What's new

Dassault Rafale, tender | News & Discussions

Status
Not open for further replies.
How do you know that Boeing is the only one which offered last minute change??? you have any source for it??... secondly you have the proposal of boeing submitted to MoD?? how do you know EPE is not offered in the first case??

Now lets see, EF and it's EJ 200 has the highest TWR ratio, clearly no new engine needed. Mig 35, Rafale and F16IN are offered with their latest engine versions and has high TWRs anyway. Gripen NG is offered with a new engine, the GE 414G instead of the Volvo RM 12 and although the NG came late to the trials, it was available to test the engine.
Which leaves us with the F18SH, that has the lowest TWR of all competitors and the only engine available for tests in the trials was the normal GE 414 engines (98kN AB thrust), because the EPE is nothing more than a demo programm so far.
And also think about the TOI report about IAF not beeing satisfied with the thrust of the F18SH and that further negotiations are going on. What do you think these further negotiation might be? :azn:


and the idea of developing EPE seems to be there and it is not a new idea that sprung up when the thrust doesnt seems enough .....

Wrong, the initial idea was that an export customer funds it, because the USN, nor the US government wants to do it and that is still the case! This new article just says, IF the US government cancells the GE engine development for F35, GE would divert funds that were planed for that engine, to fund the GE 414 EPE engine. But there is no decision about the F35 engine yet and so far GE will have to wait. Also think about this, if the EPE was part of the initial offer and GE had the neccesary funds, they had time from 2007 (when the RFP for MMRCA was sent out) till today to develop at least a test version of the engine integrated in a fighter. But that is not the case, isn't it?


Yeah may be EPE was not in the test craft... but it applies the same for all manufactures... No AESA in all the test crafts except US manufactures...

:what: Except of the EF (that might had showed the CESAR AESA demonstrator during the weapon trials in Europe), all fighters came with AESA installed to the trials in India.
 
Dont want to bulldoze your conversation with Sancho. But EPE or EDE will depend on what IAF will need, whether they offer or not.

We dont even know for sure if EPE or EDE is being taken/given for LCA MK2.

When we take the price to account for the LCA engines, it is clear that the normal GE 414G was ordered, because it is not more expensive then the Super Hornet engines. Any further developed engine would cost more, because they require more funds, also if India had chosen the EPE for Tejas, the US companies would have made a big PR campain out of it, because that would increase the chances of the SH not only in India, but also in Brazil, Japan, or other countries.


Dude I think they are also offering the F-18 G and they have even mentioned about their interest of offering F-35 ....

Boeing India Home: Boeing EA-18G Growler

Boeing is ready to offer a light version of the Growler to export customers, basically with the wingtip pods, but without the important jammers. That still would require the approval of US government, but as I said it's of limited benefit for us, when other fighters offers similar techs in every fighter, not only in specific versions. All Eurocanards have integrated ESM/ECM systems, Rafale and Gripen E/F has already, or will have interferometry techs, so we have alternatives and are not dependent on the US in this field.
 
In addition to the earlier comparison:

http://www.defence.pk/forums/india-defence/4347-mrca-news-discussions-321.html#post1663462


Some more pics of the F18 Hornet in air policing config:

2011_03_29_171.jpg

2011_03_29_168.jpg

2011_03_28_008.jpg

2011_03_29_205.jpg
 
Now lets see, EF and it's EJ 200 has the highest TWR ratio, clearly no new engine needed. Mig 35, Rafale and F16IN are offered with their latest engine versions and has high TWRs anyway. Gripen NG is offered with a new engine, the GE 414G instead of the Volvo RM 12 and although the NG came late to the trials, it was available to test the engine.
Which leaves us with the F18SH, that has the lowest TWR of all competitors and the only engine available for tests in the trials was the normal GE 414 engines (98kN AB thrust), because the EPE is nothing more than a demo programm so far.
And also think about the TOI report about IAF not beeing satisfied with the thrust of the F18SH and that further negotiations are going on. What do you think these further negotiation might be? :azn:

still your assumption right? ... and TOI is a toilet paper.. and you dont need to take them seriously.... A negotiations can be anything.. it can be on offset .. weapons systems... or Electronics.. not necessarily to be engine... Yeah present engine may not be powerful.. but Boeing surely would have proposed an offset.. which wasnt a last minute change which IAF where crying... because the EPE where as part of the proposal already...

Wrong, the initial idea was that an export customer funds it, because the USN, nor the US government wants to do it and that is still the case! This new article just says, IF the US government cancells the GE engine development for F35, GE would divert funds that were planed for that engine, to fund the GE 414 EPE engine. But there is no decision about the F35 engine yet and so far GE will have to wait. Also think about this, if the EPE was part of the initial offer and GE had the neccesary funds, they had time from 2007 (when the RFP for MMRCA was sent out) till today to develop at least a test version of the engine integrated in a fighter. But that is not the case, isn't it?

the report clearly says that base line of Indian MMRCA is with EPE and was proposed as part of the proposal..... without any prospect customer you will not develope a product.... will you invest in such a product no right?? so they will wait for Indian MMRCA which is going to comeplete in a month or two... read the below report

Paul Oliver, Boeing's senior director for international business development, confirms the F414 enhanced performance engine (EPE) was submitted as part of Boeing's proposal to win the MMRCA contract


:what: Except of the EF (that might had showed the CESAR AESA demonstrator during the weapon trials in Europe), all fighters came with AESA installed to the trials in India.
NG doesnt exist fully and Mig -35 is a paper plane... even Dassault AESA was validated to French requirement in 2010 only then we have to see IAF requirement. which means it wasnt a full fledge radar but some prototype.... EFT not fully developed... still F-16 has to developed to block 70... so every Manufacture came with some lame promise and not a full fledge working model right..
 
^^^ Rafle/EFT for MMRCA and Rafel/EFT for N-MMRCA!!!!:yahoo::yahoo::yahoo::yahoo:


COME AND GET US PAKISTAN!!
 
still your assumption right? ... and TOI is a toilet paper.. and you dont need to take them seriously.... A negotiations can be anything.. it can be on offset .. weapons systems... or Electronics.. not necessarily to be engine... Yeah present engine may not be powerful.. but Boeing surely would have proposed an offset.. which wasnt a last minute change which IAF where crying... because the EPE where as part of the proposal already...



the report clearly says that base line of Indian MMRCA is with EPE and was proposed as part of the proposal..... without any prospect customer you will not develope a product.... will you invest in such a product no right?? so they will wait for Indian MMRCA which is going to comeplete in a month or two... read the below report





NG doesnt exist fully and Mig -35 is a paper plane... even Dassault AESA was validated to French requirement in 2010 only then we have to see IAF requirement. which means it wasnt a full fledge radar but some prototype.... EFT not fully developed... still F-16 has to developed to block 70... so every Manufacture came with some lame promise and not a full fledge working model right..

It is quite clear, sancho is right.
 
Potential JSF Customers Inquire About Super Hornet

SOURCE AVIATION WEEK “A number of potential Joint Strike Fighter customers” have asked for information about the Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, according to Boeing Military Aircraft President Chris Chadwick.

“We see customers trying to recapitalize their tactical fighter forces and balancing that with huge budget pressures, and trying to make the best decisions going forward,” Chadwick says.

Boeing sees potential to extend the Super Hornet production line to 1,000 aircraft by 2020, company officials said April 20 as the 500th member of the Super Hornet and EA-18G Growler family was delivered to the U.S. Navy.

Current and planned orders for the Navy and Australia total just fewer than 700 aircraft, including 41 additional Navy aircraft announced earlier this year to mitigate the effect of JSF delays. Middle Eastern countries are among those expressing interest; they do not include Saudi Arabia.

Chadwick calls the Super Hornet a “low-risk, low-cost, known-time offering worldwide,” and Boeing officials repeatedly observed that Super Hornets are all being delivered “on cost and ahead of schedule” — a not-so-subtle reference to delays and overruns in the JSF program.

Boeing’s strategy, Chadwick says, is based on the idea that “what the customer wants is next-generation technology, when it’s available and as soon as it can be incorporated. We have an approach that allows rapid integration of technology into the platform.”

The Hornet international options package, shown at the April 20 event, exemplifies this approach. The options include a centerline weapons pod, with radar signatures compatible with an otherwise clean Super Hornet, conformal tanks accommodating 3,000 lb. of fuel, a chin-mounted integrated search-and-track system and all-round missile and laser warning, as well as a new big-screen cockpit.

Kory Mathews, Super Hornet program vice president, confirmed that Boeing and General Electric will offer the Enhanced Performance Engine (EPE) variant of the F414 for India’s Medium Multi-Role Combat Aircraft competition. The EPE uses an advanced core demonstrated with GE and U.S. government funding since the early 2000s and an improved higher-airflow fan, and delivers up to 26,500 lb. of thrust.:agree::oops:

Approved_Red_Stamp.png


That EPE engine has offered as standard engine for F/A 18 E/F BLOCK 2
No more conflict in this area atleast..
MILITARY AVIATION AND SPACE TECHNOLOGY NEWS: Potential JSF Customers Inquire About Super Hornet
 
Off Topic..but interesting..

Boeing engineers: We should have won F-35 fighter contract

joint%20strike%20fighter.jpg


Many Boeing engineers still grumble that Boeing’s design for the joint strike fighter, not Lockheed Martin Corp.’s, should have won the Air Force contract a decade ago to build the aircraft now known as the F-35.
Lockheed Martin’s October 2001 win cemented its lead as builder of the nation’s most numerous next-generation fighter.
Then touted as a $200 billion contract for 3,000 aircraft, the competition carried even more weight than the just-concluded fight over the Air Force tanker, which Boeing (NYSE: BA) did win.
The joint strike fighter was intended to be a low-cost fighter for all three branches of the military that was simultaneously stealthy and supersonic — and in the U.S. Marines version, able to land vertically like a helicopter.
Lockheed’s (NYSE: LMT) version of the F-35 has been riddled with cost overruns and technical difficulties, especially for the “short take-off and vertical landing” version, otherwise known as the STOVL.
High costs and technical issues have caused the program to be restructured twice in two years, and some expected overseas customers have been balking at the rising price tag. Last year Defense Secretary Robert Gates put the STOVL version on probation until issues could be resolved.
“Whenever we hear about Lockheed’s difficulties with the JSF, we all look at each other, and say, “They didn’t pick the right product,’” said Cynthia Cole, a former flight test engineer on the Boeing program from 1997 through 2002. Cole, now working outside Boeing, also was president of the Society of Professional Engineering Employees in Aerospace from 2006 through 2010.
In particular, Boeing engineers mutter about the STOVL version. They claim that Boeing’s design, which relied on rerouting the thrust of the main engine, would have been more trouble-free than the Lockheed Martin design, which also includes a central shaft-driven fan.
“I thought our vertical takeoff model was far superior,” Cole said. “The design was definitely cutting edge, it was new technology. We really thought it was going to win the day for us.”
Bill Sweetman, who reports military aircraft for Aviation Week and Space Technology magazine, does concede that the Boeing version was simpler and “eliminated some of the more complicated moving parts on the Lockheed design.”
But he contends that the Lockheed Martin design STVOL performed better on the test aircraft.
“If you look back to that competition, and you look at what was happening at the time, the only way it (the Boeing version) did a vertical landing was with inlet lip and landing gear doors removed,” Sweetman said about the Boeing design. “It would have been very hard to award to Boeing, because they hadn’t properly demonstrated vertical landing.”
But Cole disagrees, and adds that Boeing had finished its prototypes under budget and before deadline.
She said the announcement of Lockheed Martin’s win was a big surprise, because Boeing insiders in Washington, D.C. thought they were ahead.
“Everybody was really bummed,” she said. “We had the cafeteria filled, and once the announcement was made, everybody just walked away.”
In a way, that's the opposite of the recent Air Force tanker award, which most observers, even some within Boeing, had thought would go to rival EADS.
A consolation prize for Boeing has been that delays in Lockheed’s version of the F-35 have kept Boeing fighter assembly lines in St. Louis rolling, as the Navy has continued to order F/A-18/EF Superhornets.
 
still your assumption right? ... and TOI is a toilet paper.. and you dont need to take them seriously.... A negotiations can be anything.. it can be on offset .. weapons systems... or Electronics.. not necessarily to be engine... Yeah present engine may not be powerful.. but Boeing surely would have proposed an offset.. which wasnt a last minute change which IAF where crying... because the EPE where as part of the proposal already...

No plain logic! The only fighter that needs higher thrust, or don't have at least a new version of the engine is the F18SH, so when IAF refuse a last minute offer of a higher thrust engine, by logic it can only come from Boeing and GE!
The TOI report clearly said that further negotiations on the engine issue are awaited, so no need to speculate on other things.

Try to differentiate between things the manufacturer offers and things that IAF accepted as part of the initial bid!
The EPE as part of the Silent Hornet options are on offer for any export customer, if they fund it, just like the EF consortium offers TVC and CFTs as options. But all these things are not integrated into the fighters and can be tested during the trials, or at least test flights. That's the difference to the AESA prototypes of the EF, Gripen NG and Mig 35, because they were available. That's why IAF will judge the F18SH only with the normal GE 414 engine, just like they judge the EF with AESA, but without TVC, or CFTs.
For the SH that means a clear disadvantage in the flight performance, for EF a clear disadvantage in payload and range (withough CFT advantage).
So even if GE now funds the development of the EPE, it would not be taken to account into the initial bid, at least as far IAF concerns, but as I said ealier, MoD now takes the decision. Will be interesting to see if they help Boeing and the US, against IAF rules.


She said the announcement of Lockheed Martin’s win was a big surprise, because Boeing insiders in Washington, D.C. thought they were ahead.

I guess Nothrop felt the same as well when the F22 won, because their F23 also was considered to be better, or ahead. But as we all know, pure performance is often not the key to win such competitions, not even when it's a competition of indigenous manufacturers only.
 
Off topic.. but good information check this out

Russian Su-35 fighter will be a part of Brazilian tender again

21.jpg



According to RIA Novosti, Russian Su-35 fighter will take part in a new Brazilian tender on delivery of a large batch of multi-role combat jets. It has been reported by the source from Brazilian military-industrial complex (MIC).

The tender on acquisition of fighters for Brazilian air forces in accordance with F-X program has been put out in 2001 and cancelled in 2005. It has been renewed in 2008 as F-X2 and stopped again in 2010. American fighter Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, French Dassault Rafale, Swedish Saab JAS 39 Gripen NG and European Eurofighter Typhoon have taken part in this tender at different stages.


Rosoboronexport has presented the multi-role "4++"-generation Su-35 fighter, but the jet has been excluded from the tender in 2008.

According to a source in Brazilian MIC, the tender “will be renewed in the nearest future as F-X3, and the Russian fighter will be a part of it, moreover, it has a great chances to succeed: the Brazilian air force command speaks well of Russian jet ".

The source has specified that “the meeting held in the network of BRICS summit on April 14th with the participation of president of Russia, Dmitriy Medvedev and the president of Brazil Dilma Rousseff has seriously influenced the situation since the presidents have discussed the situation with Brazilian tender ". Rousseff has stated that “no decisions on fighters’ acquisitions have been made and all the tender’s participants may take part in it again ".

The second factor is that Moscow has offered Brazil to take part in fifth-generation fighter program, and “the Brazilian party has taken it seriously”.:what::what:

The F-X2 tender’s conditions include the delivery of 36 fighters (with an option of joint assembly of up to 84 more jets in Brazil), spare parts, radar with active phase antenna array, air-to-air missiles of short and medium range (with active radar homer), controlled bombs with GPS homing, and technical support for a period of 10 years. According to different assessments, the amount of this contract will be $6-12 billion.



Russian Su-35 fighter will be a part of Brazilian tender again - News - Russian Aviation - RUAVIATION.COM
 
We can buy the work done by boeing for our 5th gen project...every country does this....LM purchased the work done by russian company for their JSF project...China has acquired many prototypes from previous USSR states....
 
Off topic.. but good information check this out

Russian Su-35 fighter will be a part of Brazilian tender again

it's not at all off topic...

SU-35 is just SU-30MKI....

so the point remain , why IAF need to buy another twine engine inplace of just adding more MKIs....
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom