A good deal for France, however I wouldn’t say its as good as deal for India too…But anyway…

In terms of improving France’s chances for the MMRCA deal, maybe, maybe not, some people might consider France will walk away with the MMRCA deal now that India has gone ahead with the Mirage upgrade…I wouldn’t put any bets on that.

I remember when the other contenders were still in the MMRCA competition when India selected the GE F414 engines for their Tejas aircraft, many, many members were adament the Americans were going to walk away with the deal with their F/A-18, like, seriously sure, the likes of Scooter & Co were a million percent sure it was a done deal. But got a bit of a shock.

Fair enough re. the JSF variants – forgot about ’em. But still, the a/c primed for A2A seem to prefer tvc (F22, Pakfa, J20?).

As far as Scorpion’s detailed description goes, it only further highlights my point that assuming a tech superiority for the Tiffy, this supposed superiority is hardly a “generational” difference – the difference is marginal at best. And surely, we don’t know what that translates to in terms of performance. Not as though the MKI was facing a Raptor!

Also, there are limitations to any analysis, even one as good as Scorp’s. There are too many unknowns:
I for one, find it unconvincing that a mech scanned array, which is decidedly smaller (0.78msq vs. 0.38msq – almost a difference of 2X in area) is going to have the same/similar power as a PESA of the same era, which has certain natural advantages to boot. Too many unknowns for sure:

There are references to the captor having detected a certain f4/mig-29 (5msq) bet 160km and a bomber type target (100sqm?) at around 370km as per a recent post.
By the same token, a Bars supposedly detected a flanker (15msq) at ~ 340kms.

Again, while declared TWS/engage figures for the Captor are ~ 20/6, Bars figures range from 15/4 (since the 90s) to 15/6 and as much as 20+/8 in more recent times.

Go figure.

USS

Well, to be honest, you’ve mentioned a couple of times that theres too many unknowns yet state something is unconvincing. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not having a pop or anything but it can put one in a position where it’s just pointless to try and counter…

Might want to go figure a few things out.

As for this generation thingy – to be honest, this is something I don’t buy in to, its merely a marketeing gimmick that all manufacturers are guilty of as far as I’m concerned. It’s simply evolution of technology.

Well, I kinda sorta gave up on that tranche thing a long time back, ditto with all those flanker variations damned M, SM, MK, MK2, MKA/I/M, UB, SK, 35, 27, 30 WTH! At least the frenchies have ’em down to something my modest brain can get a wrap around – Rafale F1, 2, 3, 4 etc. So I guess no cookie for me 🙁

A bit of research wouldn’t hurt though.

True, not exactly a new thing this, but iirc, only 5 gen birds (apart from Flanker variants and the venerable Shar) tend to sport it as a norm. I mean, what gen 5 bird doesn’t have TVC?

F-35A and C variants.

So in a sense, the current MKI does sport certain tech that is decidedly ahead of the current Tiffy – somewhat contrary to what the good Chief said (MKIs were whacked because of obvious tech superiority of the Tiffy in the exercises).

My point is that the supposed technological superiority of the Typhoon over an MKI is not exactly obvious.

Also, as far as India getting new tranche tiffys goes (with AESA etc), this is hardly a big deal, their Su-30 upgrade is also slated to get similar stuff, heck so is the LCA in its newer avatar (ala Gripen NG).

IOWs, IF the Typhoon in its current form or future variants claims to have a tech edge over existing or near future IAF inventory, this advanatage is marginal at best. Not as overwhelming/obvious as the Chief’s comments suggest. Surely nothing “next generational” in that.

I think Teer might have hit it on the head – if the MKIs were playing with the Bars in a restricted mode, I can see why they would get “whacked”, however, it seems a rather a tall claim otherwise.

USS.

Once again, Scorpion82 has just explained it better than just about anyone of us could.

I doubt they’d do loopings and barrel rolls with 2 Storm shadows & 3 external tanks + 4 air to air missiles in the real world.

Nic

I’d never rule out. I have a watch that could go 20 metres under water, I’m never going to do anything such as that, but it’s comforting to know that if I accidently drop it into sink, it’s going to be fine. Know what I mean?

Thanks for the details. I’ve only ever seen operational Typhies with an LDP on the centreline, hence the query, as I’m sure in most cases the centreline would rather be used for a fuel tank.

I can understand the reservations of replacing an AMRAAM/Meteor with a pod, but it still leaves the hardpoints at the rear. And the Rafale can also pnly carry 2 BVRAAM in a similar configuration. Just wondering whether it would provide extra mission flexibility if both the front fuselage hardpoints could be switched to carry pods, one with an LDP, the other with an ECM/EW pod of some sort?

Quite possibly yes. No reasons why it couldn’t if the need arises. For example, a LDP as well as a Reccelite pod could may be carried together on those stations, to go into a little more detail, in theory, providing the weight is fine, it could possibly operate with:

2x Conformal Fuel Tanks (CFTs)
2x Storm Shadows on the wing’s wet stations
2x Paveway series on the wing’s most inner stations (no more than 1000lb)
2x ASRAAM on their usual rails
4x Meteor (1x each on the aircraft’s wings and another 2x rear conformal stations at the rear)
2x pods of a reccelite and LDP on the foreword conformal stations
1x centre drop tank

Very versatile.

It would depend on the scenarios at the end of the day I suppose. Although it won’t need the likes of the ECM/EW pods, it already has those on the wing tips etc, via the aircraft’s DASS system.

Info – Eurofighter Typhoon on Libya operations.

…”cruising at 40 000 feet, 0.9 mach, even with a war load of 4 Enhanced Paveway II 1000 lb bombs, a Litening III Targeting POD, AMRAAM and ASRAAM missiles.”

Interesting, lots more to read into here:

http://www.eurofighter.com/media/news0/news-detail/article/info-eurofighter-typhoon-on-libya-operations.html

To settle an argument, someone email the French and tell them to send up a fully loaded Rafale up to do a display. 😀

Other news:

By N.C. Bipindra, IANS,

RAF Fairford (Britain) : The German air force is keen on a joint military exercise with India and will discuss the possibility of this when the Indian Air Force (IAF) chief visits Berlin in September.

Luftwaffe chief General Aarne Kreuzinger-Janik said during an interaction on the sidelines of the Royal International Air Tattoo here that Germany was exploring the possibilities of regular joint exercises with the IAF for achieving interoperability.

“We are in talks with Indian Air Force on joint exercises,” Kreuzinger-Janik said when IANS pointed out to him that there were no joint military exercises between the Indian and German air forces.

“The IAF chief is visiting Germany in September and I will discuss with him the possibility of holding regular air exercises,” he said.

http://twocircles.net/2011jul20/german_indian_air_forces_may_have_joint_exercises_soon.html

Well, if I could choose out of those three aircraft for bombing missions today, Typhoon, Rafale or Tornado, I’ll have the trusty old Tonka please. A lot of people are babbling on about the former two but are over-looking the Tornado. As of now, its probably the more effective A/G platform operating over Libya at the moment especially with Brimstone – which seems to be the envy of many other air forces.

Superior bombing capabilities of the Typhoon may be a bit mad to claim, as of now it must be said, but the likes of lower life cycle maintenance costs and higher operational availability, well, I wouldn’t rule & laugh those off.