Dassault Rafale, tender | News & Discussions

[flanker143]

Gripen is much better choice though I still prefer that IAF cut the order into half and fund the domestic R&D with rest of money.

10billion$ for imports, is waste of money. Some of it should be diverted to domestic R&D on future technologies in MCA.

Just check how much USAF spends on domestic technology R&D in American universities. It runs into Billions of $.

And how much technological research IAF funds in India? Zero. Because IAF has zero-size brains. They never plan for future and always end up "importing" forever.

such a behaviour is logical and usa domestic markets hav been producing gud jets for decades , tejas is india's 2nd fighter jet dat has been in dev for ALOT of time dats why !

 

[flanker143]

although tejas has been under dev for a lot of time but stil it has come out to be gud jet (tejas mk1) and also tejas mk2 will be ready till mk1 gets produced in 3-4 years, an its gonna hav an aesa an many more advancements,

hey guys is it confirmed dat france and india are dev a m88 kaveri hybrid with 100kn thrust ?? plzz tell.

 

[Dash]

Gripen -
Combat radius: 800 km (500 mi, 432 nmi)
Ferry range: 3,200 km (2,000 mi) with Drop Tanks

Mig35-
Ferry range: 2,000 km (1,240 mi) / 3,000 km (1,860 mi) with 3 drop tanks

Want more , use force multiplier . How much area of enemy are we covering now ? ? ?
In case of war - where first engagement will occur , on Pak-Afg border or Pak-Ind border , and in that case a fighter with super-cruise has better Kinematic output to win battle.
If you didn't notice Super-cruise is giving you advantage of saving Afterburner fuel .

Thanks Prateek - See our discussion is on two things.
1. Why gripen is to be choosen?
2. Why LCA cant be made close to Gripen so that we can got for a better fighter than Gripen?....

You have already spokedn your point of view on Why Gripen will be choosen in MRCA, but not the secons one, as you are in a complete denial stage.

Mig35-
Ferry range: 2,000 km (1,240 mi) / 3,000 km (1,860 mi) with 3 drop tanks

Why compare it with Mig-35, if you think Gripen is good then compare it with F-16?, why fight F-16 with Gripen, better fight F-16 52 with F-16 block 60..makes sense??..

GE F110 engine.
145 Kn thurst with FADEC and confirmal fuel tank..
AN/APG 80 AESA - Battle proven RADAR than Selex Vixen RADAR?? which is just being tested?...at keast take time to integrate..
Combat radius - 550 KM
ferry Range - 4220 Km with drop tanks....They are saying they will improve the range too?..
11 Hard points with 7,700 Kgs of load - here is the BIG difference...
IRST, AMRAAM and everything......
Pythoon 4 or 5 may be.
Now here comes a point can you say Gripen is atleast in the same class of F-16, with all the gizmos and all. Its clearly not.

And if IAF refuses to go for F-16 for some reason then if they go for Gripen then they become inferior, according to this logic....

My own logic is if I can make LCA get close to Gripen. then I dont buy Gripen, LCA is even lower than Gripen in cost.

What political advantages you will get when you buy Gripen - Nothing
In others case you will atleast get to know a different engine, but in this case you will get to see the same engine.

LCA airframe is going to change and intakes are going to be modified and by sometime say 5-6 years LCA will be there where Gripen is. i am sure i will see this day.

However we have spoken much on this. Gripen is not a bad fighter iam saying. What Iam saying I already have a replacement for that.

 

[flanker143]

i just dont know why ppl say dat lca is inferior to gripen , lca mk2 will be the main production jet(produced in most no.s) will come with aesa and a 100kn engine , i hv heard dat lca has a payload >4000kg but how much ???

plzz tell

 

[sancho]

How come Ej2000 is better ,
Better thrust
Better Fuel consumption
Less maintenance what ????
Why EJ2000 will not require any changes ,
is it exactly same as F404IN .
Same length ,
requires same flow of air
Or just bcoz manufacturer says so

Lower diameter, 130Kg less weight, in the actual version 60/90kN thrust (in war setting up to 64/95kN thrust), the one offered for LCA should be based on the improved engine for EF tranche 3, which means between 95 and 100kN afterburner thrust and possibly 3D TVC, more ToT than the US engine offers and no airframe changes needed (yes, that is stated by EJ).

Lame statement

Lame statement, or a simple fact? If a co-development with Vixen 1000 will be offered, it will by offered by Selsex Galileo and not any Swedish company, that's why I said the Gripen NG can't offer us anything we would benefit from.

Does it make sense , then if u start comparing F16block2 vs LCA and start saying Lca better than F16.

First of all I didn't said that! Secondly if you mean LCA MK1 and F16 block 52 it does make sense, because both fighters have simliar 4. gen capabilities

Why then you started this comparison knowing current Gripen is 4.5 Gen and better .

I didn't! I purposly compared only MK1 and C/D, you brought up the NG. If you would think about it a bit more unbiased, you would see that gogbot and I have a point and how close LCA is to Gripen.
Btw, you mentioned the low RCS of Gripen, but what about LCA? It is smaller, integrates nearly twice as much composite materials, has also an Y-duct and incorporates RAM materials too, so can you really say LCA will not be at a similar level in this field too?

Just take a look at my comparison again, without bringen NG, F16, or like in the post to Dash Mig 35 in. Compare only LCA MK1 and Gripen C/D and you will see that LCA is more than close.



P.S. regarding the weapon trials of EF, I'm cross checking the article in some German forums, because some things doesn't fit. German EFs have not integrated much A2G weapons yet, so it would be surprising if they used them. Also it is mentioned that A2G missiles was used and till now not a single A2G missile was integrated, so it would be interesting to see which one it was.

 

[KEETARP]

Why LCA cant be made close to Gripen so that we can got for a better fighter than Gripen?..

i just dont know why ppl say dat lca is inferior to gripen , lca mk2 will be the main production jet(produced in most no.s) will come with aesa and a 100kn engine , i hv heard dat lca has a payload >4000kg but how much ???
plzz tell

And we return to same cycle ,
I echoed that point 10 times in my post ,
and atleast 5 times when day LCH flew and everyone was going - Its best , nothing can close etc etc . same case LCH/LCA vs others.

I for last time explain this point , LCA just like LCH is a fighter made according to IAF requirements that's it . It was and will be best replacement for Mig-21and role it performs .
There is no point in comparing it to gripen ,
If IAF feels Gripen is best for MRCA ,it would simply order Gripen , and LCA will be inducted as per plan and numbers there is no threat to LCA.
Turn the cycle 5 years back and you would know the difference . Forget Gripen IAF was almost set to order 126 Mirage2000-5 , now tell me isnt LCA similar to Mirage ,would that have killed LCA .
Air force of Pakistan or China would have modernized acc to their plans , and we wouldn't be sitting here saying buy Eurofighter .

Why is Gripen better than LCA , cmon DASH i wrote such a long post back . U can only compare latest build vs latest build .
Like F16bl52+/60 vs Mig29k/35
LCA-LSP/Mark1 vs Gripen NG , compare and see the difference .
When you talk of 2015 and LCAmk2 why not talk about Gripen XL . Both are under development . If DRDO is working to improve LCA so are SAAB .
By the time you field AESA , SAAB would be fielding Ga-Ni based module .
By the time you get IRST , SAAB would be fielding dual-band long range IR passive sensor.
By the time you get RWR , saab would be fielding Active cancellation Ew suite . Why the hell discuss future here . Tech changes every minute
Dont believe me
See the patent filed by SAAB-
(WO/2003/098739) STEALTH CRAFT

and one of concepts -

Why compare it with Mig-35, if you think Gripen is good then compare it with F-16?, why fight F-16 with Gripen, better fight F-16 52 with F-16 block 60..makes sense??..

Compare it , I am ready . Lets have a shot .
You may have more thrust but still T/W ratio of Gripen is better and will be more agile . See which jet dominates
Better RCS
Better Missile
Gripen can land and take-off from Roads/bombed airfield .
Can land , hot refuel in i minute and be air-borne again . Each minute I am launching many more air-crafts .
For Indian scenario , has more than enough fuel and Range to perform all functions and in toughest/Rough situation .

Don't compare extra range and extra load etc .
You always fight in formation ,
20 gripen+20 MKI against xyx , on every inch of order in quick time
Once i destroy XYZ ,
Gripen can keep bombing for months , its easy & cost effective
I save hell lot of money for more simulators,Training for pilot's skill .

In war these things count , exactly what IAF and MKI needs for compliment .
Exactly why Gripen is popular among PILOTS , IAF , Defence expert , Journos , Ex-retired pilots .
Do anything , you simply can't beat a Technological superior and robust design .

Why Brazil's air-force prefers Gripen , that is the first choice ahead of Rafale . Its a pitty Lula and sarkozy have planned for resort in Paris and rafale is going to win. On performance Gripen won in Brazil

 

[gogbot]

Believe me many believe that IA is useless , corrupt and runs behind foreign arms .Officers are only interested in money-making. I have seen many statements here
While DRDO is full of saint who haven't done a single mistake and have always given superior tech without any delay .
IA is killing DRDO ,Arjun , Yes , and IA wants India doomed

There are no absolutes.

It is undeniable that corruption was responsible for what happened with the tank , unless you want to tell me IA is so irresponsible that they ere blissfully unaware to the capabilities of their own tanks.

IA is not corrupt as whole , but there were undeniable elements within the armed forces that tried to undermine the Tank.

DRDO made the tank , and it arrived late. But DRDO did their job , but they were not to blame for the controversy that would follow.

If i am wrong, then please correct.

But you never respond to a single one of my posts , and then take my words in the absolute format.
e.g
When i say harm , it become kill .

Whys is every one looking at thing in such black and white terms.

 

[Hindustan Fighter]

I would also like to point out one of the most important advantages that Gripen offers over other competitors, they are offering integration of weapons of India's choice. Which means if I understand that we can have either of Indian, Russian, European and/ or American weapons on this fighter which will provide us the weapons versatility and also reduce cost due to commonality of weapons already available in IAF.

 

[flanker143]

lca is made acc to iaf's rquirement and it is a replacement for mig 21 , this fact does'nt mean prove that lca cant be compared to gripen , f22 is also made acc to usaf requiements and it is a replacement for f 15 , this does't mean it's justs like f 15 , same goes for lca (this is just an eg)

f15 earlier was just an air superiority fighter but now its a multirolefighter bomber roles keep changing !!!!!!!

 

[KEETARP]

the one offered for LCA should be based on the improved engine for EF tranche 3, which means between 95 and 100kN afterburner thrust and possibly 3D TVC, more ToT than the US engine offers and no airframe changes needed (yes, that is stated by EJ)

F414 - Maximum thrust: 22,000 lbf (98 kN)
Ej2000- (90Kn)

Should be , TVC is not developed .
Why pay additionally for it , when Snmeca and Kaveri will be ready by time EJ2000 finishes
Manufacturer's word and saying is when reality comes .
EADS can offer Hawk , but does it provide in Reality transfer of all tools and know how of tech .
Simply manufacturing under licence dosen't count .

If a co-development with Vixen 1000 will be offered, it will by offered by Selsex Galileo and not any Swedish company, that's why I said the Gripen NG can't offer us anything we would benefit from.

You have to ink a separate deal with Selex , simply buying Eurofighter from EADS dosen't gets you that . And you can tie up Selex eeven if you purchase Mig35 . No connection
Tell me why you need Selex so badly - E/L is much more better IMO.

Secondly if you mean LCA MK1 and F16 block 52 it does make sense, because both fighters have simliar 4. gen capabilities

Great , now you say Block52 = LCA , i rest my case ,

Btw, you mentioned the low RCS of Gripen, but what about LCA? It is smaller, integrates nearly twice as much composite materials, has also an Y-duct and incorporates RAM materials too, so can you really say LCA will not be at a similar level in this field too?

Check out Sudhir's post on LCA thread esp the last 3 lines , See what RCS is mentioned there .

Compare only LCA MK1 and Gripen C/D and you will see that LCA is more than close

Why compare in first place , and if so bent on it ,
why compare an old Gripen which has stopped production and will never come in IAF service .

 

[KEETARP]

Gog bot ,
you dig up old reports and see on what grounds Arjun was rejected in 2000 , and what was problem with Infrastructure that IA had for 3 decades .

For rest of it ,
I am PM to Indian Army sir , he will explain much better .

 

[sancho]

I would also like to point out one of the most important advantages that Gripen offers over other competitors, they are offering integration of weapons of India's choice. Which means if I understand that we can have either of Indian, Russian, European and/ or American weapons on this fighter which will provide us the weapons versatility and also reduce cost due to commonality of weapons already available in IAF.

That's correct that it can use different weapons, but that doesn't mean IAF will buy weapons from different origins. They will buy either European, or US missiles and if necessary they will use Russian missiles from our Mig 29, or Flankers too. The only other aircraft that offers weapon commonality (except the Mig 35 of course) to other fighters in IAF fleet is the Rafale. It can carry all weapons that the Mirage 2000s and Jaguars can use too, which reduces logistics too.
Personally I think if we go to any European fighter, IAF would also by only European A2A weapons and not US, because that would mean the addition of new weapons and logistics.

 

[Hindustan Fighter]

Yes Sancho you are right, but to my knowledge Mig 35 can only use russian weapons and Rafale can have french and other European weapons. But with Gripen we can not only have new European weapons but also can integrate weapons already available in IAF inventory i.e. Astra, Mica that will come with upgardes mirage 2000-5, Russian BVR already available with MKI and Migs. this can provide us flexibility and may have impact in war if crisis situation arises due to stock availability

 

[sancho]

F414 - Maximum thrust: 22,000 lbf (98 kN)
Ej2000- (90Kn)

Should be , TVC is not developed .
Why pay additionally for it , when Snmeca and Kaveri will be ready by time EJ2000 finishes
Manufacturer's word and saying is when reality comes .
EADS can offer Hawk , but does it provide in Reality transfer of all tools and know how of tech .
Simply manufacturing under licence dosen't count .

TVC was developed nearly decade ago and is tested in prototype versions, the EF didn't needed it yet, that's why they didn't integrated it, but that could change now with tranche 3. Kaveri-Snecma will not be used in LCA MK2, because MoD wants a ready and proven engine, especially on a single engine fighter where engine failours means loss of the fighter too.
Btw, I didn't said we must take TVC, I said it is offered with that option, the F414 does not.
Buddy, EADS is not the manufacturer of HAWK trainers, BAE is!

You have to ink a separate deal with Selex , simply buying Eurofighter from EADS dosen't gets you that . And you can tie up Selex eeven if you purchase Mig35 . No connection
Tell me why you need Selex so badly - E/L is much more better IMO.

Selsex with Mig 35? Sure, the latest European radar on a Russian fighter, nobody of them will agree to this!
Also I never said we need Selsex, the Vixen 1000, RBE 2 AA and Zhuk AE are possible options and would give commonality, so reduced costs. Personally I think the 2052 would be good, but I have doubts that we would get it in full capabilities, because it contends US parts and they not allowed the sale to be used in Gripen NG for IAF before. That also could be the reason why MoD now wants a co-debelopment partner, Elta can still help is such a development, even without the US parts, but in this case Russians and Europeans will be options too. With this radar competition we can chose which partner offers the most.

Great , now you say Block52 = LCA , i rest my case ,

LOL, don't put words in my mouth, I said they are the same 4th gen and that is not deniable!

Check out Sudhir's post on LCA thread esp the last 3 lines , See what RCS is mentioned there .

Which one, link, number?

Why compare in first place , and if so bent on it ,
why compare an old Gripen which has stopped production and will never come in IAF service .

Once again, because we have the specs of MK 1 and C/D and not to speculate about MK2 specs that are not finalised yet.
Gripen C/D can't do anything that the LCA MK1 can't and that is a fact, because both are so similar in design and capabilties. It still might have some slight advantages, but therefor the MK1 is nearly half as costly.
That's why I said, if you compare these 2 on a fair basis, you can't disagree that it is more than close to Gripen and that LCA has the potential to be a good 4.5 gen fighter too, even close to Gripen NG.

 

[sancho]

Yes Sancho you are right, but to my knowledge Mig 35 can only use russian weapons and Rafale can have french and other European weapons. But with Gripen we can not only have new European weapons but also can integrate weapons already available in IAF inventory i.e. Astra, Mica that will come with upgardes mirage 2000-5, Russian BVR already available with MKI and Migs. this can provide us flexibility and may have impact in war if crisis situation arises due to stock availability

In generall every fighter can integrate more different missiles, also Indian missiles, it depends only on the funding to integrate them and if the vendor allows the integration. The Rafale is wired to use AMRAAM for example too and they have offered the integration of Brazilian weapons in their competition also, so it shouldn't be a problem for our weapons. Whereas I doubt that the Russian will allow us western weapons on their fighters, Indian weapons will be the maximum.
The best choices in the weapon field are Gripen NG and Rafale, because they add latest European weapons, but can use older weapons in IAF inventory too. The other western fighters will need US A2G weapons anyway and can't use older weapons of IAF fighters.