objective is to get a fighter plane that fits the requirement and not to get the best fighter plane

 

[sancho]

Not an MKI, but at least a Flanker besides 2 Rafales, what a great combo!

 

[sudhir007]

Gripen NG demo flies from its nest

Last week the Gripen NG demo was making its Iinternational debut by taking part in the last phase of the Indian evaluation trials for the MMRCA (Medium Multi- Role Combat Aircraft) tender in India.
To date the aircraft has flown some 135 test flights in Sweden and is now testing its wings abroad, showing the international arena that next generation Gripen fighter development is on track.
"This achievement just shows the expertise and high technology capability that Sweden boasts in developing and manufacturing a fighter aircraft of this calibre. Several International pilots have already flown and evaluated the Gripen NG demo in Sweden, including pilots from Brazil and India and we are confident that this aircraft meets, or exceeds every operational requirement raised by the Indian Air Force," says Eddy de la Motte, Gripen Campaign Director, India.
The harsh environment of the Leh airbase, 3300m high up in the Himalayas, proved to be no match for the Swedish fighter where it cleared the high altitude trials.

 

[SpArK]

Its now official that 2 of the fighters cleared the Leh tests. which one is the other???