Dassault Rafale, tender | News & Discussions

[Mani2020]

this the problem of having multiple partners, every up-gradation has to see the green light from each and every member

Its upto the users whether they want it or not,they will always go with the solution that is more feasible for them

Similarly india if wants TVC they can ask them and surely it will be there

 

[Mani2020]

At least for the core techs like radar, or engine. In this case one partner could do it alone, but the point is they don't see a real need for it and possibly they are right. The EF even now is one of, or even the most manouverable fighter besides the F22 possibly, so it don't need TVC neccesarily in this regard. That is also the reason why the consortium companies says that TVC would improve the fuel consumption as well, to offer another advantage.
However, the reality at the moment is, that the partner countries have not the money to fully develop the EF and that's why they are desperately searching for a new foreign partner, be it India, Turkey, or Japan. But all these countries already (co-)develop an 5. gen fighter, so teaming up and paying so much to improve EF for basic features does not make much sense, not even for EF partners like Italy, or UK, that are partners in F35 as well.

EF could undeniably be a great fighter, but it came too late, is too costly and less developed now!

Also with such a high price tag of EF-2000 ,countries are still in dilemma whether to go for it in that high price tag or add few bucks and go for F-35 , similar thing stuck Japan they were interested in EF-2000 after the sale of Raptor was rejected but later with the price tag of EF-2000 they preferred F-35 .And now by adding TVC its price will further shoot up and that will make it a hell of costly fighter thats why they are hesitant to go for it

 

[angeldemon_007]

Also with such a high price tag of EF-2000 ,countries are still in dilemma whether to go for it in that high price tag or add few bucks and go for F-35

The problem with F35 is not just high price but also high maintenance cost. It is clear by the fact that US is keeping all the cards to itself, so if any upgrade or glitches come in the fighter, then the operator has to go to US only thus making sure a fixed income for US but a high cost of maintenance for user countries.

 

[GORKHALI]

 

[Baajirao]

tejjas is late MRCA is late...this MRCA is becoming pride issue for all countries and can make indian possition very bad at the end...[/QUOTE] main race is between Europeans & Americans ....both
of them are good businessmen.Also india is buying without any soft loans....Every one should respect the rulr buyer`s market

 

[sancho]

But we are getting TVC.

Read this article...
Upgraded Eurofighter offered to Indian Air Force

What does it meant, upgrade will pay for itself through life cycle cost reductions ?? I mean, will they be charging extra from what they had submitted in the offer ??/
According to me....No, because the offer was placed before and these upgrades offer came afterwards.

It means what I said before, TVC is an upgrade option for any customer of the EF, if he is ready to pay additional costs for it! It was developed and some ground tests were done even in the early 2000s, but nobody had paid for the integration into EF, or the neccesary further developments and flight test. So the argument of Eurojet is, that these additional costs will be paid off during the life cycle of the fighters, because of the lower fuel consumption.
It's the same like upgrade options for the F18SH (GE 414 EPE, in future CFTs, integrated IRST...), or the Rafale (HMS, CFTs), Mig 35 (foreign avionics and maybe weapons), Gripen NG (Israeli, or Russian weapons), all these things are possible, some are even developed and tested, but never integrated. Some customer thinks they are not needed, but mainly it depends on cost reasons and especially for the EF that is a problem, because as long as T3 is still not fully cleared, we don't know what techs, or weapons means additional costs.

Also with such a high price tag of EF-2000 ,countries are still in dilemma whether to go for it in that high price tag or add few bucks and go for F-35 , similar thing stuck Japan they were interested in EF-2000 after the sale of Raptor was rejected but later with the price tag of EF-2000 they preferred F-35 .And now by adding TVC its price will further shoot up and that will make it a hell of costly fighter thats why they are hesitant to go for it

It's not the price alone, because they are right to say that in some fields EF is more 5. gen than F35 (SC, super maneuverability swashplate radar)!
The biggest problem for EF is, that Italy and UK are not only partners in that development, but in F35 as well, so it's not only export customers that asks themself should we buy EF, or F35, but even these developing countries itself. If they were as comitted to EF as Germany/Spain, or as France on Rafale, they would focus way more on future capabilities, even if the costs are high.
At the moment I think neither UK, nor Italy will remain on their T3B order plans and will cancel, or resell them to other countries (India, Japan, Turkey) in favour of F35 orders. Even in Germany, where the EF is one of the least developed anyway, the T3B orders are more than in trouble.
It's actually a great fighter, but it's sad that it might never show it's real potential.

 

[the rafter]

Rafale - Active cancellation
But there is more to Spectra than conventional jamming. Pierre-Yves Chaltiel, a Thales engineer on the Spectra program, remarked in a 1997 interview that Spectra uses "stealthy jamming modes that not only have a saturating effect, but make the aircraft invisible... There are some very specific techniques to obtain the signature of a real LO [low-observable] aircraft." When asked if he was talking about active cancellation, Chaltiel declined to answer.

Earlier this year, Thales and European missile-builder MBDA disclosed that they were working on active-cancellation technology for cruise missiles and had already tested it on a small unmanned aerial vehicle, using a combination of active and passive techniques to manage radar signature. This revelation makes it considerably more likely that active cancellation is already being developed for Rafale.

Active cancellation is a LO technique in which the aircraft, when painted by a radar, transmits a signal which mimics the echo that the radar will receive - but one half-wavelength out of phase, so that the radar sees no return at all. The advantage of this technique is that it uses very low power, compared with conventional EW, and provides no clues to the aircraft's presence; the challenge is that it requires very fast processing and that poorly executed active cancellation could make the target more rather than less visible.

The complexity of active cancellation could account for Spectra's high price tag, estimated in 1997 as "several billion francs" (equivalent to the high hundreds of millions of US dollars) for research and development. One of four Rafale prototypes was dedicated to Spectra tests, along with a Falcon 20 flying testbed. Four new large anechoic chambers were built to support the Spectra project, including one which is large and well equipped enough to operate the complete system in a fully detailed electromagnetic environment.
Rafale, Dassault-Breguet

Not much is known about active cancellation. Sancho, do you have any more information about this that you could share here?

 

[GORKHALI]

GOSSIP GIRL
MILITARY AVIATION AND SPACE TECHNOLOGY NEWS

 

[IndianTiger]

The most competitor fighters i believe would be Mirage 2000-5, and F-18 Super Hornet in terms of qualtiy being given to IAF. Since now IAF is considering to buy 2 types of aircrafts which will not just be replacing Mig-21s but will also replacing the Jaguars of IAF.

Mirage 2000-5 would probably be the first choice of IAF as it would give the TOT? and also is the main competitor of F-16 Block 50, considering that Pakistan is acquiring more F-16s its really looks like that Mirage 2000-5 will be likely choice in the future for IAF. Now its interesting that what other aircraft will IAF be really interested in? Will it be Mig-35 which yet not even exists or will it be Gripen which is the very possible out come of PAF in the future.

MRCA deal is getting interesting. Looking at F-18 Super Hornet i wouldn't call it very bad choice, it will bring in new qualtive weapons in the IAF inventory, and it is very highly unlikely that United States will ever slap sanctions on India, it will further improve ties of both countries, but on the other hand will significantly effect its strategical ally Russia.

according to Initial reports Eurofighter and rafale is choice of IAF.
US lagging behind in this deal because they offerd F 16 to Pakistan.
so will they provide advance version to Pakistan.

 

[sancho]

according to Initial reports Eurofighter and rafale is choice of IAF.
US lagging behind in this deal because they offerd F 16 to Pakistan.
so will they provide advance version to Pakistan.

No, they now get Block 52, but they will be upgraded later with AESA as well and most likely will get the same CFTs with refuelling probe. The weapons are hardly different anyway, which leaves IAF with very little advantages over PAFs F16s, if they would buy F16IN.

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

Sancho we already have CFTs for ur F-16s.

 

[sancho]

Interesting news on the Rafale newsblog:

MMRCA Analysis

An extensive analysis on the current Indian Air Force competition to procure a Medium Multi Role Combat Aircraft (MMRCA).

This 142 pages document, written by Ashley L. Tellis, a former Senior adviser at the US ambassy of new Delhi, reviews the Indian seclection process and try to make an objective technical and political comparison of the 6 aircrafts involved in the contest.(Mig-35, Gripen, Rafale, Typhoon, F-16E, F/A-18E)

Despite an apparent attempt to remain neutral, the author inevitably shows some biased tendencies in favor of the two US products.which are eventually described as far cheaper but technologically on par or more advanced than their european counterparts.

A rapid reading will also reveal several errors or approximation. Just to name a few :

* The supercruise ability of the F-35, while the USAF doesn't advertise such a fact
* The Gripen NG sustained turn rate asserted to be the best by a fair margin whereas the actual plane has never flown in its final configuration.
* The RBE-2 AA of the Rafale supposedly still in developpement until the middle of the decade whereas the first serial units have been delivered in august 2010 to the French Air Force.
* The comparative fly away prices of the 6 fighters which is a clumsy attempt to compare figures obtained from various sources published at different times and including different packages.

Still worth reading but with a pinch of salt though

Also interesting, some infos about the exercise the French navy had with UAE navy and airforce, after Varuna 2010 with Indian navy:

Agapanthe 2010 : Big Fox exercise with the UAE Air Force

After the Varuna exercise with the Indian Navy, the CdG and its air wing have sailed to the Oman gulf for "Big Fox", a four day training (jan 23-26th) with the UAE Navy and Air Force.

During the exercise, the Emirate F-16E and Mirage 2000-9 as well as French Air Force Rafale from the Al Dafra air base performed several strikes on the french carrier group defended by Rafale M F3. Conversely, the UAE Air Force also carried out interdiction missions to protect the Emirate air space against French Navy fighters attacks. A total of 158 flights were performed during the event which involved 3 of the most potent multirole fighters.

No doubt that this 2011 issue of Big Fox was an important occasion for the UAE Air Force officers to have a closer look at the combat efficiency of the latest Rafale block.

Concerning the possible sell of the Rafale to the UAE, it is worth noting that the Emirate demand to get more flight slots in the French air space have been agreed by the French government, allowing the discussions on the Rafale to resume. Who knows, mays be we can expect an happy conclusion to this story in June at Le Bourget 2011 ?

Rafale News


Besides that I would love to here more about the results of the engagements of F16 B60s (with AESA) and Rafale F3 (without AESA), these kind of joint airforce and navy exercise against the French carrier was what I wanted to see from IAF and IN as well.
Fielding Mig 29Ks and Jaguar IMs against the Rafale Ms, would have made a lot of sense, but it seems Varuna exercise was based on naval training only.
Btw that GoF cleared more flight slots is a big point towards the UAE deal, now it seems the only issue is to find a customer for the Mirage 2000-9 and I guess that could be Brazil.

 

[sancho]

Sancho we already have CFTs for ur F-16s.

Not the new one with an integrated refuelling probe, PAF so far can't air refuel their F16s, because they don't have tankers with a boom system and these new CFTs are obviously cheaper than buying an new tanker. Btw, last time I checked (but I have to admit that's some time ago), PAFs B52s don't have CFTs and they are only on order right?

 

[Mani2020]

It's not the price alone, because they are right to say that in some fields EF is more 5. gen than F35 (SC, super maneuverability swashplate radar)!
The biggest problem for EF is, that Italy and UK are not only partners in that development, but in F35 as well, so it's not only export customers that asks themself should we buy EF, or F35, but even these developing countries itself. If they were as comitted to EF as Germany/Spain, or as France on Rafale, they would focus way more on future capabilities, even if the costs are high.
At the moment I think neither UK, nor Italy will remain on their T3B order plans and will cancel, or resell them to other countries (India, Japan, Turkey) in favour of F35 orders. Even in Germany, where the EF is one of the least developed anyway, the T3B orders are more than in trouble.
It's actually a great fighter, but it's sad that it might never show it's real potential.

lol i think they themselves were not expecting EF-2000 to be such a beast

anywayz on serious note i think they tilted towards F-35 because they trusted US tech regarding 5th generation as they already had F-22 the only 5th generation fighter and F-35 was projected to be a cheaper 5th generation aircraft somewhere around 80 million price tag so they would have thought why not to go for a 5th generation at a price tag lower then their 4.5+++ fighter but at that time they would have never imagine that the F-35 program will become so fragile and the prices will further shoot-up ,after the escalation of prices now some countries are really putting their thinking caps on and revising the decisions .so i think with further escalation and delaying of F-35 ,EF-2000 may become more valuable for UK and Italy and they might revise their needs

 

[Mani2020]

Not the new one with an integrated refuelling probe, PAF so far can't air refuel their F16s, because they don't have tankers with a boom system and these new CFTs are obviously cheaper than buying an new tanker. Btw, last time I checked (but I have to admit that's some time ago), PAFs B52s don't have CFTs and they are only on order right?

No, our Block-52's have CFT's but we haven't seen them yet.ACM mentioned that CFT's reduce maneuverability so they will only be used if there will be dire need .

By going with this statement of ACM i don't see PAF going for CFT's for rest of F-16's probably a new tanker will be bought ,few time back there was negotiation with the Airbus to convert PAF A-310's to MRTT but the problem was Airbus rather proposed A-320 to PAF ,after that we never heard any news, don't know what happened to the deal but as F-16's are potent aircrafts and after up gradation to block 52 level they will be more potent so i think we will see 1 or 2 tankers sooner or later

And one thing to add to your knowledge CFT's come with block 52+ not with Block 52 and Paf f-16's are block 52+ , there are not much differnce b/w Block 52 and block 52+ just minor ones the only major one is CFT's, lot of people here don't know the difference among 52 and 52+ they consider both same so they mention PAF f-16's generally as 52 but actually they are 52+