Dassault Rafale, tender | News & Discussions

[sancho]

It seem like EADS making their offer sweeter and sweeter.

I don't what the hell france is doing.

Rafale is my FAV. but Typhoon is going great

They have to, because the member countries needs this deal more than anything, that's why they will be ready to give us a lot to counter the disadvantages of highest costs, delays in development and integration of weapons.
Dassault (as sad as it is to me) don't follow the other companies with a similar PR strategy, they mainly count on showing IAF and MoD what their bird can, not. That's why they did not attend Aero India, but instead fully capable in the trials.
I heard from several French in other forums, that Dassault concentrates on MMRCA more when it gets closer to final stage only. Their actual concentration is about the Brazilian (for 36 fighters), or UAE (60 fighters) competition and as a side step also Swiss (up to 22 fighters) and Kuwait (around 24 fighters).

However, with more French avionics for our Mig 29s, Maitri co-development and a possible team up with MBDA, France in generall is getting closer to us, not to forget that EADS is half French too.

 

[KEETARP]

@Lt.Prateek.

Ur comments on this..?

http://www.defence.pk/forums/india-defence/4347-mrca-news-discussions-92.html#post920856

Karthic ,
What you are saying is true when you compare Gripen with SH and Rafale .
But for MRCA , air-force is not there to compare jets with each other
Trials are there to select Fighters which meet minimum ASR/QSR requirements .
Euro-fighter might be best in all aspects and beats everyone, but its off no use , we are not there to select Best jet but the jet which meets our requirements

Better go thru this interview -

The Hindu News

MMRCA SQRs emphasize attack potential and ownership costs

August 17, 2009, (Sawf News) - The IAF MMRCA selection process appears to emphasize attack potential and low cost of ownership, not air combat capability.

A news report in the Hindu on the IAF MMRCA selection process makes on mention of the close combat capability of the contenders.

It says the contending aircraft will be tested for stability, control, safety issues, range and endurance during the flight evaluations with evaluating teams also assessing the capabilities of the radar, navigation equipment, self-defense suites and electronic warfare devices.

Armaments will be tested in the final phase.

Here is a translation of the above SQR: The IAF wants the aircraft that can deliver a given weapon load farthest with accuracy and return safely.

In a refreshing departure from the past, the IAF will also assess the cost of ownership of each aircraft, taking into account factors such as the life of the engine, the cost of overhaul/replacement of engine and the cost to maintain these aircraft by establishing ground support.

"We do not compare one aircraft with another, but evaluate against its ability to meet our requirements and arrive at a through and methodical conclusion. There are no extra points for anyone crossing the minimum [SQR] requirements," an IAF officer familiar with the evaluation trials told the Hindu.

What we need now is a genuine multirole strike aircraft with excellent A2G capabilities and a good A2A capability

Except Eurofighter - Imo all are genuine multirole fighters .

And i think the SH and Rafale satisfy these conditions better than Gripen.

Correct , but why compare jets with each other . We need the one which suits our req and pocket . And SH v Gripen is a different class machine . One is light wt category while F18 is medium-heavy wt category . By this logic Su30 would be even better when we get Brahmos +KH32/ +K-59c , max hardpoints etc .

And also by buying Rafale we can deny the Pakistanis avionics for their JF-17s and other contracts if we use it skilfully.

Frankly,This is just wishful thinking , France if wants to sell later will sell anyhow . They have good business with Pakistan as well .

Buying a gripen offers none of these.

That's for Air-force to decide , Personal opinions differ . I have supported Gripen and Mig35 throughout . Someone would prefer F16 and Eurofighter . And most famous Rafale

And as regards supercruise it is not of as much use in Indo-Pak scenario as it is made out to be

See the latest article what Euro-fighter pitches as strong point against F35

 

[KEETARP]

Gripen NG with 10 stations , excellent T/W ratio and 6000Kg armament ,lower operational cost during lifetime , cheap cost upfront . + + + +
A true winner at such lower cost

 

[sudhir007]

Eurofighter Snipes Lockheed, Says Typhoon More 5th-Gen Than F-35, Latter Not Even A Fighter!

The Eurofighter Typhoon is much more of a 5th-Generation fighter than the Lockheed-Martin F-35 Lightning-II. That's the refrain of an article in the latest edition of Eurofighter's magazine Eurofighter World. Suggesting that the "generation sequence and headings used by Lockheed-Martin for fighters are generally shared by the defence community", the piece goes on to point out that "these classifications are truly too rigid and schematic to have any credibility, in the sense that a fighter such as the Eurofighter Typhoon exhibits all the qualities of a 5th generation fighter with the exception of full spectrum stealthiness (VLO) but is well above the legacy 4th generation platforms in all other measures of performance." Eurofighter says the US "uses and sometimes abuses" the generations issue.

"If we take the key attributes defining a 5th generation fighter the JSF satisfies only a few of them. Scoring the Eurofighter Typhoon against the same “admission criteria” as the 5th generation club, would produce a much higher compliance than JSF, for example, as the only missing part would be the VLO stealthiness," the article states, with a table depicting this compliance.

Here's the rest:

*
So, if the F-35/JSF is not a 5th generation fighter, what is it then? Where does it belong? That is a very important question and needs a definition before it can be answered properly.

A fighter is a combat aircraft whose aerodynamic characteristics, sensor suite and weapon capabilities are optimised to achieve the control of the air. Fighters actively look for and engage the opponent's fighter force. Strike aircraft generally avoid engagements with other fighters. The fighter generations concept obviously applies and is restricted to fighters. It cannot apply to bombers, strike and attack aircraft, even if sometimes these are inaccurately termed as fighters. Where does the good old A-4 Skyhawk or the Close Air Support A-10 belong in terms of fighter generations? Where does the F-117 fit? Certainly not in the fighter generation classes. The same is true also for the F-35/JSF.

So, the inclusion of a tactical strike and attack platform in the fighter generation concept is a mistake. Simply put, the JSF is not a fighter and the two classes are not comparable. The process of designing a combat aircraft will inevitably result in a number of trade-offs. Any fighter is a compromise between aircraft manoeuvrability; high specific excess power; weapon effectiveness; highoff bore sight; IR/RF missiles; gun; combat persistence; high fuel fraction; maximum firepower; aircraft systems/sensors; human machine interface; situational understanding; helmet mounted displays; threat warning; countermeasures; good cockpit visibility.

Survivability can beachieved by means other than Low Observability. For example thanks to layered information systems; mission definable preferences;automation of routine tasks; threat prioritisation; sensor fusion and inherent safety, you are able to avoid compromising the performance and flight characteristics of the aircraft and create a weapon system that does not suffer from the same inflexibility issues that the F-35 JSF appears to have. During the first Desert Storm attack against Iraq on the 17th January 1991, only 10 stealth aircraft from a total of 658 non stealth attack aircraft successfully hit targets in Iraq and Kuwait. That night there were no losses at all. So what is the lesson learnt? Clearly if you can hide an F-117, the primary stealth bomber of that time... you can also hide a B-52! However, if any air force is going to choose just one platform, they have to make sure it is fit for purpose. The main considerations should be: forget the generation labels and instead consider requirements & capabilities. Overall, military capability must meet a nation’s needs. If you cannot have the F-22, you need something of similar air-to-aircapability to support your attack aircraft at the same time. Survivability can be achieved by means other than stealthiness. A single platform designed only for strike missions is unlikely to satisfy all combat air power requirements. Today the Typhoon is the only aircraft capable of evolving ahead of the threat and in step with maturing technology.

LiveFist - The Best of Indian Defence: Eurofighter Snipes Lockheed, Says Typhoon More 5th-Gen Than F-35, Latter Not Even A Fighter!

 

[KEETARP]

Sudhir ,
EADS is so desperate they can declare anything now , they are on verge of losing 10,000 jobs and in contrast offering India 20,000 jobs and what not promises .

DTN News: Eurofighter Woos Buyers For 10 Billion Euro Order

Source: DTN News / Reuters By Tim Hepher Wed Jun 9, 2010 1:09pm EDT
(NSI News Source Info) BERLIN, Germany - June 10, 2010: Defence firms have moved to kickstart negotiations over the Eurofighter Typhoon by asking Britain, Germany, Italy and Spain to invest an estimated 10 billion euros ($13.42 billion) in the next wave of jet fighter production.
A spokesman for a consortium of BAE Systems (BAES.L), EADS (EAD.PA) and Finmeccanica (SIFI.MI) told Reuters it had submitted an offer at the end of May -- a move that analysts say could trigger a tug of war over dwindling defence budgets during a European sovereign debt crisis.
The spokesman declined to disclose the value of the offer, which covers 124 planes, but defence industry sources at the Berlin Air Show said it was around 10 billion euros.
Eurofighter says a decision on whether to build the planes would be needed within a year in order to avoid a production gap it believes would be damaging for exports and hit jobs.
The climate for talks is difficult, however, after Germany announced tough defence cuts and Britain promised to defer any major spending decisions until after a strategic defence review.
Britain, Germany, Italy and Spain have so far taken delivery of a combined 222 Eurofighter Typhoons out of the 620 they originally ordered.
The original order spanned three separate tranches. But the third and final production run of 236 planes had to be split up last year when buyers could only agree to purchase 112 aircraft.
Any decision to cancel the rest is likely to trigger calls for compensation as well as intensive lobbying over the fate of 100,000 jobs tied up directly or indirectly in the project.
Besides domestic contracts, Saudi Arabia has ordered 70 of the planes and 15 have been sold to Austria.
The Typhoon is competing in a number of contests against rival models such as the French Rafale (AVMD.PA), Swedish Gripen SAAB.ST or Boeing's F-18 (BA.N).
Switzerland has renewed interest in updating its fighter fleet after suspending a competition last year and could make a decision later in 2010, air show delegates said.
Other nearby countries showing interest in deals or evaluating their positions include Serbia, Romania and Turkey.
Middle East and Asian demand has been strong as countries face new threats or pressure to renew ageing fleets.
But Brazil, actively courted by France as the first foreign buyer for its Dassault-built Rafale, has so far delayed a decision and may have to postpone until after Oct. 3 elections.
"We are worried; nothing is happening at the moment," a French industrial source said of the competition, in which Eurofighter is not represented. ($1=.7453 Euro)
(Additional reporting by Matthias Blamont in Paris; editing by Simon Jessop)

 

[Dash]

The link you provided , is writer's personal opinion . Not even a single source to backup his claims . Blog /Personal opinions vary from person to person
See what he writes -


He is not even sure of RCS of F15 , how much credible is this ? ? ? .

Janes and Lockheed martin + F16.net are reliable , post that link

Hi Prateek - Another day..

See RCS is just a scientific teram and has got little relevance to military use I think. The reason RCS differ is different kind of situation. Basically saying. RCS of an aircraft will depend upon power of the emitting RADAR, distance of the aircraft, Relative distance to wavelength of emitting RADAR. etc..

I will agree with Gogbot here, because till date we dont know whats the actual range of a radar, whats the power of antenna, gain etc. So until the we know that we cant actually arrive at an RCS againt whatever the frequency is.

I will say a fighter like Gripen or F-16 will have minimal difference in RCS and that will be compromised by the range of the radar they will use.

No where in northrupp grumman and selex vixen the range and the actual parameters to claculate the RCS is specified..

Feel free to comment.

 

[sancho]

And just to explain - I am not against LCA ,
Its just that you guys bring
LCA better than gripen , and
block2 = NG
Gripen will harm LCA
dosen't makes any sense .

Nobody said LCA = Gripen, but more than close and that would be good enough for our indigenous development. But you are negating so hard nearly everything point that could be good about it and it's potential. Don't forget that LCA in any version cost also nearly half has a comparable Gripen, so even if it would be not completely on par, if it's close and still cheaper it would be the better choice. Why pay $60 - 70 millions for each Gripen NG, if a LCA can be close in capability but for $30 - 50 millions the max?

I am not an LCA fan boy in generall and if you followed my comments in the LCA thread, you should saw several comments of me about the failures through the development.
If you said LCA is totally delayed, or that it still had many faults, or is under development only, I completely had agreed with you. But you also have to admit that, LCA is developed for exactly the same roles, exaclty the same aim of a cost-effective lightweight fighter, both developments started even at the same time. Also with similar design and materials, it even had the same consultants for design, or techs like all Eurocanards (BAE, Dassault, EADS), so it shouldn't be surprising that LCA has the potential to be so close to Gripen.

Had that 126 Mirage2000 deal gone through , no-one would have questioned,why Mirages were bought
when Mirage = LCA or LCA better than Mirage . Similar fighters etc.....

Yes, because they were only a fast replacement at LCA MK1 level (4th gen capabilities), but we would still have further developed LCA to MK2 which obviously will be better than Mirage 2000-5 in design. Gripen NG instead is at a level that LCA can achieve too, but if we already can licence produce it, why should HAL/IAF/MoD put more effort into the development of LCA MK2, or even further versions?

Bottom line for me is, pay less for LCAs and order them in numbers, but pay more for MMRCAs that are more capable and gives more advantages to our forces.
LCA - Rafale - FGFA - stealth UCAV would be the best for IAF and IN in the next 2-3 decades!

 

[gogbot]

Karthic ,
What you are saying is true when you compare Gripen with SH and Rafale .
But for MRCA , air-force is not there to compare jets with each other
Trials are there to select Fighters which meet minimum ASR/QSR requirements .
Euro-fighter might be best in all aspects and beats everyone, but its off no use , we are not there to select Best jet but the jet which meets our requirements

I understand.

But then how are they short listed , surely there is some form of commission.

I have a source from PIB

PIB Press Release

Tuesday, August 28, 2007

Ministry of Defence

Request for Proposal for 126 Medium Multi-Role Combat Aircraft Issued

17:30 IST
The Request for Proposal (RFP) for the procurement of 126 Medium Multi-Role Combat Aircraft (MMRCA) at an estimated cost of Rs. 42,000 crores for the Indian Air Force was issued today to six vendors – Russia’s MIG-35(RAC MiG); Swedish JAS-39 (Gripen);Dassault Rafale (France); American F-16 Falcon (Lockheed Martin); Boeing’s F/A-18 Super Hornet and Eurofighter Typhoon (Made by a consortium of British, German, Spanish and Italian firms). The 211-page document deals with various issues relating to initial purchase, transfer of technology, licensed production and life-time maintenance support for the aircraft. The RFP contains the selection model that would involve an exhaustive evaluation process as detailed in the Defence Procurement Procedures (DPP) – 2006.

*The proposals from the likely contenders would first be technically evaluated by a professional team to check for compliance with IAF’s operational requirements and other RFP conditions.

*Extensive field trials would be carried out to evaluate the performance.

*Finally, the commercial proposal of the vendors, short-listed after technical and field evaluations, would be examined and compared.

The aircraft are likely to be in service for over 40 years. Great care has been taken to ensure that only determinable factors, which do not lend themselves to any subjectivity, are included in the commercial selection model. The selection would be transparent and fair.


Under the terms of purchase, the first 18 aircraft will come in a ‘fly away’ condition while the remaining 108 will be manufactured under Transfer of Technology. The vendor finally selected would also be required to undertake 50% offset obligations in India. The ToT and offset contracts would provide a great technological and economic boost to the indigenous defence industries which would include Defence Public Sector Undertakings, Raksha Udyog Ratnas and other eligible private sector industries. Foreign vendors would be provided great flexibility in effecting tie up with Indian partners for this purpose.

It may be recalled that the Defence Minister Shri A K Antony while chairing the Defence Acquisition Council Meeting on June 29, 2007 had outlined three guiding principles for this procurement scheme.

First, the operational requirements of IAF should be fully met.

Second, the selection process should be competitive, fair and transparent, so that best value for money is realized.

Lastly, Indian defence industries should get an opportunity to grow to global scales.

Sitanshu Kar / HS

That's for Air-force to decide , Personal opinions differ . I have supported Gripen and Mig35 throughout . Someone would prefer F16 and Eurofighter . And most famous Rafale

See the latest article what Euro-fighter pitches as strong point against F35

But Mig-35 , has significant issues meeting the Delivery schedule , would it not be better to go with a more safer option.

 

[KS]

Karthic ,
What you are saying is true when you compare Gripen with SH and Rafale .
But for MRCA , air-force is not there to compare jets with each other
Trials are there to select Fighters which meet minimum ASR/QSR requirements .

Prateek that is wat the MoD says to satisfy all the vendors.
But frankly dont u think we should go for a platform that is excellent in A2G as this is one area where our technology is relatively outdated (Jags,Mig-27s).
The need of the hour(and our AF) is medium to long rage strike fighter not a point defence light weight fighter.

Euro-fighter might be best in all aspects and beats everyone, but its off no use , we are not there to select Best jet but the jet which meets our requirements
Better go thru this interview -
Except Eurofighter - Imo all are genuine multirole fighters .

Yes i agree.....but a Rafale with higher number of HP's,greater range,payload,equal or better avionics is in my opinion a better bet anyday than the Gripen.
The only thing against the Rafale is the cost but hey if its a choice of quality over cost we should go fior the cost.

Correct , but why compare jets with each other . We need the one which suits our req and pocket . And SH v Gripen is a different class machine . One is light wt category while F18 is medium-heavy wt category . By this logic Su30 would be even better when we get Brahmos +KH32/ +K-59c , max hardpoints etc .

Yes but we cant be depending on the MKI for all our needs..By that logic we can scrape the MRCA and produce 500 MKI instead in that cost.But thats not our intention.
We need a omnirole fighter that can match the MKI in perfomance but with western tech.
I cant think of a fighter that fits the bill other than Rafale.

Frankly,This is just wishful thinking , France if wants to sell later will sell anyhow . They have good business with Pakistan as well .

Yeah true to some extent.But thats y i used the word "skilfully".Moreover even if we cant cancel the deal we can atleast delay the deal to a large extent that it will be unnecessary by the time it is cleared.

That's for Air-force to decide , Personal opinions differ . I have supported Gripen and Mig35 throughout . Someone would prefer F16 and Eurofighter . And most famous Rafale

Yeah.....lets all agree to disagree here and put the onus on the IAF and some wise babu in the MoD.



See the latest article what Euro-fighter pitches as strong point against F35[/QUOTE]

 

[sancho]

The Hindu News

MMRCA SQRs emphasize attack potential and ownership costs

August 17, 2009, (Sawf News) - The IAF MMRCA selection process appears to emphasize attack potential and low cost of ownership, not air combat capability.

If that is true, Gripen NG has even less chances, because it's attack/strike capability is low (2 stations for bombs and 2 for fuel tanks only) and it is mainly an interceptor so for air combat.
If you add the cost of owner ship to strike and less air combat capability it hints even more on F18SH than ever before. MKI might have similar payload, stations, but its huge RCS makes it usefull for strikes from far distance.

 

[gogbot]

Gripen NG with 10 stations , excellent T/W ratio and 6000Kg armament ,lower operational cost during lifetime , cheap cost upfront . + + + +
A true winner at such lower cost

Gripen does not get enough attention.
It's a little sad given that it's only fault is being associated with the Tejas.

(my points against the Gripen still stand a possible negative)

it is the only aircraft apart form the Euro Fighter that can super cruise

Gripen takes of in just 12 sec of runway

May be the year is wrong ?

Why is MKI here , just because

 

[KEETARP]

We need a omnirole fighter that can match the MKI in perfomance but with western tech.

But frankly dont u think we should go for a platform that is excellent in A2G as this is one area where our technology is relatively outdated (Jags,Mig-27s).
The need of the hour(and our AF) is medium to long rage strike fighter not a point defence light weight fighter.

See , Karthic .
MKI is not standard/minimal performance against which we are comparing
What performance criteria Air-force has set , no one believe me no one knows, even Fighter Pilots/Training instructors whom I know don't have much idea about it .
Whether its Long-range bomb-truck or multi-role air-combat , those criteria only IAF knows or Lockheed-Martin Official who had access to those documents
If we are ready to spend money on development of Euro-fighter like Eurofighter-MKIn , then none of fighters offered can come close to match its performance . But is IAF looking for such performance ???

What we get is little bit of inputs/pieces from Vishnu Som who is closely following MRCA trials since start .
Exactly what IAF means by meaningful load for Leh or Jaiselmer trials

By Vishnu-Som , defnce editor NDTV India
The Gripen Campaign for the Indian MMRCA seems to be gaining good ground. With trials in India and Sweden going fairly well so far, the Gripen has emerged as a strong contender even as defence writers have noted the performance of the aircraft.

Vishnu Som, a defence expert and associate editor of India's leading News Channel NDTV writes in the Bharat Rakshak forum:

"The Gripen Ds did sensationally in their tests when they were in India recently. The D restarted and took off from Leh with a loadout of 2.6 tonnes which included air to air missiles and underwing fuel tanks. The heat test went off very well in Jaisalmer. It meant placing the aircraft in the sun for a designated period of time, firing her up and flying her at maximum speed at low altitude while checking out all the systems. They also dropped a bomb flying out of Jaisalmer. They also did tanking ops.

And ... no need to hold your breath any longer ... the Demo will be here in mid May and will likely do the Leh trip again and anything that the Indian Air Force requests. They were earlier unable to bring in the Demonstrator because of tasking with the Swedish Air Force which happened at exactly the same time that they were supposed to come to India.

Indian Air Force pilots travel to Sweden in the next few days. They are free to fly the Demo there if they want though they will be firing an AMRAAM off a D platform. My sources tell me that Indian Air Force pilots loved the jet while it was here, particularly its man-machine interface and the intuitive nature of the setup ..."

Incidentally, Vishnu makes it clear in his post that:

1. I do not endorse any of the MMRCA competitors.
2. I sincerely hope the Indian Air Force gets the plane it wants and the decision is NOT a political one

You see he gives just a slight highlighted point , what could be one of the requirements for IAF . Load which F18/MKI can carry may be 8000 , what air-force is looking is whether 2.5tons can be carried in high altitude operations flawlessly or not .

 

[flanker143]

Gripen does not get enough attention.
It's a little sad given that it's only fault is being associated with the Tejas

why do u want a fighter in a 10 bn deal when a similar jet with more or less capabilities is already being inducted !! dats why it is gettin less attention , and take my word if gripen gets selected (<10&#37; chance)

it wud be only bcoz of itz low cost !!!

 

[KS]

See , Karthic .
MKI is not standard/minimal performance against which we are comparing
What performance criteria Air-force has set , no one believe me no one knows, even Fighter Pilots/Training instructors whom I know don't have much idea about it .
Whether its Long-range bomb-truck or multi-role air-combat , those criteria only IAF knows or Lockheed-Martin Official who had access to those documents
If we are ready to spend money on development of Euro-fighter like Eurofighter-MKIn , then none of fighters offered can come close to match its performance . But is IAF looking for such performance ???

What we get is little bit of inputs/pieces from Vishnu Som who is closely following MRCA trials since start .
Exactly what IAF means by meaningful load for Leh or Jaiselmer trials



You see he gives just a slight highlighted point , what could be one of the requirements for IAF . Load which F18/MKI can carry may be 8000 , what air-force is looking is whether 2.5tons can be carried in high altitude operations flawlessly or not .

Prateek we are not discussing wat the IAF thinks or the MoD thinks...we discuss wat the MoD must choose according to our own opinions..

And as such,as much i respect ur opinions...my opinion stands..

 

[Tejas-MkII]

YouTube - Rafale IR Signature Comparison

I saw this video long time back at BR , i am like

Imagine this much of IR signature and have IRST like PAK-FA it can be in the sky.