MildaveThe MMRCA clause already allow for a command increase (at the same cost). What I understrand is that the IAF is willing to order more aircraft beyond the scope of the MMRCA. That will probably happen during 2020 onward. So I think another competition will have to be run since many aircraft will be updated by that time. That’s why some say it’s a backdoor to let the F 35 come in to appease the US.
However most of the sources are from US/UK so it might be a attempt to keep morale up and do some lobbying…
MildaveWith AESA technology the greater the array diameter is, the more TR modules you can put on it, increasing range, resolution, maintenance etc. while keeping power output and other variant constant.
The question is how many TR module are practicable on an fighter’s radar to do the job properly. For a ship you have about 3000 to 5000 for a given array. On a fighter you have between 800 to 2000. Because of the small space you have to worry much more about interferences.
The Rafale has a very modern approach to fighter design with the concept of discretion. As such Spectra is supposed to monitor at each time the amount of EM energy emitted by the different sensor in order to tell the pilot where and how to fly in order to be detected at the very last minute. As such you do not need to stress raw radar performances in detection range as not matter how discrete or stealthy, an aircraft using its radar is no longer discrete.
During the cold war the US put a lot of money researching stealth while the Soviet put more faith in raw performances and agility. As a result the F 117 was able to evade the very powerful soviet radar of the Iraqi army during the First Gulf War.
The idea of using your fighter as an awacs platform is a very desperate move, what you need is a radar able to fully use your weaponry’s range, and/or offer a firing solution for your wing man.
Mildave[QUOTE=Common Sense;1853608]
If Frenchies or Saudies ended up ordering Mirage 4000, would Rafale program even exist?
The Rafale would still have existed as a ‘next’ generation follow-on though it’s configuration could well have changed. Probably a single engined in between the Gripen and F-35 since the M-4000 was a heavy twin engined system.
I don’t see France going back to a single engined aircraft. However I don’t think that the Rafale program would have survived the end of the cold war. The AdlA did what they could with the M-2000 which while been a very good aircraft is not what they wanted for AtG missions in general. Given the public pressure on the Rafale, the cost of development, the actual economic situation were it’s increasingly difficult to sell new aircraft, they would have gone for a M-4000 “modernisé” or super M-4000.
The only reason France was able to afford Rafale was to provide the same plane for the the AdlA and the French Navy has a one plane fit all. They might have joined the EFA but would have dropped pretty early has cost increased.
Look at all the upgraded F15s been sold currently. France would have done the same and yes the French Navy would have bought SH. They were pretty excited about it at the time.
MildaveRight now the only thing we know about the J20 capabilities is that it carries its weapons internally. The Chinese are still behind the Russian in some aspects like engines, and the Russian are still behind the European in other aspects like electronics.
So to say that the J20 can be a real threat for Rafale before at least 2035 is daydreaming at best.
The only reason why Sarkozy hasn’t tried to sell Rafale to China is because of American’s embargo (which China has tried to get rid off in exchange for bailing out Europe crisis), the fear of the technology been copied illegally and China stopping the contract after buying only 12 aircraft, and India of course.
China is building at home because China has no other choice. But they would import if they had one. And while I’m sure in the end they will build incredible aircraft (and they already are), the day is still distant were they can be of concern for Typhoon, T50, Rafale, F22 and the like.
MildaveIf the French are still talking about sharing nuclear submarine, I don’t see why France and UK would not be able to share a squadron.
There was never serious talk about buying an UK carrier, although they had a look at it, it was deemed too expansive, and DCNS would have make too much noise. Given that Thales is a major shareholder of DCNS and that Dassault is a major shareholder of Thales… You can see the picture.
Current exchange programs already allow UK pilots to fly on Mirage 2000s and such, so I don’t see why it could not be extended to allow UK pilots to fly half of one of the 3 squadrons the French Navy is going to have in 2020. In exchange the UK would allow France to use their carrier when the CdG isn’t available, and provide escort for it when it’s operational. The UK is only going to operate one aircraft not two (the first currently been built will be put in storage brand new and cannot operate CATOBAR aircraft).
MildaveThe Rafale AESA has 1000+ elements per Dassault, and will eventually be upgraded to use GaN elements. Sensor fused AWACS support, datalinks, satcom, OSF-NG, SPECTRA, etc… will likely negate any differences in radar range.
+2;). The prototype had 800+ TR, the production model is said to have 1000+.
Plus FYI, the RDY-2 has a range of about 160km. The RDY-3 is better. The Rafale’s AESA was tested on a Mirage 2000 which had its nose modified for the AESA to be accommodated.
As a result if the Mirage 2000-5 MK2 with a smaller nose than Rafale can see at least up to 160 km with the RDY-2 which is not even the latest variant, it is safe to say that Rafale can see at 160+ km.
So again, that joke about the Rafale having a small nose was good, but it’s time to move on !
MildaveNot necessarily with heavy load.
EF is bigger so it won’t get as affected as Rafale, EF also has more thrust so can keep speed up higher than Rafale, which in turn translate into more range.
Same reason as why Gripen NG most probably out-range Rafale on light loads, but can’t keep up with heavier loads
That doesn’t make any sense. Typhoon doesn’t cruise (or supercruise) significantly faster than Rafale while consuming more fuel for the same speed. So the only thing it will achieve by speeding up is burning fuel faster (AB) which mean less range, not more.
Same is true with Gripen, it might have faster acceleration speed if light, but doesn’t cruise (or supercruise) significantly faster than Rafale while having less fuel. So Typhoon and Rafale are still going to have a longer range. The Rafale even more so with the M-88E4 engine.
As for the UK, another option is to form a joint group. The UK would provide the carrier and France would provide the Rafale. The personal would be mixed, with UK pilots flying half the missions on Rafale.
MildaveYou’ve got to love this.
Few years ago, the Typhoon was clearly superior to the Rafale. Then Superior in AtA and high altitude, now clearly better “potential” ! Well like they say about one’s woman…. better wait for her to change her mind !
Anyway, I think all claims have been debunked or certified by now, so we know which one has the potential and capabilities and which one has good PR…
I have to admit I’m a bit worried for France who is against US/UK and Germany’s pressure. I hope they will get the contract on paper before the US can offer free F-16s…
I guess we’ll have to wait for quite a few month of suspense before the dies are cast !
MildaveBAE is associated with EADS Germany and EADS Spain in the Eurofighter consortium but has no longer any direct investment in EADS itself (they prefered investing in the US). That’s probably the reason why the UK is making such noise. If the Rafale is bought, they are the one with the more to lose, while indeed Germany and Spain’s investor are going to see some money (albeit not as much as for a Eurofighter win) come their way (which may explain their reserve.
The UK is indeed behaving a bit like the US after they were eliminated and I’m sure France will have to be very careful in their dealings with India as they won’t be given a second chance. However after resisting the US’s pressure to reconsider selecting the F18/F16 or even the F35, I doubt India will let US/UK dictate how they should evaluate what they need.
MildaveGeneral Palomeros: “The Rafale is the best aircraft in the world”
France Soir , Feb 1EXCLUSIVE. By the time New Delhi has selected the Rafale, General Jean-Paul Palomeros, Chief of Staff of the Air Force, told France-Soir in what the French intervention in Libya has demonstrated the qualities of the aircraft to potential buyers.
F-S: Is Operation Harmattan, Libya – during which the Rafale was involved – has played a decisive role in this export success?
General Jean-Paul Palomeros: It is clear that the success of the Air Force and the Rafale during Harmattan were studied by every army in the world. My counterparts in other countries want to talk with me. They are surprised that we were able to send the Rafale as quickly to perform all types of missions. This was a demonstration of the versatility of the aircraft.
F.-S. Can you elaborate on these missions?
J. Gal-PP: We had to both impose a flight ban over Libya, help ground forces against Gaddafi who were at the gates of Benghazi and obtain information on enemy military plan. On March 19, 2011, from the first patrol, these three objectives were achieved. In addition to the imposition of the no flight zone, we used our arms of precision and fed our data for the following tasks. Thanxs to its warning and protective ground/air systems, the Rafale was able to intervene without destroying in advance all the Libyan anti-aircraft facilities, including missiles ramps which for us was the most worrying threat.
F.-S. You have been directly involved in negotiations to sell the Rafale with the Indian authorities. What was your role alongside engineers, commercial and political and French?
J. Gal-PP: I play my role as Chief of Staff. The partnership with the Indian army is old. For years, we do exercises with the Indian Air Force (IAF) which uses Mirage 2000 an aircraft very much appreciated in its ranks. My role is that this relationship is maintained at the highest level, by promoting the qualities of our equipements and those of the training of our pilots.
F.-S. And for the Rafale, specifically?
J. Gal-PP: to show the operational qualities of the aircraft, its benefits in terms of availability and maintenance. The availability of the fleet is the responsibility of the Chief of Staff. It was 95% during Operation Harmattan. In this area, France has set a high bar. To maintain a Rafale continuously, we need seven or eight mechanics. For some of our competitors is almost twice. The cost of maintenance of the aircraft is thereby reduced. It was one of the essential criteria incorporated into the design of the aircraft.
F.-S. What is this sale going to change for the Air Force?
Gal J.-PP The main interest for us is to work with the armed forces of friendly countries which have the same weapons systems than ours. The Indian Air Force will bring us an original feedback that will allow us to develop the capacity of the unit. That’s what happened with the crews of Qatari Mirages that participated with us in operations in Libya. Finally,by increasing the numbers, it will reduce production costs and maintenance. Yesterday, one explained that the Rafale was very expensive. He has demonstrated today that he is probably the best aircraft in the world and in the end, it is not expensive.
MildaveWe sure hope so 😀 !
Mildave@ Giblets : Nope, if the contract is signed before the election, nobody will want to touch it. Buying 11 aircraft a year require a tremendous effort from the govt. to keep Dassault line economically profitable (which is why many French who don’t see the big picture aren’t happy with Dassault), while other programs are suffering.
Even if 18 aircraft isn’t as big as 60+ they will allow the govt. to buy less for at least 3 years allowing to free some money to fund other programs and upgrade (like for the Mirages 2000-D that the AdlA is pushing for). The work to upgrade these Mirages will be done in France, so Dassault and local suppliers will benefit. Dassault has a long history of self-funded development and prototype, and winning India might give them the confidence to spend money, again to the benefit of the local industry.
So it’s like in the UK, no matter what the govt. in place does, the opposition well, oppose but then they do the same when they are elected. Beside Hollande has clearly stated he will keep pushing export and military expenditures. The only change is in the reduction of personal for the army.
MildaveThe very reason why an country decide to develop nuclear weapons is to “sanctify” its territory. You might get a few clashes along the border but you’ll not see India and Pakistan going to war any more. That is why Pakistan is alleged to use terrorist network and India… Well I’m not sure what they use, but I’m sure they are using something.
Pakistan doesn’t have to last, they only have to make it so that attacking them is not worth it. Which is why they have nuclear weapons. Any confrontation between air forces exclusively will see Pakistan lose. But since wars are never exclusive, the role of the PAF will be to protect nuclear installations and bases long enough for them to be deployed.
MildavePlease, 1.5b to upgrade 46 aircraft on 10 years with ToT and support is hardly what I call expansive. Upgrading a plane is usually much more expansive than buying new one which is why govt often prefer not to (UK, Swede etc.).
All that talk about french upgrade and weapons been “that” expansive is nonsense. Sure they can’t compete with the large economy of scale of the US, but 1 they come without string attached, 2 with the mica you get 1 missile for the price of two (AIM-120 + AIM-9 combo is much more expansive to buy and maintain while offering less advantages in both role).
I am not saying that Dassault and the French govt are not making money, I’m saying that the current suppliers of Dassault (except Thales and Sagem) might not see as much work and profit as Dassault due to the clauses of the contract, ToT, and 50% offset. That’s all.
Since even the sources code are supposed to be shared, some are concerned, and I understand why. But I still think the deal is more important than any such concern.
MildaveAnd one more question: Have you ever accualy saw flying MiG-21? The aerdynamic design is from 50s!!!
It might be from the 50s and it might not be aerodynamic unstable, but the MiG-21 is still one of the more aerobatic aircraft ever built. Plus contrary to modern aircraft they didn’t have to compromise the design for multi-role purposes.
Sign In
