MMRCA: Self Goal by IAF?
- Thread starter TimeTraveller
- Start date
sancho
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2009
- Messages
- 13,011
- Reaction score
- 27
- Country
- Location
No, because it's not a choice to deploy 3 (or more) Tejas, but a necessity!Take a simple strike mission for example
Rafale:
1 x LDP
2 x fuel tanks
6 x 500lb bombs
2 x BVR missiles
2 x WVR missiles
Tejas:
1 x LDP
2 x fuel tanks
2 x 500lb bombs
0 x BVR missiles
2 x WVR missiles
So LCA can neither carry the same ammount of LGBs, nor can it carry bombs and BVR missiles, that's why you have to add more LCAs to carry the same load of a single Rafale. With the currently available configs you would need 3 x LCAs in the above mentioned strike config + at least 1 x LCA in A2A config.
1 x Rafale
=> 1 pilot
=> fly-away cost (for France including taxes) $86 million dollar
=> $12 to 16.000 dollar per hour costs
=> RCS of a single fighter
vs
4 x LCAs
=> 4 pilots
=> fly-away cost between $160 and 200 million (based on the estimated fly-way cost of Gripen between $40 and 50 million each)
=> $12 to 20.000 dollar per hour costs (based on Gripen per hour cost estimates, between $3000 and 5000 dollar each)
=> RCS of 4 fighters
Again, it's not we CAN buy 3 or 4 LCAs for 1 Rafale, but we MUST buy 3 or 4 LCAs to equal even basic roles of a single Rafale. Not to mention that LCA is not useful in long range roles, can't carry cruise or stand off missiles, doesn't have SEAD capability and even if it gets IRST or when it gets AESA is unclear so far. Not to mention that the induction of an MK2 which currently is only in design stage, was estimated at 2019. With the record of delays in the program, we shouldn't be surprised if that time line won't be met either. The first Rafale for IAF on the other side, can be available by 2016, a full squad by the end of 2017, because they are already planned for the Dassault production line in these years, with the licence production in India to start by 2018.
Even if we ignore the fact that the competition is not only about getting a new fighter, but also about ToT and high ammount of offsets to the Indian industry in return for the costs and look at the operational requirements of IAF only, the above shows why they wanted a proper MEDIUM class MRCA, that can actually provide IAF the capability to counter threats mainly at the north eastern borders.
The Sultan Erdogan
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2014
- Messages
- 331
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
indian air force is pathetic and backward. They should learn from Pakistan Air Force on how to establish a professional air force with top class leadership.
Zarvan
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2011
- Messages
- 54,470
- Reaction score
- 87
- Country
- Location
There major problem is their politicans who make lot off money through defence deals often compromising on quality
Raul_AD
BANNED
- Joined
- Sep 5, 2014
- Messages
- 796
- Reaction score
- -5
- Country
- Location
Thanks for your post!! First I would like make come corrections for weapon carrying capacity of Tejas:
Tejas:
1 x LDP
2 x fuel tanks (Payload capacity - 1200 Kgs each )
4 x 500lb bombs (Multiple racks 800 kgs weight carrying capacity 2 Nos each)
2 x BVR missiles (Multiple racks central line – weight carrying capacity 1200 kgs)(Derby ready for MK-I)
2 x WVR missiles
Any time multiply this by 3 for same cost of 1 Rafale, you will have the answer how much you are carrying in the same cost, in the above mentioned carrying capacity of Tejas.
Why pay in Billions of $ for carrying capacity for 2 extra LGBs???? Any way only 2 Tejas will be sufficient to carry out the task any given day for full weapon load of Rafale.
May I please know how CAN A SINGLE ENGINE plane have FLY-AWAY COST of TWIN-ENGINE COST???
What will the Life time Maintenance Cost of TWIN-ENGINE JET will it be able to compete a single jet in this department???????????
Sirji, may I please know What will the RCS of "ELEPHANT EARED CONNARD" which is having maximum Metal Body and poor STEALTH DESIGN???
VERSUS
Tejas without Connard and maximum Composit body, which will Only going to increase in MK-II version, and smaller in size.
One more thing!!!! Do 2 Tejas carrying AESA is better in flight config Or single Rafale ??????? Food for thought!
Btw what is the current production rate of Rafale in France???? Is it not 8 per year????
Is Desault is not oblige to first serve the Qatar then will come the number of India. Dont it?????
What do you think when will our THANKLESS HAL will be able to erect Assembly line of Rafale and start production?????
Dont you think all this will if the deal is signed in 2015 will not materialize before 2019 ?????? By that time Tejas will be ready for induction???????
Nothing is coming by the way of TOT it is just horex which is created just to sell the Rafale. Because India is NOT Getting SPECTRA; THALES - AESA; M88 - Engine in TOT. Is there anything apart from this which India REALLY require in the name of TOT from RAFALE.
NOTE: IAF should learn to evolve strategy around Tejas and MIX OF SU-30-MKI & TEJAS which will be more useful then Single platform of Rafale.
Again thanx for your valued reply.[/quote]
Last edited:
MastanKhan
PDF VETERAN
- Joined
- Dec 26, 2005
- Messages
- 21,269
- Reaction score
- 166
- Country
- Location
rockstarIN
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2010
- Messages
- 6,168
- Reaction score
- -2
- Country
- Location
GORKHALI
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 13, 2010
- Messages
- 3,689
- Reaction score
- -9
You never get tired right ?Licking pakistani a$$ in every post or you are a pakistani showing your self as turkish bitch.
GORKHALI
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 13, 2010
- Messages
- 3,689
- Reaction score
- -9
We got quality and quantity too in nos.Keep your suggestion for your armed force they need it the most.As I see another winter coming for pakistan democracy.
It's Safariz his other account is banned so he came back as a Turkish. You know identity problem, it's very prevalent in the land of the pure.
duhastmish
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2009
- Messages
- 4,302
- Reaction score
- -4
One thing is sure india lack a combination of fighters single engine is lqcking.
indian air force is also spending way too much.
choices are delayed and result is not crisp.
If iaf gave 2 options and money spent is so high why not euro fighter.
Tot is over hyped in this deal.
this deal will stall lot of other projects.
so it might be better option to go for cheaper option.
indian air force is also spending way too much.
choices are delayed and result is not crisp.
If iaf gave 2 options and money spent is so high why not euro fighter.
Tot is over hyped in this deal.
this deal will stall lot of other projects.
so it might be better option to go for cheaper option.
GORKHALI
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 13, 2010
- Messages
- 3,689
- Reaction score
- -9
Small update bro,LCA is carrying
2 x 500lbs
2 x Drop tanks(800 Litres)
2 x WVR
1 x LDP
No BVR as there is none mounted else :
2 x 500lbs
2 x BVR
2 x WVR
1 x LDP
1 x 1200 litre Centerline Drop tank.
An internal redesign is probably needed for Tejas. A deal with SAAB regarding this would make the plane even better. Had read one report which had described Tejas as Maintenance nightmare with many sub-systems simply inaccessible. OTOH Gripen is said to be best plane viz-a-viz maintenance. If SAAB can help HAL in this regard, I think it will go a long way in further developing Mk-3 or, AMCA.
sancho
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2009
- Messages
- 13,011
- Reaction score
- 27
- Country
- Location
As you can see in the latest pics of LCA with the 500lb LGB, there is very limited space to use a tandem pylon for these LGBs. They can try it with even smaller LGBs or dumb bombs maybe, but LCAs standard CAS weapons are 500 and 1000lb LGBs and if a tandem pylon with 500lb LGBs fits, needs to be seen.
Wrt the BVR missiles, please be realistic and lets not make fake points here. LCA will carry AAMs only at the wings and as all official load configs show, only at the inner or mid wingstations which both are blocked in strike config.
The fly-away cost has nothing to do with the number of engines, it is the basic production cost of the fighter, without adding development or other costs. The per hour costs however include maintenance or fuel costs and here a single engine fighter of course have cost advantages, which however will be multiplied if you have to use more fighters.
A single Rafale! It also has AESA, it has the better flight performance, it has the better A2A weapons...
11 per year
That depends on when the contracts will be signed and if they get Rafales from the orders of French forces, since they asked for a similar configuration, while ours will differ.
What do you think when will our THANKLESS HAL will be able to erect Assembly line of Rafale and start production?????
As said, the first squad will be available by 2017 and the productionline is expected by the next year and since the first will mainly be assembled, there shouldn't be a big problem. Also why would it be easier to set up LCA MK2s production line, if it's still on drawing board today, while the Rafale F3+ is in production for years?
Last edited:
sancho
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2009
- Messages
- 13,011
- Reaction score
- 27
- Country
- Location
No, I showed the standard CAS configs, which doesn't include LGBs on the centerline for both. For more range both would however carry a 3rd fuel tank there, but that doesn't change the weaponload.
That's not correct, the wingtanks are larger and can carry 1200l, while the centerline station has size limitations, which is why only a 800l tank can be carried there. The single fuel tank is only useful for light A2A roles, or to add more fuel besides the 2 tanks at the wings.
Similar threads
