A layman's analysis on our last two MMRCA contenders

[gambit]

So at what conclusion have you reached Somooo??? Does Mica has dual seeker in missile or they are different variants???

Use your imagination. We know that an aircraft is an exercise in forced compromises between competing interests, and a missile is very much an aircraft, so is the blimp. For the missile, nose cone volume is even more constrained than the parent launch aircraft's. Which sensor do you want to be dominant in which combat regime? Radar has the best range so if you give the radar antenna prominence in the nose cone, where are you going to install the IR sensor? Keep in mind that sensor position -- radar or IR -- on the body will inevitably affect its viewing field.

 

[DrSomnath999]

We will of course have to end up funding at least some of the weapons - but its not that huge an amount - the weapons are ready and developed all we will have to do is integrate them, which should be cheap enough( consider the LCA project - nearly all the cost overruns and expenditure was done on developing various parts - integration of weapons( R 73, the LGBs which were just tested)was smooth and cheap). The only thing needed to actually develop is the AESA radar which is already funded by the industry and all 4 partner nations support it - they should start funding it soon enough.

what about other systems like Conformal fuel tanks ,TVC ,recnoissance pods ?

 

[Jon Snow]

what about other systems like Conformal fuel tanks ,TVC ,recnoissance pods ?

I couldnt find anything on the CFTs so it depends on whether India wants them or not. TVC is already ready and waiting, the TVC enabled engine is of dimensions as of normal EJ200 so if the IAF wants it there need not be any changes made to the airframe. Very few reports are present for the reconnaissance pods - but it seems that the EFT uses the RAPTOR pod.
http://204.12.78.67/products/janes/defence-security-report.aspx?ID=1065929300
The RAF's Eurofighter Typhoon boasts a RAPTOR reconnaissance pod that enhances intelligence sharing.
but then again this could be a typo since this is written under the image of a Tornado and no other source can confirm this


CFTs should be ready by now considering wind tunnel testing has already been completed way back in 2002. there have been some images of the EFT released with the CFT. But it depends on whether India wants them or not, CFTs come with their own set of disadvantages.
The images were posted in a thread at IDF - here you go
http://www.indiandefence.com/forums/f17/eurofighter-typhoon-cfts-1416/

 

[Whazzup]

What could be the demerits for the Dassault bcoz of that Mirage upgrade deal as we all know it do include TOT.

 

[rockstarIN]

Then in this case, the manufacturer can rightly claim the same range for both variants. For the IR MICA, its own IR sensor is 'idle' while the missile itself is being guided by a superior sensor package: The aircraft itself.

Sir,

You mentioned EM guided missile is superior than IR seeker...

But new gen. IR missiles are hard to defeat. Whether it is sidewiner, Py-5 or R-73.

EM guided is prone to jamming, a BVR fitted with IR seeker (like IR MICA)will have more kill rate, right?

 

[gambit]

Sir,

You mentioned EM guided missile is superior than IR seeker...

But new gen. IR missiles are hard to defeat. Whether it is sidewiner, Py-5 or R-73.

EM guided is prone to jamming, a BVR fitted with IR seeker (like IR MICA)will have more kill rate, right?

To use 'prone' mean easily done. The early generation of radar guided missiles were indeed prone to jamming, but so were the early generation of IR guided missiles as well where there were plenty of stories where the IR missile should not be launched when the enemy is flying into the sun. That is not the case today for both guidance methods. Radar guidance is superior to IR for target resolutions: speed, heading, altitude, and aspect angle. All of those are direct results of the medium -- EM waves. For IR guidance, we have only general direction and intensity, Any other target resolutions must be contrived, meaning interpreted from alternate means. So while this seemingly make IR guidance more vulnerable to deception/distraction tactics, the shorter range involved in using IR missile with today's sophisticated sensor and data processing make the target the more vulnerable one. It is a seesaw where counter-measures will have the upper hand at one point, then the sensor-guidance will take back the advantage at another point.

 

[Firemaster]

To use 'prone' mean easily done. The early generation of radar guided missiles were indeed prone to jamming, but so were the early generation of IR guided missiles as well where there were plenty of stories where the IR missile should not be launched when the enemy is flying into the sun. That is not the case today for both guidance methods. Radar guidance is superior to IR for target resolutions: speed, heading, altitude, and aspect angle. All of those are direct results of the medium -- EM waves. For IR guidance, we have only general direction and intensity, Any other target resolutions must be contrived, meaning interpreted from alternate means. So while this seemingly make IR guidance more vulnerable to deception/distraction tactics, the shorter range involved in using IR missile with today's sophisticated sensor and data processing make the target the more vulnerable one. It is a seesaw where counter-measures will have the upper hand at one point, then the sensor-guidance will take back the advantage at another point.

By IR seeker do we mean IIR seeker??? just asking for curiosity

 

[gambit]

By IR seeker do we mean IIR seeker??? just asking for curiosity

We are talking about infrared.

 

[DALAI LAMA 4477]

The US AIM-9L Super Sidewinder has a 20km effective range. You can use that as a gauge for your skepticism.

well but that doesnt mean a IR guided missile cant have 40 -50 km range but the fact is infrared guided missiles are less effective at long range than compare to RADAR guided missiles.So usually IR guided missiles are kept at 20-30 km range .BUt as MICA ir missile has same missile frame & same motor it can have 40 -50 km range but the plane can outperform at such long range IR guided missile even if the missile may be having TVC or passive link to plane for guidance .Generally closer the plane much higher is the chances of ir guided missile to hit the target as plane cant out manuver even if does countermeasures like Flares

 

[sancho]

Rafale with top sight

See, that's one reason why all the effort you put in your analysis went the wrong way, you simply collected a lot of pics, but not the infos/data/knowledge behind it and without that, you can't make a real comparison. Here again you googled a pic, but didn't read the article, which clearly states:

Friday, April 1, 2011

Rafale HMD spotted !

April fool - At last, a Rafale pilot has been spotted with a Helmet Mounted Display earlier this week at the Mont de Marsan Air Base (CEAM)...

...Ok that was not funny
For those who thought it was real, the helmet is in fact a gallet LA-100 (the usual French Air Force flight helmet) mixed with a Thales topowl, HMD of the Tiger Helicopter (See below)

Rafale News: Rafale HMD spotted !


You "belived" a lot of things shown on the pics, or PR presentations, but as I told you before you have to distinguish the facts!

 

[sancho]

well but that doesnt mean a IR guided missile cant have 40 -50 km range but the fact is infrared guided missiles are less effective at long range than compare to RADAR guided missiles.So usually IR guided missiles are kept at 20-30 km range .BUt as MICA ir missile has same missile frame & same motor it can have 40 -50 km range but the plane can outperform at such long range IR guided missile even if the missile may be having TVC or passive link to plane for guidance .Generally closer the plane much higher is the chances of ir guided missile to hit the target as plane cant out manuver even if does countermeasures like Flares

Therefor the target has to detct the missile launch first! Most MAWS have very limited range only, while MICA IR used at BVR ranges and with the passive seeker won't be detected and that's one of the huge advantages. Rafale can launch MICA with the lock after launch capability, only with INS guidance and mid course correction via data link and don't have to have the missile seeker itself to detect the target. It closes into the no escape zone, without beeing detected and then activates it's own seeker. A twin shot of a MICA IR first, with a METEOR following should be very hard to counter, if at all!

 

[gambit]

well but that doesnt mean a IR guided missile cant have 40 -50 km range but the fact is infrared guided missiles are less effective at long range than compare to RADAR guided missiles.So usually IR guided missiles are kept at 20-30 km range .BUt as MICA ir missile has same missile frame & same motor it can have 40 -50 km range but the plane can outperform at such long range IR guided missile even if the missile may be having TVC or passive link to plane for guidance .Generally closer the plane much higher is the chances of ir guided missile to hit the target as plane cant out manuver even if does countermeasures like Flares

Yes, I said that before. You CAN have a 100km or even 1000km distance capable missile airframe but it does you no good to advertise that capability if your sensor/guidance package is limited to 10km. In fact, if you do advertise so, you would not be in business for long. The moment you install a sensor/guidance package into a missile, the effective range burden (or limit) is shifted to the sensor/guidance package. This is not a physical limitation but a virtual one. If you decided to guide the missile via the launch parent aircraft's sensor package, then that is a different story. You can legitimately advertise that ADDITIONAL capability to increase the missile's range, but if asked, you must also give the lower range estimate because that is based upon the assumption that not everyone will be able to guide the missile via the aircraft's sensor package.

 

[luckyyy]

with filttered news coming out indicating both rafale and ef overpriced..
F-16 , F-18 , mig-35 and Gripen would soon be back in the race..

 

[DALAI LAMA 4477]

See, that's one reason why all the effort you put in your analysis went the wrong way, you simply collected a lot of pics, but not the infos/data/knowledge behind it and without that, you can't make a real comparison. Here again you googled a pic, but didn't read the article, which clearly states:



Rafale News: Rafale HMD spotted !


You "belived" a lot of things shown on the pics, or PR presentations, but as I told you before you have to distinguish the facts!

well i personally beleive topsight is still in prototype stage & has been integrated in mirage 2000 only & mig 29ks only.Plz correct me if i am wrong .Well another helmet is also being developed gerfuit for rafale but i think india would give preference to Top sight.

But i would surely give credit to Dr Somnath 999 for it's hard work & beautiful pics presentation ,though some points are more future or in paper only like E CAptor aesa .But all in all good work
well the most beautiful pic was this

well i would have been more happy if he had place the pics of rafale in it instead of EF 2000

 

[DALAI LAMA 4477]

Therefor the target has to detct the missile launch first! Most MAWS have very limited range only, while MICA IR used at BVR ranges and with the passive seeker won't be detected and that's one of the huge advantages. Rafale can launch MICA with the lock after launch capability, only with INS guidance and mid course correction via data link and don't have to have the missile seeker itself to detect the target. It closes into the no escape zone, without beeing detected and then activates it's own seeker.

well mate todays' MAWS have much improved range & lower false alarm rates than their predecessor s especially 5th or 4.5 gen fighter's MAWS ,but despite that IR guided missiles are highly effective ,The main reason why IR guided missiles were so effective was that it took much longer to develop effective warning systems against them. Most aircraft that were shot down by IR guided missiles never knew that the missile(s) were coming .But also apart from long range , iR guided missiles should also have good quality IR seeker as a good quality seeker determines the killrate of that missiles not long range ,Well todays IR missiles countermeasures have improved a lot .SO u must have a good quality seeker which is immune to all countermeasures. Well i beleive Python 5 has the most advanced IR guided seeker till date now & also it is BVR in range .But i cant say Mica's IR seeker is as good as Python 5 .PLz do correct me if i wrong

A twin shot of a MICA IR first, with a METEOR following should be very hard to counter, if at all!

but mate i think u said the opposite i beleive meteor(EM GUIDED) should be shot 1st as it has around 120 km range & ram jet powered assuming 80 km is the no escape zone for BVR warfare & simultaneously firing MICA ir missiles as it is having 50-60 km .then it would give no chance to target.what u said would be applicable if both Mica IR & EM vesrion is there but not if meteor EM is present in aircrfat's arsenal.