F-18 of IAF

[Sargodhian_Eagle]

If IAF chooses F-18 or rafale then wht affect will be impected on PAF fleet?
Wht will PAF fr these ACs?

 

[saiko]

I don't think the F-18 would change much unless, unless we are talking about EA-18Gs. But the Su-30MKI is already a bigger problem.

The Rafale, that's a trickier question since the capabilities of the SPECTRA defensive suite are still a question mark. Simulations done by various think tanks seem to put the Su-35 and Rafale at about par, so tough to say.

But Pakistan doesn't need to match the IAF in every way, only in the right ways. No matter how expensive an airplane is, it is still vulnerable to a much cheaper aircraft that can see it on radar and has a capable AAM to shoot it down with.

 

[anoopsaxena76]

Hi,
I doubt though that Super Hornets would be something that India would buy. Just MHO.

Regards,
Anoop.

 

[sancho]

I don't think the F-18 would change much unless, unless we are talking about EA-18Gs. But the Su-30MKI is already a bigger problem.

The Rafale, that's a trickier question since the capabilities of the SPECTRA defensive suite are still a question mark. Simulations done by various think tanks seem to put the Su-35 and Rafale at about par, so tough to say.

But Pakistan doesn't need to match the IAF in every way, only in the right ways. No matter how expensive an airplane is, it is still vulnerable to a much cheaper aircraft that can see it on radar and has a capable AAM to shoot it down with.

Can you tell me why you see the Mki as a bigger problem? F18 Sh comes with a good and proven AESA radar and many good weapons, also it RCS must be smaller right?

 

[sohailbutt]

F-18 is not a fighter like f-16, rafale, eurofighter, or anyother fighters it is up against, it's basic role is to provide support to ground troops, which is why it is used as a prime weapon on US aircraft carrier's believe me a hornet pilot would not like to come face to face with f-16's and other fighters which it might face in the future if selected, coz it will be outperformed by its rival's. but yeah it will surely have a technological edge over all its rivals.

chances r slim that f-18 will make up into iaf.

 

[Shiny Capstar]

I don't think the F-18 would change much unless, unless we are talking about EA-18Gs. But the Su-30MKI is already a bigger problem.

The Rafale, that's a trickier question since the capabilities of the SPECTRA defensive suite are still a question mark. Simulations done by various think tanks seem to put the Su-35 and Rafale at about par, so tough to say.

But Pakistan doesn't need to match the IAF in every way, only in the right ways. No matter how expensive an airplane is, it is still vulnerable to a much cheaper aircraft that can see it on radar and has a capable AAM to shoot it down with.

I am quite sure that the French Government will not let the SPECTRA suite be exported, no matter how much Dassault needs the money. It is one of those toys that you don't put on export aircraft.

 

[blain2]

I am quite sure that the French Government will not let the SPECTRA suite be exported, no matter how much Dassault needs the money. It is one of those toys that you don't put on export aircraft.

Spectra would not be coming with a ToT but it will be part of any Rafale purchase. Without Spectra, Rafale does not have much to offer.

 

[Contrarian]

Spectra would not be coming with a ToT but it will be part of any Rafale purchase. Without Spectra, Rafale does not have much to offer.

Why do they keep harping on the 'omni role' thing? Whats that all about mate? Wont Tranche 3 Typhoons be just as good strike platforms as the 'omni role' rafale? I have been thoroughly confused by their marketing of the Rafale's capabilities vis-a-vis Typhoon and others!

 

[sancho]

Why do they keep harping on the 'omni role' thing? Whats that all about mate? Wont Tranche 3 Typhoons be just as good strike platforms as the 'omni role' rafale? I have been thoroughly confused by their marketing of the Rafale's capabilities vis-a-vis Typhoon and others!

I think the difference between multi role and omni role is not only that it's good in strike role. It's more about the capability to replace carrier aircrafts also!
That makes Rafale something special between the european fighters, cause EF and Gripen can't do that and if I'm right that was one reason why France left the EF consortium.
For India that could be a reason too, cause if we take Rafale for IAF, we could also take Rafale for IN new carriers instead of Mig 29 K.

 

[anoopsaxena76]

I think the difference between multi role and omni role is not only that it's good in strike role. It's more about the capability to replace carrier aircrafts also!
That makes Rafale something special between the european fighters, cause EF and Gripen can't do that and if I'm right that was one reason why France left the EF consortium.
For India that could be a reason too, cause if we take Rafale for IAF, we could also take Rafale for IN new carriers instead of Mig 29 K.

I disagree in MHO here. Which Aircraft Carrier do you have in mind for the Rafales? If it is Admiral Gorshkov, then it is a package deal with Russia. Can't default on that and if it is the indigenous one then that's a very very long way off. And INS Viraat may become too old to carry Rafales by the time India inks this deal.

Besides the naval version is a single seater, which has it's disadvantages. Perhaps Mr. Murad (if he reads this post) can enlighten us here as to which is better in what conditions. From what I gather, most aircraft designs post Gulf War, have been pro two-seat configuration.

Also, correct me if I am wrong, but French did not bring their Rafales for Aero-India 2009. Would I read too much into that? I would read just what one should. For a prospective customer, and such a huge order at that, I would always take a plane out to display.

Regards,
Anoop.

Regards,
Anoop.

 

[godsavetheworld]

India would be least interested in buying an aircraft of make similar being owned by its rivals. The only cent worth spending is the one which increases the gap by a dollar.

 

[zombie:-)]

India would be least interested in buying an aircraft of make similar being owned by its rivals. The only cent worth spending is the one which increases the gap by a dollar.

right now american fighters though are good have to be seen from the diplomatic viewpoint too and seriously obamas administration is not sending good signs MMRCA IS MAINLY INTENDED TO REPLACE STRIKE AIRCRAFT hence IAF would be looking primarily at strike capabilities and next comes air superiority not like the Ef or the rafale way of development air defense first strike later ...however good ther aircraft be for air superiority role it should be good in strike first..

 

[anoopsaxena76]

India would be least interested in buying an aircraft of make similar being owned by its rivals. The only cent worth spending is the one which increases the gap by a dollar.

Hi,
Just wondering, which aircraft?

Regards,
Anoop.

 

[godsavetheworld]

right now american fighters though are good have to be seen from the diplomatic viewpoint too and seriously obamas administration is not sending good signs MMRCA IS MAINLY INTENDED TO REPLACE STRIKE AIRCRAFT hence IAF would be looking primarily at strike capabilities and next comes air superiority not like the Ef or the rafale way of development air defense first strike later ...however good ther aircraft be for air superiority role it should be good in strike first..

India has had a close shave when it comes to buying equipment from an industry selling equipments to rivals its self. However it has coincidently been a good thing in the past when Pakistan placed a large scale order to a Swedish company for Alipne suits, it alerted the Indian estabilishment and they launched Operation Meghdoot well in time and we today rule Siachen.

But when it comes to fighters, the golden rule is to keep your material scrects. This was the reason why India droped the F-15 programme in 1994 and went for Sukhoi's instead and today we rejoice over the superiority of Su-30MKI over an F-15/16.

 

[anoopsaxena76]

But when it comes to fighters, the golden rule is to keep your material scrects. This was the reason why India droped the F-15 programme in 1994 and went for Sukhoi's instead and today we rejoice over the superiority of Su-30MKI over an F-15/16.

Yes but that is an option with the seller not the buyer. I disagree India has done anything of the kind that you mention.

Regards,
Anoop.