Rafale proposal 'effectively dead' as Dassault bid not cheapest

[SrNair]

My Ultimate choice was always this, a practical fighter for IAF.
Super Hornet MKI offer something which is super offering for any airforce:

1>An internal infrared search and track system (IRST)
2>Next-generation cockpit featuring large area displays,features an 11 X 19 inch touch screen with the ability to present the pilot with a 3-D perspective of the air and ground threat environments.
3>New missile/laser warning systems
4>Enclosed weapons pod which includes 2 MK-82-sized weapons and 2 AMRAAM-sized BVR weapons; 1 MK-83-sized weapon and 2 AMRAAM-sized BVR weapons; 4 AMRAAM-sized BVR weapons; and 1 MK-84-sized weapon.
5>Enhanced performance engines,EPE solution will provide 15-20% more thrust to current 98KN GE414 series engine.
6>Conformal fuel tanks,provide an additional 3,000 pounds of fuel and reduce the drag.

And all this cost no more than 85Million $.

And when a situation arises.Americans will cut off the spare supply.And all those so called fighter will ended up in.hangar.We dont need that luxury.

Upgrade Su MKI and rest should spend for speedy purchasing of FGFA and LCA mk 2.

 

[CONNAN]

And when a situation arises.Americans will cut off the spare supply.And all those so called fighter will ended up in.hangar.We dont need that luxury..

wont it be the same situation with our LCA as long as we dont have our own engine we will be vulnerable, dont you agree

 

[SrNair]

We are ready with c-130s and p-8 , getting ready with Apaches and chinooks and maybe drones.

Except P 8 all others have spare Russian system.The fact is they will neutrilized the capability of IAF with a single statement in Washington.

 

[possumlot]

wont it be the same situation with our LCA as long as we dont have our own engine we will be vulnerable, dont you agree

US has a history of embargo, Russia does not.

 

[SrNair]

wont it be the same situation with our LCA as long as we dont have our own engine we will be vulnerable, dont you agree

LCA wouldnt be our frontline fighter.
And engine project is already in there.

 

[CONNAN]

US has a history of embargo, Russia does not.

wrong quote i meant to quote different person different thread

 

[GORKHALI]

And when a situation arises.Americans will cut off the spare supply.And all those so called fighter will ended up in.hangar.We dont need that luxury.

Upgrade Su MKI and rest should spend for speedy purchasing of FGFA and LCA mk 2.

First thing first- India is no Pakistan and world has been changed alot since 1998. Its mutual partnership now and India buying apaches,C 17 ,C130,P8 etc etc.

 

[SrNair]

They didn't failed the test ,they failed the Leh higher altitude test which can be rectify by tweaking the engines a bitas we did for Su30mki and LCA tejas .

If sanction is a major hiccups then why buying C17,P8,C130,Drones ,apaches etc etc.All we need is good diplomacy.
PSon't compare India with Pakistan.

https://defence.pk/threads/priya-pillai-offloaded-after-intelligence-report.359746/#post-6790186

The friendliness of so called western friends.
And we have Russian spare system for all.those systems that we bought from US.

 

[GORKHALI]

That was exactly my point

Russia also sell to pakistan and china, so what the point of embargo by US ?

 

[CONNAN]

Russia also sell to pakistan and china, so what the point of embargo by US ?

post 67

 

[IND151]

should of went with the Super Hornet. India would probably by now have 40 birds and pilots trained for the SH, now who knows if the Rafale deal will fall through, and if it does who knows how long it will take to sign a contract for the Typhoon.

FF and SH were rejected beacuse they did not meet expectations and failed too pass tests set during evaluation process.

Besides these both plarforms are old partiaclury F 16 which entered service in early 1980s. F/A 18 Super Hornet itself is evolution of F/A-18.

They have limited growth potential.

They didn't failed the test ,they failed the Leh higher altitude test which can be rectify by tweaking the engines a bit as we did for Su30mki and LCA tejas .

If sanction is a major hiccups then why buying C17,P8,C130,Drones ,apaches etc etc.All we need is good diplomacy.
PSon't compare India with Pakistan.

They failed test mean they failed test. If tweaking their engines was possible, the US would have done so. Besides that is not the only reason for rejecting them.

 

[Bang Galore]

FF and SH were rejected beacuse they did not meet expectations and failed too pass tests set during evaluation process.

Besides these both plarforms are old partiaclury F 16 which entered service in early 1980s. F/A 18 Super Hornet itself is evolution of F/A-18.

They have limited growth potential.

It's a bit more complicated than that. SH was rejected for not doing well at the trials in Leh, could have been reworked with a new engine that Boeing offered if we really wanted to. F 16 & Gripen failed but they were essentially single engine platforms up against heavier twin engine platforms. Made no sense.

As for age of the platforms, I really don't know how much water that argument actually holds. Almost all advances other than stealth is software & electronics based. To diss a platform because it first made an appearance some time ago is pointless. However F16 would have been a difficult buy because the line is due for closure & support (and cost) over the long term is not clear. SH is almost a completely different plane from the F/A18 and in any case was a serious contender and is still being bought by the US navy. Support would have been around for much longer. Who can predict the future of either Rafale or EF considering that the countries building it seem to have very little appetite for much more.

 

[janon]

FF and SH were rejected beacuse they did not meet expectations and failed too pass tests set during evaluation process.

Besides these both plarforms are old partiaclury F 16 which entered service in early 1980s. F/A 18 Super Hornet itself is evolution of F/A-18.

They have limited growth potential.

The F-16 is an old platform, but not the Super Hornet. Just because they did not change the name (F-18) does not mean that it is the same thing. It is much more of an evolution than Mig-35 is over the mig-29, or Su-30 is over the Su-27. Justt because Russians change the name doesn't make the material change that big.

Also, it is misleading to say that the SH did not meet expectations. The IAF stated that all the contenders would have met the goals of the original MRCA program. The IAF found two better performing (and hugely more expensive) fighters, and shortlisted them, with no thought about the cost.

The Super Hornet with EPE, especially in the new 'Silent Hornet' version, will be capable of meeting all our needs for the next two decades. Remember that the USN is slated to use them for at least another 25 years - that should tell you something. Also, the Americans think of it as a complete package - the avionics, sensors, jammers, EW equipment etc on the SH make it more potent than an aircraft that can perform "acrobatics in the air". (To quote an IAF official.) Like most American weapons systems, they come cheap for the quality offered.

IMO, the F-18 SH would have been the best choice, given our requirements. (A stop gap measure to get Western technology, quickly build squadron numbers before the LCA and FGFA arrive, and come cheap enough to not impact other aquisitions.) At this point though, I would favour outright cancellation of the deal, and getting more MKIs and Tejases.

@DrawingDead : Any chance that the US can sell growlers? Is there an export restriction on those? One squadron of EA-18G along with Super Hornets might be too hard an offer to refuse.

 

[rockstarIN]

They didn't failed the test ,they failed the Leh higher altitude test which can be rectify by tweaking the engines a bitas we did for Su30mki and LCA tejas .

If sanction is a major hiccups then why buying C17,P8,C130,Drones ,apaches etc etc.All we need is good diplomacy.
PSon't compare India with Pakistan.

Those C17, P6, C130s are not as prime important as a main stray fighter jet!

Remember, USA sanctioned India as well as Pakistan after the nuke tests. Yes we are not in the league with those but we have an independent foreign policy.
Also not only F-18s but all engine jets need tweaking for high altitude. Even the Rafes and Eurojets. It is just a notion that they failed only in engine altitude testing!

 

[janon]

It's a bit more complicated than that. SH was rejected for not doing well at the trials in Leh, could have been reworked with a new engine that Boeing offered if we really wanted to. F 16 & Gripen failed but they were essentially single engine platforms up against heavier twin engine platforms. Made no sense.

As for age of the platforms, I really don't know how much water that argument actually holds. Almost all advances other than stealth is software & electronics based. To diss a platform because it first made an appearance some time ago is pointless. However F16 would have been a difficult buy because the line is due for closure & support (and cost) over the long term is not clear. SH is almost a completely different plane from the F/A18 and in any case was a serious contender and is still being bought by the US navy. Support would have been around for much longer. Who can predict the future of either Rafale or EF considering that the countries building it seem to have very little appetite for much more.

In fact, with all the budget cuts and number cuts across European air forces, the Super Hornet has a better future than the Eurocanards. I wouldn't be surprised if more F18s roll off the assembly line from today than Rafales or EFs.