PAF's possible answer to MRCA

[x_man]

@ Luftwaffe

Well, once you have more than 3000 jets and 5000 pilots to take care of , one cannot have only J-10s or JF-17s or SU-27/30s….Can they ??? Want to know the reason?…Again the same old Economics...

Most of the airforces have a Base Jet…i.e. the first fighter that a young graduate flies, polishes his fighting skills and to gain enough experience on it to prepare him/her self to convert onto the more sophisticated jets and so on….that’s how generally the fighter training works…The current base fighter for PAF is F-7, for IAF its Mig-21 , USAF its F-16 and for PLAAF its also J-7, Q-5 ….The typical characteristics of base fighter are that they are cheaper, have simplified avionics / systems , sturdy , easy to handle in all flight regimes, cost-effective to operate and they are always in abundance….

Back in 70s and 80s, PLAAF operated around 3000 J-6s and that’s how they still operate: A force of sheer numbers. However, with their economic growth, advancement in technology and global exposure, there is a definite improvement in the quality of their fighters and ultimately numbers will come down while maintaining a qualitative edge. But until then, to satisfy the appetite of fighter flying for their huge pilot force, they will still rely on numbers and you will continue to see the J-7s, Q-5s , J-8 etc..

 

[p2prada]

@ Luftwaffe

Well, once you have more than 3000 jets and 5000 pilots to take care of , one cannot have only J-10s or JF-17s or SU-27/30s….Can they ??? Want to know the reason?…Again the same old Economics...

Most of the airforces have a Base Jet…i.e. the first fighter that a young graduate flies, polishes his fighting skills and to gain enough experience on it to prepare him/her self to convert onto the more sophisticated jets and so on….that’s how generally the fighter training works…The current base fighter for PAF is F-7, for IAF its Mig-21 , USAF its F-16 and for PLAAF its also J-7, Q-5 ….The typical characteristics of base fighter are that they are cheaper, have simplified avionics / systems , sturdy , easy to handle in all flight regimes, cost-effective to operate and they are always in abundance….

Back in 70s and 80s, PLAAF operated around 3000 J-6s and that’s how they still operate: A force of sheer numbers. However, with their economic growth, advancement in technology and global exposure, there is a definite improvement in the quality of their fighters and ultimately numbers will come down while maintaining a qualitative edge. But until then, to satisfy the appetite of fighter flying for their huge pilot force, they will still rely on numbers and you will continue to see the J-7s, Q-5s , J-8 etc..

What???

Do the Chinese prefer the Js and Qs over the JF-17????

If they really want to satisfy the appetite of fighter flying for their huge pilot force then atleast a few JF-17s is in order rather than just keeping it for export.

 

[Myth_buster_1]

What???

Do the Chinese prefer the Js and Qs over the JF-17????

If they really want to satisfy the appetite of fighter flying for their huge pilot force then atleast a few JF-17s is in order rather than just keeping it for export.

each air force have their own requirements. like PAF may prefer F-16 block 15 over chinese J-10 and china prefers J-10 or twin engine MRCA over JF-17. recently their was an article on possible chinese jf-17 purchase.

 

[x_man]

What???

Do the Chinese prefer the Js and Qs over the JF-17????

If they really want to satisfy the appetite of fighter flying for their huge pilot force then atleast a few JF-17s is in order rather than just keeping it for export.

You probably never read my post completely and have started to jump to the conclusion…

I was speaking in relation to the base jet….At least read the first two and the last two lines again of my last post…Please also have a look at the PLAAF line up and you should get the answer to your query...

 

[Kharian_Beast]

I like the idea of this thread and believe that this question should be taken seriously. Within the next 5 years India will be operating 4.5-5 gen aircraft as their front line fighters, all packing AESA, BVR, with top of the line engines and avionics, helmet mounted sights and thrust vectoring or super cruise. This is worrying because our F-16 will be hard pressed to match a Rafale or Typhoon, even the Super Hornet would cause serious problems with its radar, and our F-16 will lose its advantage due to sheer numbers alone. I don't want to compare the JF-17 yet to a Block 60 F-16 or a modified Gripen, so we need a serious deterrent...J10 or FC-20 is basically a legacy era F-16, what's the point of buying them? They have never been tested in battle and China only has 100 of them while the F-16 has proven itself and there are more than 4,000 flying around in the world today.

And remember, whatever you hear, J10B or Super Dragon is a paper dragon and will remain one for the foreseeable future. By the time China puts one in the air for evaluation, India will have started inducting MRCA candidate.

We need to evaluate real aircraft in a similar manner in a similar schedule as the MRCA program otherwise the balance in air power will be completely with India if it isn't already due to the SU-30 threat.

I am against purchasing 2-3 squadrons of FC-20. Maximum amount of capital should be reserved for our next front line fighter, or the expenditure can be shifted to JF-17 program instead.

My personal choice would be Eurofighter if India doesn't choose it. If they were to choose it I would go with Gripen NG. Let j10 develop and mature into what it was supposed to be, and once it has, let it be incorporated amongst the Typhoon or Gripen squadrons. Having the right fighter planes is much more important than any other equipment issue in the entire military.

 

[Kharian_Beast]

I also think ToT is not that vital for a small order (under 50 aircraft).

 

[p2prada]

You probably never read my post completely and have started to jump to the conclusion…

I was speaking in relation to the base jet….At least read the first two and the last two lines again of my last post…Please also have a look at the PLAAF line up and you should get the answer to your query...

zzz

Base jet or frontline fighter. PLAAF can afford it. Why are they going for a lot of Js and Qs when they can atleast invest in JF-17.
Instead of inducting 5 squadrons of Qs, they can invest in 5 squadrons of JF-17.

And Please, PLAAF is not inducting the old fighters because they need planes to fly. They are inducting them cause even in todays world these old vintage fighters still pack a lot of firepower. Why else do u think PAF is inducting PGs or IAF with Bisons.

 

[p2prada]

I like the idea of this thread and believe that this question should be taken seriously. Within the next 5 years India will be operating 4.5-5 gen aircraft as their front line fighters, all packing AESA, BVR, with top of the line engines and avionics, helmet mounted sights and thrust vectoring or super cruise. This is worrying because our F-16 will be hard pressed to match a Rafale or Typhoon, even the Super Hornet would cause serious problems with its radar, and our F-16 will lose its advantage due to sheer numbers alone. I don't want to compare the JF-17 yet to a Block 60 F-16 or a modified Gripen, so we need a serious deterrent...J10 or FC-20 is basically a legacy era F-16, what's the point of buying them? They have never been tested in battle and China only has 100 of them while the F-16 has proven itself and there are more than 4,000 flying around in the world today.

And remember, whatever you hear, J10B or Super Dragon is a paper dragon and will remain one for the foreseeable future. By the time China puts one in the air for evaluation, India will have started inducting MRCA candidate.

We need to evaluate real aircraft in a similar manner in a similar schedule as the MRCA program otherwise the balance in air power will be completely with India if it isn't already due to the SU-30 threat.

I am against purchasing 2-3 squadrons of FC-20. Maximum amount of capital should be reserved for our next front line fighter, or the expenditure can be shifted to JF-17 program instead.

My personal choice would be Eurofighter if India doesn't choose it. If they were to choose it I would go with Gripen NG. Let j10 develop and mature into what it was supposed to be, and once it has, let it be incorporated amongst the Typhoon or Gripen squadrons. Having the right fighter planes is much more important than any other equipment issue in the entire military.

Thank You for being realistic. There are a few more choices for PAF. Rafale is a good choice. It is actually one of the best options for both IAF and PAF compared to EF or SH. Gripen NG is a good option too.

 

[p2prada]

I also think ToT is not that vital for a small order (under 50 aircraft).

I beg to differ. ToT is vital for any number of planes you operate. It considerably reduces maintainance costs and servicing. It is just that ToT will increase the bill for purchasing the planes.

 

[Kharian_Beast]

I beg to differ. ToT is vital for any number of planes you operate. It considerably reduces maintainance costs and servicing. It is just that ToT will increase the bill for purchasing the planes.

Yes though there might be roadblocks for AESA transfer. For the MRCA, have you guys been offered ToT on the western radars as well? I was under the impression that only Russia was offering full tot including radar and that France was looking for funds for it's Rafale AESA which wasn't part of the Dassault proposal for the Rafale.

 

[Kharian_Beast]

Thank You for being realistic. There are a few more choices for PAF. Rafale is a good choice. It is actually one of the best options for both IAF and PAF compared to EF or SH. Gripen NG is a good option too.

Rafale carrier variant would be nice option for India, though for some reason I think Super Hornet will be favored. In which ways do you think Rafale is superior to EF for India and Pak? Just curious, I don't know too much about these planes other than the European consortium fulfilled all orders and obligations while France is still scurrying to fill its own orders and find customers. The data regarding the aircraft seems to point in a small favor to EF in terms of range, thrust to weight, A2G capability (current) and WVR maneuverability though that's only from what I've glanced over recently. Rafale has had some problems in Afghanistan I hear as well though nothing major.

 

[p2prada]

Yes though there might be roadblocks for AESA transfer. For the MRCA, have you guys been offered ToT on the western radars as well? I was under the impression that only Russia was offering full tot including radar and that France was looking for funds for it's Rafale AESA which wasn't part of the Dassault proposal for the Rafale.

France to sell Rafale fighter to India

Paris, Nov 05: The French government has cleared the full transfer of technology
for the Rafale combat jet that is one of the six aircraft in contention for an Indian Air Force (IAF) order for 126 fighters in a deal worth USD 10 billion, its manufacturer Dassault Aviation says.

"When we talk about technology transfer, we mean full technology transfer and not in bits and pieces," JPHP Chabriol, Dassault's senior vice president for military sales, told a group of visiting Indian journalists at the company's headquarters here.

"The way we work, we first have to obtain clearance of the government before putting in our proposal. If we win the order, we can begin work on transferring technology from day one - unlike our competition," he added.

The technology transfer would include that of a cutting edge radar that gives the Rafale the ability to also function as a close battlefield support airborne warning and control system (AWACS), Chabriol maintained, adding that the software source code would also be provided with the equipment.

The Advanced Extended Search Array (AESA) radar that Dassault is offering is still under development by French aerospace giant Thales, a partner in the Rafale project, and is expected to be integrated with the aircraft by 2012, around which time the IAF is expected to narrow down its choice of aircraft.

"We have full faith in the competency of Thales to deliver a top of the line AESA radar," Chabriol added.

Transfer of technology is a key clause in the Defence Policy-2006 (DPP-2006) that governs India's purchases of military hardware. Two other companies in the fray - Boeing and European conglomerate Eurofighter - are also offering an AESA radar with their F/A-18 Super Hornet and Typhoon respectively but say the transfer of this technology would be dependent to the extent the American government permits as the radar's manufacturer is US electronics giant Raytheon.

At least one of these two companies has said they would definitely not transfer the software source code that enables the programming of the radar. What this means is that the IAF would have to specify the mission parameters to enable the manufacturer configure the radar.

Defence analysts point out that this could seriously compromise India's national security as the IAF would not be able to re-programme the radar should it wish to at a later stage.

"This is not an issue with us. We will not only fully transfer the technology for the AESA radar but also provide the software source code so that that the IAF can programme it in the way it wishes to," Chabriol said in response to a specific query.

Apart from the Rafale, the F/A-18 and the Typhoon, the other aircraft in the fray are the Lockheed Martin F-16, the Saab Grippen and the MiG-35, which is essentially an upgraded version of the MiG-29 that the IAF already operates.

The IAF had floated its global tender for the jets in September 2007 and these were opened earlier this year. The technical bids are currently being evaluated after which all the six aircraft will be put through a rigorous testing process in Bangalore, Jaisalmer and Leh.

The first is meant to gauge the aircraft's ability to operate in the humid conditions of south, the second their effectiveness in the deserts of Rajasthan and the third to study their suitability in the icy Himalayan heights of Ladakh in Jammu and Kashmir.

By the time the evaluation process is complete, the size of the order is likely to rise to around 200 jets, as the IAF, which is down to 32 squadrons from a high of 39-1/2, is expected to see a further depletion of its fleet due to the retirement of some its ageing Soviet-era MiG-21 aircraft. The IAF has a sanctioned strength of 45 squadrons.

Chabriol also pointed out that being 100 percent French gave Dassault a distinct edge over its competitors on the technology transfer issue.

"The Grippen is powered by a US engine and has other US components too. Similar is the case with the Eurofighter, which has quite a few American parts. So, they would have to first seek the US government's approval. In the case of the F-18, approval would have to be sought not only of the government but also of parliament (the US Congress).

"This legislative approval is not an issue in our case," Chabriol added.

We are currently discussing this in the Indian MRCA thread.


At first Dassault did not have an AESA. Now, Thales has promised to deliver on the AESA by 2012. So, AESA was also added to the shopping list. We are not concerned with French R&D budget problems though.
Anyways, its not like the french are poor like the russians.

 

[Kharian_Beast]

In which ways do you think Rafale is superior to EF for India and Pak?

Oops...Raytheon makes the best pieces on the EF

 

[Kharian_Beast]

Oops...Raytheon makes the best pieces on the EF

60% of the Gripen is American parts as well...

Time to reconsider Rafale ?

 

[p2prada]

Rafale carrier variant would be nice option for India, though for some reason I think Super Hornet will be favored.

None of these fit on our ACs. We are going ahead with Mig-29k and N-LCA for our carriers.

In which ways do you think Rafale is superior to EF for India and Pak?

Superiority is not an issue. Both planes are good. It is just that the French are very good suppliers. Both IAF and PAF will not reel under economic sanctions. France will not place economic sanctions based on American whims and fantasies.
Other than that, French products have been in use by IAF and PAF for over 30 years now. So, familiarization with french policies and technology.

Just curious, I don't know too much about these planes other than the European consortium fulfilled all orders and obligations while France is still scurrying to fill its own orders and find customers.

Rafale went through some rough patches through its development. Rafale development cycle is longer than the EF. But, the plane is ready now. So, even if they fail in getting customers a single Indian order will boost its image.

The data regarding the aircraft seems to point in a small favor to EF in terms of range, thrust to weight, A2G capability (current) and WVR maneuverability though that's only from what I've glanced over recently. Rafale has had some problems in Afghanistan I hear as well though nothing major.

Yes, the EF has better range, payload, T/W etc. But, I dont see why the french will not be able to deliver on their plane.
It will be a pretty successful bird in the near future.