Dassault offers Rafale, stage set for MMRCA 2.0

[randomradio]

I am confused. What's the difference between the previous rafale and present rafale offers ?
What's this whole tender about ? Why not just buy more rafales and keep the different types of fighters down ?

The previous tender was cancelled and a new tender is being held.

The 36 Rafale contract was for strategic purposes, not related to the tenders. But the idea is to get more Rafales at a cheaper price through tender.

Whats up with medium multi role combat aircraft when tejas mk2 is coming out as a medium weight aircraft???

There were two MMRCAs. One for single engine and one for twin engine. The idea was to buy 150-200 Gripens and 150-200 Rafales.

For single engine, the competitors were Gripen and F-16. But DRDO insisted they will make Tejas Mk2 Gripen equivalent, so there is no need to import a jet in this category. IAF will be ordering 201 LCA Mk2 instead of holding the tender.

So the IAF withdrew the single engine tender and replaced it with the twin engine tender, which was supposed to follow the single engine tender in the future.

Both LCA Mk2 and Rafale are medium weight aircraft.

In the light category, we will have 123 LCA Mk1/A.

They shouldn't waste money on anymore 4th gen fighters.Next fighter should be stealth. China will play a major role in the next India Pakistan conflict and j20 fighters if acquired by Pakistan will be a force multiplier. China could also contrive a situation to enter the conflict on pakistans's side.

5th gen and higher requirement is separate from LCA and Rafales. We need hundreds of fighter jets. Read the above reply to Daghalodi.

I was reading about a combined Franco German fighter jets program. Why not wait for this ?

That's after 2040. It can come into play when the time to replace Su-30MKI comes. But we want to start building our own stuff by then.

We just don't know that yet. Our carriers have Mig-29s deployed on them and their wing span is 36.6'' while Rafale's is 35" which is still smaller than the Mig's

Neither carrier can operate the Rafale or SH. Both carriers or both aircraft will need modifications.

You are already using the GE F404 and plan to use the GE F414 for LCA/AMCA,
which leaves you somewhat dependent.
Trying to avoid US technology altogether will probably leave you with MiG-35
and the problems related to Russian logistics.

Engines and weapons systems are not the same.

The US will not sanction the engines, but the aircraft itself can be.

 

[Daghalodi]

The previous tender was cancelled and a new tender is being held.

The 36 Rafale contract was for strategic purposes, not related to the tenders. But the idea is to get more Rafales at a cheaper price through tender.



There were two MMRCAs. One for single engine and one for twin engine. The idea was to buy 150-200 Gripens and 150-200 Rafales.

For single engine, the competitors were Gripen and F-16. But DRDO insisted they will make Tejas Mk2 Gripen equivalent, so there is no need to import a jet in this category. IAF will be ordering 201 LCA Mk2 instead of holding the tender.

So the IAF withdrew the single engine tender and replaced it with the twin engine tender, which was supposed to follow the single engine tender in the future.

Both LCA Mk2 and Rafale are medium weight aircraft.

In the light category, we will have 123 LCA Mk1/A.



5th gen and higher requirement is separate from LCA and Rafales. We need hundreds of fighter jets. Read the above reply to Daghalodi.



That's after 2040. It can come into play when the time to replace Su-30MKI comes. But we want to start building our own stuff by then.



Neither carrier can operate the Rafale or SH. Both carriers or both aircraft will need modifications.



Engines and weapons systems are not the same.

The US will not sanction the engines, but the aircraft itself can be.

Do you mind posting links to what you claim??

Because your known for posting BS fantasies and myths

 

[randomradio]

Do you mind posting links to what you claim??

Because your known for posting BS fantasies and myths

It's fine to not believe me.

 

[BATMAN]

I am confused. What's the difference between the previous rafale and present rafale offers ?
What's this whole tender about ? Why not just buy more rafales and keep the different types of fighters down ?

Previously it was called MRCA, now MMRCA. I bet if its delayed for another decade, than it will be MMMRCA.

 

[randomradio]

Previously it was called MRCA, now MMRCA. I bet if its delayed for another decade, than it will be MMMRCA.

MRCA = Mig-29, M-2000, F-16 program
MMRCA = F-16, Mig-35, Rafale, Typhoon, Super Hornet, Gripen

So this new one is already MMMRCA. But we are calling it MMRCA 2.0.

 

[Daghalodi]

It's fine to not believe me.

Your posts and claims are not reliable!!!

Your a well Known troll who posts BS like indian rafales are better than F22

 

[randomradio]

Your posts and claims are not reliable!!!

They are. You only have to look up my track record. Believing it or not is up to you.

Even before MMRCA was cancelled, I used to speak of two more fighter tenders.

Your a well Known troll who posts BS like indian rafales are better than F22

I am only repeating stuff claimed by more knowledgeable people than me.

 

[Daghalodi]

They are. You only have to look up my track record. Believing it or not is up to you.

Even before MMRCA was cancelled, I used to speak of two more fighter tenders.



I am only repeating stuff claimed by more knowledgeable people than me.

Your stuff has been refuted many times and thrown in the garbage.

You are not a reliable poster, most of what you post are BS fantasy and myths

 

[randomradio]

Your stuff has been refuted many times and thrown in the garbage.

You are not a reliable poster, most of what you post are BS fantasy and myths

As I said, believe what you want.

It will be fun to see all your reactions when the stuff I said eventually happens.

 

[Daghalodi]

As I said, believe what you want.

It will be fun to see all your reactions when the stuff I said eventually happens.

The stuff that you said was a marketing gimmick to sell you a product.

A fourth gen fighter cannot be better than a fifth gen fighter.

But than again indian trolls like you claim the stuff india gets is out of this world technology.

Have a nice day!!

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

It's fine to not believe me.

Since the RFI does not mention the number of engines, it is not a two engine tender.

At the about the same time as the RFI was issued, IAF was told that they have to
fit inside a limited budget.

There are two alternatives:

1. You have inside information about the thinking of the IAF, in which case you are committing high treason by publishing it here.
2. You are making guesses, which considering facts seems to be poorly motivated.

 

[randomradio]

Since the RFI does not mention the number of engines, it is not a two engine tender.

At the about the same time as the RFI was issued, IAF was told that they have to
fit inside a limited budget.

There is no "limited budget".

The MMRCA was also not the same.

There are two alternatives:

1. You have inside information about the thinking of the IAF, in which case you are committing high treason by publishing it here.
2. You are making guesses, which considering facts seems to be poorly motivated.

There is no "high treason" going on here.

Here's a conversation between an Admiral and an Air Marshal. The Air Marshal was involved in the MMRCA program.

==========
“What surprises me – since you’re the author of that RFP (MMRCA) – is that what is the significance of the term medium? Is it weight, is it performance, is it range, is it endurance? A. And B – how did you end up with a bunch of aircraft from single-engined to twin-engined, from 17 tons to 30 tons – I mean why did you stand for it? Make up your mind what you want. Whether it is performance, whether it is weight. So I think this mess, in which we are today has been self-inflicted.” – Admiral (retd.) Arun Prakash

“It’s about operational requirements – you know, meeting a certain spectrum of operational utility. You had to have a mix of both – I’m defending that. And I’m defending it very strongly. We had to actually bring in this Medium Multi Role Combat – because it was originally MRCA – primarily because you had to – although I’d said that weight consideration is no more a relevant issue – to categorize aircraft by weight limitations – we had to keep the Su-30 out because otherwise the Su-30 would have come into the competition, as well. And the question would have been raised, ‘Why can’t you buy more of the Su-30s’. Now you can’t put all your eggs in one basket – strategically, it’s unwise. That’s one of the primary reasons. And therefore you created this Medium Multi role Combat Aircraft (competition) which is 30 tons and below. Okay, so the Su-30 is 34 tons and above – 34 tons category. So the heaviest aircraft in this entire category was the F/A-18, which is 29 tons. The costliest aircraft was the Eurofighter, as per our estimation at that point of time. The cheapest aircraft was – and the lightest aircraft was the Gripen. The F-16 would have been the cheapest. But the point is, you had the original contenders who were there in the fray – you couldn’t have removed them because that process had started off. But you had the new technologies – 4 and half generation aircraft and you also had a spectrum of cost differentials from one end -I would say, averaging about 40 million dollars to almost 100 million dollars – or 85 million dollars.” – Air Marshal (retd) M Matheswaran
==========

Basically, what this means is the previous MMRCA did not seriously consider the Gripen or the F-16. They were in the contest because they had already replied to the previous contest.

The same thing's repeating. F-16 and Gripen are in this new contest only because they are part of the process. But they are only participants, not competitors. The IAF is not going to consider them seriously because their main intention is to buy a twin engine jet.

Again, there is no "limited" money here. As the Air Marshal said: "It’s about operational requirements – you know, meeting a certain spectrum of operational utility."

The first phase of the contest is purely based on technical specs and not money. Money comes into the picture only for shortlisted aircraft. What that means is, you need to meet tech specs first, and then you need to be the cheapest among the shortlisted.

If the Gripen matches the Rafale or Typhoon in payload and performance capability, then all power to Gripen, and that's the only way for Gripen to be relevant in this contest. So Gripen has to get shortlisted first before money comes into play. And that's a very difficult road for a single engine aircraft to walk on.

The stuff that you said was a marketing gimmick to sell you a product.

A fourth gen fighter cannot be better than a fifth gen fighter.

But than again indian trolls like you claim the stuff india gets is out of this world technology.

Have a nice day!!

The French refer to the Rafale as an equal to a 5th generation jet.

https://www.hindustantimes.com/indi...ce-minister/story-UdT659wTKO5x9eQmgmoAXI.html
Frankly, in real terms, the Rafale is as good as any existing fifth-generation aircraft.

 

[Daghalodi]

The French refer to the Rafale as an equal to a 5th generation jet.

https://www.hindustantimes.com/indi...ce-minister/story-UdT659wTKO5x9eQmgmoAXI.html
Frankly, in real terms, the Rafale is as good as any existing fifth-generation aircraft.

Thats just a marketing gimmick to sell indians some rafales!! This does not mean rafale is better than F 22 raptor.

Your Indian Air Chief claims Tejas is a future aircraft <<< -- what does this mean tejas is better than F 22?

 

[randomradio]

Thats just a marketing gimmick to sell indians some rafales!! This does not mean rafale is better than F 22 raptor.

It's no gimmick.

Your Indian Air Chief claims Tejas is a future aircraft <<< -- what does this mean tejas is better than F 22?

The Chief was talking about it in reference to the JF-17.

JF-17 is for the present, LCA is for the future.

 

[Daghalodi]

It's no gimmick.



The Chief was talking about it in reference to the JF-17.

JF-17 is for the present, LCA is for the future.

Yes it is a gimmick!!! These marketing gimmicks dont mean the rafales you indians are getting are better than F 22.

The french know your not getting F 22, hence they said its the best plane out there because indains were looking for a multi role medium aircraft and F22 doesnt even fall in that category its an air superiority plane so offcourse the french was referring to medium multi role aircraft but you started cherry picking those lines and started comparing that marketing gimmick with the raptor.


If we go by your logic than Indian Air Chief claims about tejas being the future aircraft means tejas is better than rafale and F 22 but here you claim the indian air chief is talking with reference to jf17 than why are you comparing the French officers claim with F 22?

Either your plain stupid or a hypocrite