What's new

India selects EF, Rafale for MMRCA shortlist

Who is now the Favorite?


  • Total voters
    211
  • Poll closed .
Ok....! Here is an interesting thing for you guys!
Below is the picture I made few month back when I didn't know India is going for Rafale..! :D

RAFALE KILLER :D


no pun intended.

wow, it seems u have answer to indian MMRCA. ask u r govt to purchase second hand F-4. i am sure they will be happy to buy.
 
Austrian EF


[video]http://www.tccb.gov.tr/playVideo.asp?vid=18091[/video]
 
I have not made my mind up yet or voted in the poll BUT must say that Santro is making a stronger case to date... the EF boys need to speak up...he is owning you guys on this thread with his precise informative posts.
 
AASM: FROM PRECISION GUIDED MUNITIONS TO SMART WEAPONS

Our forces really need to add this weapon, at least on the higher end above our own LGBs. Would love to see the company that develops Sudarshan LGB to form a JV with MBDA on an extended range AASM, as a standoff weapon, comparable to JSOW, or HOSBO. Would be a great addition for our strike packages, be it on India, western, or Russian fighters.

LGB - Sudarshan, Paveway
PGM - AASM, KAB
Standoff - ER AASM, Kh 59
CAS/ATGM - ER Helina
Anti radiation - AASM, X-58USHKE
Anti ship - Brahmos, Kh31 / 35, Harpoon
Cruise missile - Brahmos, Scalp


These weapon would give Tejas, Rafale, MKI, FGFA and AURA UCAV excellent strike capabilities and IAF many alternatives in this role. Laser or sat guidance (GPS, Glonass, maybe even indigenous soon), IR, data link, high or low altitude attack, with supersonic speeds, with CEPs of only 1m...
 
Eurofighter better for India due to excellent performance in a hot humid climate like India with higher thrust engines and the new E Captor aesa will be better than the Rafale RBE2.

Eurofighter will improve it's A2G capability in the coming years as it being the newest fighter in the MRCA contest and the Euroblock nations will give good tech transfer they need this deal and will bend over backwards along with the french to get it.
 
Our forces really need to add this weapon, at least on the higher end above our own LGBs. Would love to see the company that develops Sudarshan LGB to form a JV with MBDA on an extended range AASM, as a standoff weapon, comparable to JSOW, or HOSBO. Would be a great addition for our strike packages, be it on India, western, or Russian fighters.

LGB - Sudarshan, Paveway
PGM - AASM, KAB
Standoff - ER AASM, Kh 59
CAS/ATGM - ER Helina
Anti radiation - AASM, X-58USHKE
Anti ship - Brahmos, Kh31 / 35, Harpoon
Cruise missile - Brahmos, Scalp


These weapon would give Tejas, Rafale, MKI, FGFA and AURA UCAV excellent strike capabilities and IAF many alternatives in this role. Laser or sat guidance (GPS, Glonass, maybe even indigenous soon), IR, data link, high or low altitude attack, with supersonic speeds, with CEPs of only 1m...

For a larger AASM in the 500kg (IAF's preferred bomb size) and 1000kg class, it would make sense to use these for attacking heavily defended C2 centres from stand-off ranges (15km to 50km). Rafale could come in low (Terrain Following modes) and launch the AASM in the popup mode (AASM powers up upwards trajectory and then drops straight down on the target) to evade long range SAMs. In this role, it would serve similar role as the ALCM but at a lower cost ($300K vs $1million) and being able to hit the target with a bigger ordnance size.

aasm_release.png


Courtesy srai, BR
 
For a larger AASM in the 500kg (IAF's preferred bomb size) and 1000kg class, it would make sense to use these for attacking heavily defended C2 centres from stand-off ranges (15km to 50km). Rafale could come in low (Terrain Following modes) and launch the AASM in the popup mode (AASM powers up upwards trajectory and then drops straight down on the target) to evade long range SAMs. In this role, it would serve similar role as the ALCM but at a lower cost ($300K vs $1million) and being able to hit the target with a bigger ordnance size.


The 500Kg class bombs were prefered in the past by all air forces, because you can strike hardened targets like concrete shelters, or bridges as well as armoured vehicles or troops. But today the trend is to smaller, more effective bomb kits that creates less collateral damage. That's why most CAS strikes in Libya were made with 250Kg Paveway, or AASM kits, or the even lighter Brimstone missile. The French even hase the AASM 125Kg (actually the same kit as the 250, just a smaller bomb), which offers more range, while the US already developed comparable size SDB kits, because you can carry more of them, compared to bigger 500Kg PGMs.
IAF is evaluating AASM and SPICE for Mirage 2000 upgrade now, while the latter is available only in 500 and 1000Kg versions, we saw 250, 500 and 1000Kg AASM versions displayed on Aero India, although I think the 125 should be on offer as well:

DSC03731.JPG



The 125 would be also a great SEAD weapon, with ranges between 70 and 100Km, if they would even an a wing kit, it could be furter increased and even an anti radiation seeker is possible (France did not developed it, because the GPS version has proved to be very effective as well).
 
which would b a better buy...rafael..or eurofighter typhoon?????

For Indian forces? Rafale

- ready developed and available from next year on
- combat proven
- true multi role capable and medium weight class
- better EWS and passive detection features
- 2 x BVR missiles with different seekers
- better weapon package and loadouts
- suits better between LCA and MKI, capability and weightwise
- carrier and nuclear versions available for IN, or SFC
- dedicated EW version possible
- commonality to Mirage 2000 and already available logistics gives advantages in fast induction
- most likely L1
- all main techs developed by France and they proved to be reliable in sanction times
- more possible JV / co-developments that would benefit LCA and Rafale (HMS, weapons, AESA radar, Kaveri engine...)
- long experience with French companies for JV, co-developments, ToT...
- best consultancy partner for AURA UCAV (Dassault is the leading company behind the nEUROn as well)


Just some points...
 
The IAF Precision guided munitions and stand off mis$ile should include Russian- KAB-500KR, KAB-1500 LGB, Kh-59Mk stand-off missile, Kh-31 and Kh-35U Anti ship missile,Kh-31P and Kh-58 UsHKE anti radiation missile. French AASM-(125,250,500) PGM/LGB, MBDA ARMAT and ALARM Anti Radiation Missile,Scalp EG PGM,the Indian Sudarshan LGB,brahmos ALCM, NAG ATGM. The american stuff would include CBU-105 Sensor fused weapon,Paveway II/III LGB,Harpoon cruise missile. not to forget india also operates Crystal Maze PGM.a formidable arsenal indeed.
 
which would b a better buy...rafael..or eurofighter typhoon?????

I would go for the eurofighter typhoon
- We become partner in the program (i.e. we get a say in future upgrades of the eft thus we can tailor it to indian conditions like mki)
- much better inventory of a2a weapons as opposed to the rafale's only mica and meteor
- huge order book all over the world as opposed to the rafale
- better engines - higher thrust and we wont have to change them as we will with the rafale's when the m 88-4e comes out
- more expensive in flyaway cost but less maintenance and cheaper weapons, hence net cost could very well be below the rafale's
- when tranche 3 is complete( it will be if india joins the program) it would become the equal of rafale in a2g and far better in a2a (which it already is)
- the future aesa radar of eft is far superior than the rafale's
- next gen hms system
- eads will offer better offsets as so many companies are involved in the project that work distribution will be so much easier
- the french might have support us during sanctions but they have past associations with pakistan as well and will readily sell their best tech to pakistan if pakistan can come up with the cash eg- the agosta subs and avionics for jf 17
 
- more expensive in flyaway cost but less maintenance and cheaper weapons, hence net cost could very well be below the rafale's

Based on?

Would be interested in any reliable source for EF maintenance, if possible even compared to Rafale, because I didn't found anyone yet.

The weapons can't be much cheaper, because most of those that the EF will get, will the Rafale have as well.

Weapons EF / Rafale:

WVR - most likely Asraam, because it's an option for Jaguars as well / MICA IR
BVR - METEOR both (Rafale uses MICA IR at BVR ranges as well)
LGB - US Paveway bomb kits for both
CM - Storm Shadow / Scalp, different versions of the same missile
CAS - Brimstone is in talk for both, possibly even earlier for Rafale


The EF partners are replacing their US missiles by METEOR and wants to use European weapons in future mainly, just like the French already does. Only because the EF can use older US missiles, it doesn't mean India would buy them, especially when METEOR is much more capable.
 
Based on?

Would be interested in any reliable source for EF maintenance, if possible even compared to Rafale, because I didn't found anyone yet.

The weapons can't be much cheaper, because most of those that the EF will get, will the Rafale have as well.

Weapons EF / Rafale:

WVR - most likely Asraam, because it's an option for Jaguars as well / MICA IR
BVR - METEOR both (Rafale uses MICA IR at BVR ranges as well)
LGB - US Paveway bomb kits for both
CM - Storm Shadow / Scalp, different versions of the same missile
CAS - Brimstone is in talk for both, possibly even earlier for Rafale


The EF partners are replacing their US missiles by METEOR and wants to use European weapons in future mainly, just like the French already does. Only because the EF can use older US missiles, it doesn't mean India would buy them, especially when METEOR is much more capable.

I don't think Typhoon is going to cost us more. In fact Rafale will cost just as much as the Typhoon. The European missiles are extremely expensive. With Rafale we have no option but to go for Meteor($2 million) and MICA($1.6 million). A single aircraft with 10 missiles(6 Meteor + 4 MICA) would carry missiles worth $19 million. That's crazy.

With Typhoon we have the option to go with Sidewinder($3,50,000) and AIM-120C($5,00,000) or even AIM-120D($1 million).
A completely loaded Typhoon with 14 missiles(8 AIM-120D + 6 Sidewinders) would carry missiles worth just $10 million.

So every time Typhoon makes a sortie in a war, it shoots down more enemies and saves $9 million. Remember, that's just one sortie, and a single aircraft does 20-40 sorties even in short wars.

With same no. of missiles, the difference becomes $10.5 million. That's huge. The Typhoon will recover its costs within two sorties. And start to become cheaper than Rafale after the second sortie.

Guess which aircraft's cheaper now...
credit jagjitnatt IDF

nobody can call the aim 120 d outdated or even old...... its the main bvr missile of the f 22 raptor, and the best in the world right now on par with meteor
 
...A completely loaded Typhoon with 14 missiles(8 AIM-120D + 6 Sidewinders) would carry missiles worth just $10 million...


Guess which aircraft's cheaper now...
credit jagjitnatt IDF


nobody can call the aim 120 d outdated or even old...... its the main bvr missile of the f 22 raptor, and the best in the world right now on par with meteor

So you have no figures for the maintenance costs of the EF and just take estimated missile costs as the base for the theory that EF should be cheaper.
Even that is based on the wrong assumption, that IAF would buy 2 different BVR missiles for a single fighter, which no other fighter in the fleet can use. :disagree:

Secondly, can you show me on the following pic how the EF can carry 14 missiles and how far it will fly without fuel tanks?

AIR_Typhoon_RAF_ASRAAM_AMRAAM_Vertical_lg.jpg



Even if you take all wingstations for AAMs only it can carry a max of 12 missiles, but such a load is not possible with a single fuel tank, at least to useful ranges. Even today in Libya it carries 8 x AAMs (as shown on the pic) with 2, or even 3 fuel tanks, which means when we look at it more realistically and not only based on the specs on paper, it might carry 10 x AAMs + 3 fuel tanks at max (Rafale 8 + 3) and the only difference as I said will be the SR missiles, while both will carry Meteor.

Btw, nobody said that the Aim 120D is outdated, it's simply not integrated at EF, a fact that jagjitnatt keeps ignoring:


There will be three Eurofighter production phases or "tranches":

* The first 38 "Tranche 1" machines will be configured for training, with a basic hardware and software configuration. It appears this initial batch will be mostly or all two-seater machines.

The following 105 Tranche 1 machines will be fitted to an improved hardware and software specification, providing support for basic air-combat capabilities with the AIM-9L Sidewinder, the ASRAAM, and the AIM-120B AMRAAM. The remaining machines will feature the next level of software, which add a limited air-to-ground capability, and bring the Eurofighter up to the capability level envisioned in the aircraft's long-standing specification. Britain and Italy have successfully lobbied for some additions in the Tranche 1 specification to support various laser-guided bombs (LGBs).

* "Tranche 2" will add software for an enhanced air defense capability, a direct voice input (DVI) capability, MIDS / Link 16 data link, and a basic DASS.

Sets of "Enhanced Operational Capabilities (EOCs)" are being considered for Tranche 2 aircraft. "EOC1" lists support of the IRIS-T and AIM-120C5 AMRAAM missiles, both with "off-boresight" targeting capability, as well as GPS-enhanced LGBs. "EOC2" list supports of the Meteor BVRAAM, Brimstone, Storm Shadow, and the KEPD 350 Taurus missiles. The EOCs are currently in definition and may change over time.

The Eurofighter Typhoon


Only older Amraam versions were integrated and will be replaced by Meteor as soon as it will be available, just like Aim 9X is not available, because the Europeans replaces the older AIM 9 versions with Asraam and Iris-T.


Now lets get back to real maintenance issues, here are some points why the EF T3B might be costlier to operate than Rafale:

- swashplate AESA vs fixed RBE 2 AESA => more mechanical parts that requires more maintenance

- retractable fuel probe vs fixed => see above

- air brake vs no air brake => see above

- bigger air superiority fighter with, bigger engines vs true medium class fighter in the F16 / Mirage 2000 class and maintenance routines based on the latter


Some more reason are discribed here:

...For Col. Moussez, the big change for the Rafale, compared to other combat aircraft in the AdlA fleet, has been the elimination of scheduled maintenance: "The aircraft has an ‘on-the-way’ maintenance concept. There’s no more scheduled maintenance on the airframe which makes for a lot of savings."

The removal of scheduled maintenance was a requirement for the Rafale programme from the outset. "It was the French government which imposed the maintenance concept for the Rafale, the first combat aircraft in the world which had both operational and support requirements," according to Yves Robins, Dassault Aviation director of communications. The use of computer-aided design (CAD) tools helped. "We used different tools such as CATIA modelling software," Robins explains. "During the design phase we were able to rehearse the maintenance, removal and installation of equipment on the aircraft to determine what would be the most convenient way. We were able to influence the design of the components so that they could be easily removed and installed... we were able to perform virtual maintenance and even before the first designs were made, locate where the problems were to solve them virtually."

To reduce the Rafale’s maintenance burden, Dassault has embedded sensors throughout the airframe to record details of the aircraft’s behavior. This data is recorded and downloaded into two data cartridges, one of which contains flight operational data and the other maintenance data. These are accessed by the groundcrew on a computer, which can pinpoint the precise cause of a problem and rectify it with line replaceable units (LRUs). "As soon as you have flown, you have the results," remarks Robins. "It tells you very precisely what is happening in different zones."

Rafale’s predecessor, the Mirage 2000, had embedded sensors in the aircraft to record the behavior of the aircraft’s mission systems. "The aircraft is its own test bench. You don’t need a lot of systems besides the aircraft for troubleshooting. You have just one test bench for all the aircraft’s systems, which use shop replaceable units," Moussez says

Modular design is an important element of reducing the aircraft’s maintenance burden. "The engine has 21 modules," Moussez continues, "so even without moving the engine you can repair it. You can move the engine from the aircraft with a crane and that takes you roughly one hour." The aircraft also makes light use of ground support equipment (GSE). For example, the same GSE can be used for the Thales RBE2 radar and frontal electro-optical package. "We tried to reduce the specific GSE to make the aircraft easy to deploy overseas," he notes. The innovations that Dassault has built into the Rafale reduce the necessary groundcrew to eight personnel — 25 percent less than the Mirage 2000 and again, this is to ease deployment.

Space on the Charles de Gualle, France’s solitary aircraft carrier, is at a premium and the savings on GSE and manpower is an important feature. "The French government imposed commonality on the two Rafale types. What is interesting is that on the aircraft carrier, all maintenance has to be done within the ‘shade of the aircraft,’ so to speak," says Robins. Moreover, the naval deployment has given Dassault and the AdlA a good idea of the maintenance burden on the aircraft when it is deployed in harsh conditions. The Kandahar deployment will deepen that knowledge further giving an idea of how the aircraft holds up in the dusty, hot terrain. Word on the street from the AdlA is "so far, so good." — By Thomas Withington


Aviation Maintenance Magazine :: Aviation Maintenance: Intelligence: News
 
So guys which one will win???
how many of u shifted ur party??? and to which one???

I am with both rafale and typhoon. But would be more happy if MRCA is scrapped. :lol:

Rafale looks beautiful but Typhoon has more future.

Typhoon advantages =

- big nose(nice for future AESA upgrades n )
- Better under fuselage space n topography, better organised hardpoints(nice for future arrangements n )
- politically better option.

Rafale advantages =
- looks beautiful
- french women are beautiful n sexy, yumm.
- looks beautiful.
 
Back
Top Bottom