VnomadLet me guess this straight, to question the wisdom of operating three different types of fighter jets in a single navy makes me want to “bash India”!?
Are you able to offer any argument or is your paranoia so severe!?
All three are variants of air force aircraft. The single navy will not support them ‘singly’.
VnomadTo add more drama…
Indian Navy Submitted an RFI to Dassault about the Rafale M Carrier Capable Variant
He’s probably talking about the RFI issued long back to Dassault along with Saab, Boeing and Lockheed Martin. If there were a new RFI it would have been discussed in the media.
VnomadDid you see that guy asking why Saab use women engineers, lol. I guess that is unusual in Indonesia. In Sweden you would be decapitated just asking that type of question haha.
Something probably got lost in translation there. Happens sometimes with non-native English speakers.
Between 2005 and 2008, countries with the most male-dominated engineering programs include the world’s leading industrial democracies (Japan, Switzerland, Germany, and the U.S.) along with some of the same oil-rich Middle Eastern countries in which women are so well-represented among science graduates (Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and the United Arab Emirates). Although women do not reach the fifty-percent mark in any country, they come very close in Indonesia, where 48 percent of engineering graduates are female (compared to a 49 percent share of all Indonesian college and university graduates). Women comprise about a third of recent engineering graduates in a diverse group of countries including Mongolia, Greece, Serbia, Panama, Denmark, Bulgaria, and Malaysia. Link
VnomadOne can’t help but wonder. The only reason a buyer would go with something like the AASM is because they anticipate needing to operate at very low altitude. It is a good match for the Rafale, but wouldn’t offer anything to the F-35.
The JSOW would be a better bet for all aircraft at all altitudes. For heavily protected static targets the BROACH equipped baseline JSOW would be more effective. For time-sensitive mobile targets, the JSOW-ER’s warhead is more than sufficient to kill them (whether its a tank, APC, radar or TEL). The AASM was intended to be a cheap add-on kit like the JDAM but since its ended up costing as much as a missile, most operators would prefer to use a missile anyway.
Vnomadhuh what?
Figure it out.
So the F-35 will not be deployed before 2018 now? Your arguments only get better. 🙂
No the F-35 will not get sent into combat before 2018 and will not be expected to perform CAS in unsanitized space before 2022.
Well, the F-35s will NOT have the 16 SDB IIs, so I really Wonder where that comment comes from.
The F-35 will have the SDB II equipped with Block 4. As per schedule.
If there is no problem with enemy defenses after a few days of operation, why would they even bother with integrating the SDBII internally?
Its a more efficient means of carriage and the SDB will eventually take over as the primary air to ground munition for the fleet.
The JTACs have been in combat and know very well, much better than you incindently, how CAS works and the relative capabilities of the planes, fanboy.
The air superiority required for A-10’s to operated unmolested didn’t just magically appear, it was achieved by (CAS capable) aircraft like the F-15 & F-16, which is why they are being retained and the A-10 being pensioned off. Whiner.
Ridiculous. European countries don’t claim to be superpowers and are not preparing their armies for a potential large scale conflict with China or Russia. The US military is built for that.
Stop spinning. Here are the facts –
1. The Rafale was inducted in 2000 by the French Navy (oh but it wasn’t ‘operational’ as-per-plan)
2. As a so-called ‘omni-role’ aircraft, the fleet couldn’t carry out basic precision strikes without Mirage guiding it through the process until 2011 (oh but this was all as-per-plan).
3. The primary air-to-air weapon i.e. MICA was and still is out-ranged by Russian and Chinese AAMs (oh but this is also as-per-plan), while you whine about how old the Aim-120C7 is.
4. The Meteor won’t be operational till 2018, over 15 years after the aircraft’s induction. The operators can move up the timeline but have chosen not to (oh but that’s fine as well since that too is as-per-plan).
5. The F-35 will have long range air-to-air as well as precision strike capability from Day 1. Not an operational necessity but delivered nonetheless. And five years down the line the SDB II will further improve those (already available) capabilities, as per plan (plan? what plan? it should have it NOW or else its a failed project).
The strike role is very important for the F-35, don’t compare it to a typhoon or the first variant of the rafale. The Charles de Gaulle protected by crusaders would have looked more like an aviation museum than a combat ship.
Hmm… JDAMs, Paveways, HMDS, & EOTS on F-35 vs diddly squat on the Eurocanards for several years. I can see why you would shy away from a comparison.
They were not mothballed at all, they were used for training. The first squadron became operational in june 2004.
The F-35 isn’t intended to be sent into combat before FOC either unless a massive war breaks out in the interim. For next few years it’ll be engaged in training.
The rafale can use its radar and electronic warfare suite to find target coordinates.
The radar is substitute for a laser designation pod like the Damocles or Litening.
The basic JSOW is not powered so is not as good at low altitude. The ER has a small warhead. The AASM uses the BLU-111 so it has penetration capabilities in a smaller package than the 1000lbs JSOW, so that 3 can be carried per pylon.
The basic JSOW outranges the AASM at all altitudes with far better penetration. The JSOW-ER’s warhead is big enough to kill most mobile targets. And the F-35 can carry six of them comfortably, though for dispersed targets requiring more weapons, the SDB will be used.
What else, it’s really tiring to debunk all that crap…
You wouldn’t have been whining about inadequate resources if you were actually debunking anything.
Egypt has ordered 180 AASMs and the production will remain open until 2018. And it is being integrated on other planes, like the F-16 and mirage 2000. So the production may well continue.
1728 + 180 = 1908. Whoop-dee-doo. The original plan still called for 4,200 of them to be delivered. Think many F-16 operators are standing in line?
Nice that you are not Boeing because it would be rather embarassing to admit that you can’t make a wing kit. :apologetic:
I think you just proved who is and isn’t a ‘fanboy’ with that juvenile line.
Vnomad@ VNomad
sorry to interrupt, butcould you explain to all of us how it can be equivalent (besides the significant error in dates you present) that an aircraft whose first job is interception (Typhoon) or a rafale, made from the beginning for pretty much anything that you can ask from a combat aircraft today have a few years before having all functions implemented, and a Joint STRIKE Fighter that starts by not having the STRIKE capability?
The F-35’s starts with the AMRAAM, JDAM, Paveway II and the EOTS integrated. So saying it doesn’t have strike capability is just plain false, unlike the Rafale & EF where Damocles & Litening integration took a decade post induction (and apparently 6 years after FOC).
VnomadI have known from quite some time that the SDB2 had been pushed from block 3 to block 4. The criticism of the F-35 is not arbitrary at all, the program is 16 billion over budget and 7 years late DUE MAINLY TO TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES.
So you’ve know for ‘quite some time’ that the SDB II is a Block 4 weapon, but you kept the outrage bottled up so far… until it simply burst out in March 2015?
What?? I don’t retract anything. 2 AIM-120C is insufficient until block 3F and 4 AIM-120C is insufficient from block 3F to block 4. The external AIM-9Xs reduce the stealth of the plane, talk about a half ass idea. And I would even say that after 2022 when the F-35 gets the 120D, it will be a relatively old weapon at this time. It won’t be before the mid 2020’s that the F-35 will be well armed with the successor of the AMRAAM hopefully. Also a bad news is that the 9X block 3 has been cancelled.
There’s only one logical reason for thinking that 2 Aim-120Cs are insufficient until 2018, and that is if you’re deluded enough to think that the aircraft will be deployed in combat before that, which isn’t surprising given that you think the Aim-120D will be an old missile by 2022 (as opposed to all the ‘new missiles’ being delivered before that).
More BS, not even worth a response.
And yet you blow hot air anyway.
No the obvious BS argument comes from the F-35 fanboy who thinks that by luck there won’t be a conflict that would require a lot of smart bombs against moving targets.
The A-10 will be retired despite what 95% of the JTACs have been repeating over and over, which is that the A-10 is a better CAS Platform. And also despite the obvious fact that the F-35 will be poorly armed for CAS in stealth mode until block 4 ( plus no ROVER, no IR pointer… you know the whole story… ).
Most rational people would define 16 SDB IIs between two F-35s as a ‘lot of smart bombs’. You apparently subscribe to some different metric.
Since you haven’t figured it out yet, air campaigns typically start out with a focus on securing the air space against both air and ground based threats not by dodging SAMs to hit trucks and technicals. And with hundreds of other fighters still available there’s no operational urgency to have the F-35 perform BAI (instead of strike and SEAD/DEAD) in a unsanitized environment before 2022.
100% of serving JTACs never had to worry about the enemy’s air force or air defences.
Nonsensical argument… The F-35 is stealthy so can be used in much more difficult scenarios than legacy planes. Unless you want to lose 50% of your F-16s in a short period of time.
If the USAF was worried about some ‘much more difficult scenario’ that’s likely to come up before 2022, it would direct the program office to move up the SDB II integration. No ‘normal’ person is worried about 500 USAF F-16s being lost in combat before 2022.
The typhoon is primarily a fighter. Again, as said before, you can’t compare the budget that Europeans have for their fighters to the F-35 program.
The Eurofighter is very much a multirole aircraft (it too can hit six targets in a single pass). And whining about budgets doesn’t change the fact that the Europeans have the option of immediate integration of the Meteor on the EF & Rafale and have still opted not to. Apparently they haven’t heard about the Third World War being scheduled to break out in 2020.
So basically what you’re saying is that you want the F-15Es will designate the targets for the SDB IIs dropped from the F-35s? Talk about a BS idea in a high intensity conflict…
A high intensity conflict will start with the targeting of enemy air defences, air bases and command and control nodes. Once the air space is secure, the F-15E will able to employ SDB II without any assistance from the F-35. As for what I was ‘basically saying’, the Eurocanards operating even in a low intensity conflict, required hand-holding by older jets. If their operators could live with it and felt no urgency to upgrade aircraft ahead of schedule, the F-35 operators can do the same without the sky coming down.
http://www.defense.gouv.fr/dga/equipement/aeronautique/le-rafale
Mise en service op�rationnel (MSO) de la flottille 12 F Juin � 2004
Inauguration du premier escadron Air � Saint-Dizier Juin � 2006
Which would be the FOC unless you’re suggesting the Rafales delivered between 2000 and 2004 were simply mothballed.
The AASM has been in service since 2007.
:rolleyes: The limiting factor was the Damocles which became operational in 2011.
The AASM is used against high end targets and can be launched from low altitude from a stand off distance. The rafale can destroy 6 aircraft shelters in one sortie from a safe distance at low alt, or attack radar sites etc while remaining safe. Not good enough for you I guess…
The oh-so-old JSOW can destroy aircraft shelters and radar sites with a BROACH warhead from considerably longer ranges at a similar cost. The JSOW-ER will be able to do so from hugely longer ranges, with the SDB still available as a low cost alternative.
E252000 is around $300000 with R&D.
Even ignoring the costs from the CPRA report from 2010, the unit cost will still get revised upwards to €300,000, since the total order has been reduced from 4200 to 1728 units.
Btw you know who makes the wing kit of the SDB1? MBDA:
http://mbdainc.com/mbda-missile-systems-produces-10000th-diamond-back-wing-for-the-small-diameter-bomb-program/MBDA received a “Boeing Performance Excellence Award” for the diamond back. Thank you very much!
I’d say you’re welcome except that I’m not Boeing and you’re not my subcontractor i.e MBDA.
VnomadMore lame excuses to defend the F-35…
As opposed to totally arbitrary criticism of the F-35. Most people have known for years that the SDB-2 was a Block 4 weapon, but somehow several folks here are only now realizing it. Unless you have other reason for deciding that March 2015 is an ideal time to whine about it.
I am not predicting anything. And we are talking about the period until block 4 which is not 2018, but 2021+.
So you’re retracting the part about 2 Aim-120s being an insufficient payload for the transitional period between the Block 2B and 3F?
What is the point of building this plane if its capabilities are not needed? The US want 2500 of those so it is probably not for nothing.
Point is to replace the F-15C, F-16, A-10 and Harrier. None of which are scheduled for retirement in 2018. And the F-35 wasn’t designed around the SDB-2 (even though it will be equipped with it). If integrating the SDB-2 before 2022 were an operational imperative, it would have gotten done.
I would also point out that the F-22 has been cancelled in 2009 so one would expect the USAF to try and compensate for the much reduced number of F-22s with more air to air capabilities on the F-35s.
No one had any expectations in 2009, of the F-22 build order carrying on to 750 aircraft. And with the F-35’s domestic orders pegged at 2,500, the presence or absence of another few dozen F-22s won’t be the factor determining the capabilities planned for the F-35.
They are decent weapons but the SDB 2 is very much needed to increase the F-35’s payload against moving targets in stealth mode.
And it will be integrated as a part of the Block 4 fit.
Why did they build the 120D if it is not significantly better? The 120D brings interesting capabilities to the table. Even one F-22 pilot ( Dozer I believe ) said the 120D was a big improvement over the C for the F-22. One cannot naively expect the AMRAAM to have a high pk against advanced threats, so the missile has to be as good as possible.
Is the Meteor not significantly better than the MICA and Aim-120C. Why are France and UK scheduling its operationalization in 2018 then? Why aren’t they doing it NOW in 2015? Why are they waiting until its 3 years old and therefore less modern than it could have been?
So the argument that the USAF needs a stealth plane so much for CAS for survivability reasons is BS… and the A-10 can do the trick until 2022, right?
No the BS argument is saying that in the four years between 2018 and 2022, its essential to be able to hit more two targets (or four targets for typical fighter pair) with an internal payload. Assuming that every other aircraft in the USAF, USMC and USN is inoperational with their crews on vacation, the enemy’s radar has not been targeted and SAM sites are still functional. But hitting that fifth moving target on the ground is the over-riding priority.
Yes the A-10 can perform CAS until 2022. As can the F-16 and F-15E. And since they can do a lot more than just CAS they’ll both be in service in 2022 while the A-10 will have been retired.
You do realize that the amount of money poured into the F-35 is much larger than what has been spent on the european fighters, don’t you? It is disingenious to try and compare the 2 without taking this obvious fact into account.
You do realise that the US military has a huge fleet of tactical fighters to shoulder operational requirements, don’t you? It is disingenuous to insist that the F-35’s weapon integration ought to done in double time without taking this obvious fact into account.
Also of course the F-35 needs the SDB II much more than european fighters, because it needs many miniaturized weapons for its internal bays. The eurocanards can make do with larger weapons on external pylons. And the SDB II is american, the european countries don’t want it on their planes that much.
The Eurocanards operated in Afghanistan and Libya paired with older types for buddy lasing. If they can ‘make do’ with a reduced capability set for a brief period, so that the Americans for far briefer period.
As for the rafale, it entered service in 2004 for the Aeronavale with the F1 standard. It couldn’t carry a/g guided munitions because it was very urgent to field it to replace the crusader. The F2 entered service 2 years later in 2006 and the F3 in 2009. The F2 does have precision strike capabilities, and the F3 carries the SCALP-EG, AASM and exocet. The AASM has proved to be an effective weapon, it is powered so it has more range than an SDB at low altitude and is twice the size. Not bad for a country that spends a tiny fraction of what the F-35 consortium spends. Wadayathink, fanboy?
The first Rafales were delivered to French Navy in 2000. Unless the Rafale also adopted the (much derided) concurrency model, that makes it 10 years to Damocles integration and independent precision strike capability.
As for ‘wadayathink’ – I think the AASM costs $400K each (incl. R&D) and there’s a very good reason why the French ordered Paveways and why the Gripen flies with the SDB rather than the AASM.
VnomadThey’re focusing too much on the software and not enough on the weapons. Block 2B sould have had 4 AIM-120Cs, and block 3F 4 AIM-120Ds and SDB2s together with the SDB1. The other planes will be able to use the 120D and the SDB2 effectively without that kind of software whizzbang.
Are you predicting a major conflict involving the entirety of US air power between 2016 and 2018 (such that 2 AMRAAMs will fall short)?
Darn good selection of weapons with 12 year old AIM-120C7s at best, 20 year old JDAMs, 13 year old SDB1s, old LGBs, 15 year old JSOW?
Just putting its age next to it doesn’t not make the munition dated. JDAMs, SDB-Is and JSOWs are still far from needing replacement. And in 2018, the UK and France will have only a handful of Meteors with the bulk of their inventories consisting of Aim-120Cs and MICAs. And the Aim-120C7 will still remain competitive against anything fielded in rest of the world.
Against mobile targets in stealth mode it will have 2 weapons ( GBU-12s ) until 2022. That’s darn impressive, isn’t it?
If CAS/interdiction is called for before 2022, its highly unlikely that the aircraft will be required to perform it in ‘stealth’ mode.
VnomadNo FBW my last comment was simply an observation on the distinct difference between hoppy’s vague it’s “darned impressive” comment lacking any actual data on what makes it “darned impressive” and the factual list provided by hotshot.
The Eurofighter and Rafale were operational for a full TEN YEARS before they received proper precision strike capability (not including the T1’s ‘Austere’ mod). And I wouldn’t be surprised if the SDB-II integration on the Gripen E happened only after 2020.
VnomadInterior of the KE-03
Very nice interiors. A copy of the 737 Wedgetail. An impressively exact copy.
Here’s the Turkish president in the 737. Or maybe its the KE-03, I can’t really tell.
VnomadWhat reasons would favour selection of Eurojet rather than GE to power AMCA?
Its only been offered by Rolls Royce. The Indian side hasn’t yet selected it to power the AMCA. Yet anyway.
As for the engine itself, perhaps the design is better suited for sustained supercruise than the F414?
Vnomadmore productive uses?. show me a single one that is more productive than learning cargo lifter.
So you can’t think anything productive use by a developing country for $300 million. Bravo!
Those 8 operaators are not operating size of India. infact that 12 or so C-130J will wear out due to overuse and lack of training pilots. For India atleast 100 is needed. some will be in training. some in overhaul. some for prototyping and upgrades.
Why just 100? Why not 200? All it requires is an adjustment to your sphincter.
This ERJ-145 is joke and not suitable for 21st century AWACS. The two engine of MTA produce as much non-afterburning thrust as afterburngin thrust of 5G fighters. AWACS has to significantly outperform Fighter radar ranges. ERJ-145 AWACS is very low standard AWACS. MTA is all in one solution. Designed from ground up for multifunctional use.
Hell yeah, doesn’t even need escorts. Just slap some missiles on it and you have a fighter aircraft. There’s a lot you can achieve when you’re making modifications to a plastic model.
VnomadIt is far more reliant on exports to survive than the C-130J was, I’m sure you’ll agree.
For the program as a whole yes I’d agree. At the same time, I have to point out that its not won a competitive export order anywhere. All sales have been political, based on Latin American solidarity. They would have been in the bag regardless of how well it compared to the C-130J (unless it was unusually expensive).
2 vs. 4 engines is not a bad start. Fuel cost is important, but not to the exclusion of other operating costs.
2 turbofans vs 4 turboprops. Swept vs straight high aspect wings. Also, the C-130J has scale working in its favour in terms of spares and support.
Thing is, the 737 was souped up far more comprehensively and much more regularly than either the C-130 or the Il-76. While the latter two have remained virtually unchanged aerodynamically the over the course of their lives and received no more than a single major engine upgrade, the 737 will have gone through 3 clean-sheet wing designs and 3 major engine updates by the time the MAX comes online, with countless evolutionary improvements in between.
I agree to some extent. Like I said in one of the earlier posts, if Embraer had set out with the objective of beating the C-130J on operating costs and designed the aircraft accordingly, they’d have succeeded. But the end result would also have looked like a more refined version of the C-130J. As things stand however, its been designed to meet a more variable set of requirements including aerial refueling as well as commercial operations.
The only way the C-130 could maintain its leading market position for so long without similarly comprehensive revisions is that there was no serious competition – the KC-390 will change that.
Thing is, export market is mostly settled isn’t it? South America will be dominated by the KC-390. The US and its Pacific allies will operate the C-130J. The Europeans will operate a mix of C-130Js and A400Ms. The only open market left was the Middle East which the C-130J has already captured. Leaving just India and a handful of small states in Africa and Asia as viable markets.
VnomadThe question isn’t really C-130J or KC-390, but whether either of them is preferable to a Russian-designed Il-214 MTA which so far has not been built, using an as yet incomplete engine. Decide first whether to be a junior partner to Russia in a new project, then decide whether it’s better to be a second-tier customer for the C-139J, or a first-tier (the biggest, probably) customer for KC-390.
What difference does the tier system make. Its not a prestige buy and India is already a C-130J customer. (Also, having funded its development and home to its manufacturer, Brazil will continue to be the only ‘first-tier’ customer for the KC-390)
Sign In
