Nice visual depiction of what 5% difference in the L1 means, despite claims of marginal etc.

http://rafalenews.blogspot.com/2011/11/mmrca-is-5-price-difference-irrelevant.html

Also does EADS have a 40% stake in Dassault, thanks to taking over Aerospatiale? If so, it may be a win win for EADS one way or the other.

So what do you think is going to happen now ? These 60 Rafales are more important for Dassault then 126 for India since all the UAE fighters will be manufactured in Merignac ,no licence production in customers country !

Like I have mentioned before, its entirely possible that 60 of those planes come with all their parts from Dassault out of a 189 plane order, for quick induction. SKD and then CKD, and 18 will anyway be from the manufacturer. 120 planes made and assembled in India + spares is still ok for Indian aerospace and HAL.

I wonder what they are doing for the ARM requirement? Presumably both have offered to integrate HARM (don’t know whether ALARM is still in production) which is why Raytheon is happy. It sort of knew whosoever won (apart from the MiG-35) there was a good chance its weapons packages would fly on the winner.

But it does seem more and more that the EF team is really taking this entire competition as seriously as anybody possibly could. They seem to have answers for pretty much all the IAF requirements, and will (if we go by unit costs) be very competitive in terms of offsets and TOT as well.

I wonder what all they have included in terms of radar and EW proposals.

Even the recent NATO mission in Libya has reports hitting that a simple aircraft would have served just as good – http://defensetech.org/2011/11/11/did-libya-show-the-need-for-light-attack-planes/

Would help the PAF against its own Pakistani Taliban campaign, and conserve flight hours on its F-16s which are apparently being used heavily. As the opposition, the Taliban, don’t have dedicated anti-aircraft units of the sophisticated kind. But not in a conventional war with AAA units every where!

hmmm…

Its for CAS and to be deployed by say, the Pakistan Army Aviation with large armored formations in big plains and deserts against large(er) Indian formations…

in comparison with attack helicopters and not in comparison with strike aircraft…

Easy targets for the Indian Army’s Corps of Air Defence & Artillery, with its SA-6/Akash regiments, its Tunguska and SA-8 units, not to mention its upgraded Zsu Schilkas.

What Pakistan needs versus the IA battle groups are fast movers with Brimstone type missiles, one pass and clear out. Even that will not be easy, because the Indian AF will be doing its utmost to achieve localized air superiority over the TBA with Flankers, MiG-29s etc.

Putting slow moving A-5s into the battle field, that cannot even make use of terrain the way helicopters can, that will be a recipe for disaster.

The IA is currently equipped with batteries (organized into regiments/groups) of SA-6, SA-8, Tunguska, Schilka, and twin barrel Zsu (which are on flatbed trucks). Mechanized infantry and other units also have Iglas.

The Army has also ordered and is receiving two regiments of Akash and substantial numbers of SpyDer. These will replace the oldest SA-6 and SA-8 units. It also has a tender out for more MR-SAMs for which Hawk, SLAMRAAM, Russian SAMs are competing. New RFIs are also being put out for new generation guns & MANPADS.
The Army has also ordered many DRDO 3D TCRs and 2D gapfillers.
The ADC&RS (Air Defence Control & Reporting System), the CADAs C3I software is also being deployed.

Against this sort of network, putting an A-5, however modified, into the air, will be nothing short of disastrous.

The only solution is to engage from medium-high alt, and that too is contingent upon getting windows of superiority open against the IAF. In an era of AWACS, thats easier said than done.

Helicopters using terrain masking are still a better idea in some areas (J&K for example).

Kb, here is the data from Sandeep Unnithans article on the SLBM. Note, while the article did bring in some confusion regarding the K series as a rival to Agni etc (they arent, both programs are proceeding in parallel) and also that thereafter, the Shourya cleared another trial and was cleared for production. This happened just recently

http://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/science/article2482010.ece?homepage=true

Mr. Avinash Chander said it was “an entirely atmospheric flight” at a height of 40 km. Since this was the third successful flight in a row, “the development phase is over and we are going in for production of this missile.”

and on K4

With Shourya ready for production and its under-water cousin, K-15, already under production, the DRDO’s sights are set on K-4 missile, which will be launched from a submarine. After K-4 is launched under water, it will knife up to the surface and can target places 3,000 km away. “Various systems of K-4 are under development,” a DRDO official said.

Anyways, from the 2010 article we have:

Shaurya/K-15 /B-05

Range 750 km

Weight of missile 10 tonnes

Warhead 1 tonne

length 10 m

Status K-15/B-05 in series production. Land-based missile awaiting clearance

K-4 Ballistic Missile

Range 3,500 km

Weight of missile 20 tonnes

Warhead 1 tonne

length 10 m

Status Second test by January 2011. At least six more tests before induction by 2017. Future variants for larger nuclear submarines to be 2 m taller and have 5,000-km range.

Air-Launched Missile

Range 200 km

Weight of missile 2 tonne

Warhead 500 kg

length 4 m

Status Hypersonic missile project called the Air Launched Article. Designed to fit under the belly of a Su-30MKI. First prototype by 2012.

This plus the Nirbhay and the LFRJ comprise the Indian complements to the Brahmos JV’s ALCM which is beign acquired as well.

IAF will have around 3-4 ALCM types each of which can used for specific missions.

Toss bombing is no longer a preferred means of nuclear payload delivery.

Break through AD, have a sufficient force protection package, and there is nothing wrong with toss bombing.

If you simply must have an air launched capability – a nuclear tipped Brahmos launched from the Su-30MKI still remains the only option for the foreseeable future.

No, it doesn’t. Per public reports – there are upto 3 programs* that will offer this capability apart from Brahmos, which will end up as just one of the several options.

*of which at least 2 are fairly serious statements of intent and being funded with a direct requirement from GOI, per all public reports so far.

Video of the Agni IV launch this morning

This is the Agni-2 Prime I mentioned earlier.

Expect 2 more tests for verification then mass production. Many new technologies used.

http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article2630898.ece

Indigenous technologies played a big role

In the successful flight of Agni-IV on Tuesday, what stands out is the flawless performance of a range of new indigenous technologies developed by the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO), and according to technologists in the organisation, they represent a quantum jump in the nation’s missile technology prowess.The triumph caps three successful flights of Shourya, Prithvi and Agni-II missiles conducted in September last week and has boosted the DRDO’s confidence to go in for the Agni-V’s maiden flight in a couple of months

The spectrum of new technologies incorporated in the Agni-IV mission included fibre reinforced plastic (FRP) or composite casing for the second stage, ring-laser gyros for inertial navigation system (RINS), micro-navigation system (MINGS) as redundancy to improve the vehicle’s reliability, a powerful onboard computer system, a multi-channel communication system and advanced avionics. The FRP reduced the missile’s weight, enabling it to carry more propellants and to have a better range than Agni-II’s 2,000 km.

“Today, we have a missile which is lighter in weight, highly accelerating, manoeuvrable and unmatched. This missile incorporated the type of redundancies seen in manned missions, providing for robustness and reliability,” Dr. Saraswat said.

The other important technologies that contributed to the Agni-IV’s success were better stage separation systems, efficient propulsion, high-energy solid propellants and powerful batteries.

Avinash Chander, Chief Controller (Missiles and Strategic Systems), DRDO, and V.G. Sekaran, Director, Advanced Systems Laboratory, Hyderabad, were sure that the new technologies contributed to the Agni-IV’s triumph. The missile was road-mobile (it can be launched from a specially designed truck), “which is state-of-the-art for this class of missile,” they said.

Mr. Reddy said the indigenous RINS and MINGS, complementing each other in a redundant mode, were proven in this flight. “We used a powerful onboard computer system with distributed avionics structure and a multi-channel, highly reliable communication system, which controlled and guided the missile accurately to the target.”

Read the entire article for the missing bits.