2. The F-35 can carry an insane amount of weapons when loaded with internal and external.

Say goodbye to you very low RCS.
I don’t doubt that the F-35 would still enjoy a state of the art avionics, but still, we have one strong point of the plane that suddenly disappeared.

I was under the impression that the major difference between western made radars and russian made radars was not so much given performance but the flexibility in various modes of operation.

For example I remember seeing (but I have never verified this, How could I?) that russian Su-27s for example never had TWS or RWS or something along those lines. Forgive me my memory does not serve me right now.
Other goodies like that were alleged to be missing also, like target prioritisation etc. Monolithic displays that didn’t help the pilot as much as the western ones etc etc etc.

**Warning .. this is from memory, I am not even sure I remember correctly.

Well, there is another phenomenon, it was the lag of USSR on the electronic field, but Russian engineers manage to do wonders without it.

You won’t get anywhere closer to the “truth” than we already are. Unless you expect the Indian officials to come out and say – hey, you know we knew all along from day one that we wanted to maintain both European vendors (France for Rafale, UK for Hawks), we just used you to cut the prices down, thank you Boeing, SAAB, MIG and LM !
You are not serious, are you?

Which means that we both don’t have the answer.

You ought to get the facts straight first. F-16IN was Block 70, not 60. Although I am sure that LM used as much of the 60 as possible.

Isn’t Block 70 above block 60 ?
Don’t you think block 70 featured more modern sub-systems which translate into higher price ?

Anyway, have you conveniently started to concentrate on the detail with the F-16IN, so that you distract attention from your original quote that picking Rafale had anything to do with upcoming conflict with China? Interesting is that for these funny claims of yours you somehow do not require any proofs. 🙂

I don’t understand the sentences above since I haven’t put any emphasis on the F-16 IN. Is it just to dodge the question of the maintenance cost of Mig-35.

Well, that is exactly the problem you have. You see Rafale as being much better than it actually is. Or the others much worse, I don’t know. I personally would be very surprised if the proposed version of the Rafale for India was more than 20% better in any parameter than the proposed final MiG-35.

It’s all about the requirements. Any mission that a Gripen cannot fulfill because of a lack of range for instance and the score is 0.

I can’t really imagine what more proof would one require to recognize, that the leap from the N001 and N019E cassegrain radars thru all slotted arrays up to the latest Irbis-E PESA and Sh-121 AESA for the T-50 is every bit as large as the step from monopulse RDM to today’s RBE2-AA.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Su-27

To achieve this at a reasonable weight, the design team came up with a radar using electronic scanning for elevation and mechanical scanning for azimuth. Unfortunately, it proved too much for the Soviet microelectronics industry in the 1970s to achieve, and by 1982, the original Myesch program had to be abandoned and a less capable alternative array was selected. To make up the lost time, many matured technologies from the N019 Topaz radar, including an enlarged version of the twist-cassegraine array, on the MiG-29 was used, and as a result, the resulting N001 radar shared the same TS100 signal processor used on N019 Topaz radar, while N001V, the successor of N001, shared the same TS101M signal processor with N019M, the successor of N019. The radar only achieved a 140 km detection range versus the Tu-16, and could only engage a single target. Even then, the radar was initially beset by reliability problems and this caused the N001 to be accepted for service in 1991, half a decade after the Su-27 first entered service in 1986.

Interesting.

You have obviously chosen to stay ignorant, I cannot help ya here, bud.

From a poster who cannot support his argument by anything, that’s quite funny.

Looking at the report I have a hunch this is a classic case if a reporter misunderstanding the details of general defence talks between two countries.

So take with a pinch of salt guys!

Yep, that’s the first thing that pop in my mind.
Even if Serbia had some projects with Dassault more than 20 years ago and even if Abu Dabi makes lots of effort to built an industry, such cooperation wouldn’t really makes sense.

A good question. Because it would suit the IAF doctrine quite well.. And even if I don’t like it as much a the Rafale, price-wise I think it delivers the same for less buck. For some reasons the Americans were out from the fighter game from day one. The whole MRCA was about Tyffie vs Raffie, anyway.

Well, that’s your opinion.
And I can say that it makes sense but it’s not enough to make it the truth.

Wrong thinking. If you want to mess up with China, then quality alone does not save you – you need to add up numbers. If MRCA was really chosen with a possible conflict with China in mind, then they would go for the cheapest contender – either Gripen, MiG-35 or F-16IN.

WE know for a fact that the Gripen is really cheap, that the F-16 bock 60 or above are expensive to buy (you just can check how much UAE had to pay for their own block 60) and for Mig-35 we cannot be sure of the maintenance cost.

Given the fixed budget, five airframes with technical score 80 are still of more combat value than three costlier airframes with technical score 100.

Sure, and 4 airframes with a score of 100 is better than 5 airframes with a score of 40.

A nice example. Now look at Russians. In 1990, they just had the N-010 and N-011 slotted types almost ready on the table. In fifteen years they have a dozen PESA types ready and three AESA types in the testing/pre-production phase. Is that the stopped technological improvement?

Quite on the contrary, for some reason you are the one completely ignoring all facts I have provided.

The issue is that you totally missed to point.
They could have develloped fifty types of radar, if it’s done using the same technologies, there is strictly no technical jump (well, you could argue that the more experienced engineers could find lots of optimization, but let’s forget it for a while).
A good example was the super-RDI made for the Mirage 4000, much bigger, much more powerful, but just a RDI on steroids.
So, I gave you 4 radars, but with a clear difference of technologies, that’s why I really think that Rusian lost the advantage it enjoyed in 80’s over Europe in the radar field.

you mentioned that France has some kind of security agreement with UAE that will give it preference in military equipment.

No, I said that UAE asked some “advantages”, nothing else.

but now procurement has been reduced to 10%. and you admit that Rafale deal was political favor. but why they dont need that political favor. obviously France is financially unsustainable. so no need to favor.

Could you explain me the link between each of your sentences ? I really don’t get it.

You underestimate the importance of objectivity, obviously.

Are trying to explain that a good radar, ECM, sensor fusion etc is pointless ?
I’m sorry sir, but another poster tried to explain the obvious superiority of the Mig-35 radar over eurocanard so, if we consider that some sub-systems can be more modern than the equivalent on the Rafale, I don’t think we can so easily assume that the Mig-35 is so much below the capabilities of eurocanards.

Not my favourite journo, but:
http://indiandefenceboard.com/threads/iaf-mig-29-aesa-upgrade-on-the-way-janes.4533/

And according to it, the only conclusion is that the Zhuk-A is vastly superior to the radar of their Mig-29.
Strictly no comparisons with the RBE2 AESA.

And what exactly would you want to have here? A written statement signed by Indian Ministry of Defense that they wanted to diversify their vendors?

Source is me.. Satisifed?

Let’s talk like people, not like idiots. What I really hate are time wasters who answer everything with “Could you provide me a source for this and that?”

Yep, let’s not talk like idiots. Could you, please, reply to the second sentence ?
With India we have one of the few very case where the argument “Bla bla politics bla bla” isn’t that strong.

Get a life… And you better got some serious explanation in what way the French/Euro radar technology is any more advanced than Russian one.

Just as I wrote, the european industry wasn’t stalled for more than a full decade.

French have assembled together one fighterborne PESA (RBE2) so far, good luck with that, Russians have like ten types developed in the meantime (N011M BARS for Su-30MKI, BARSik-29 for MiG-29, N001 Pero for Su-30 upgrades, OSA for MiG-29UBT and Yak-130, Kopyo-Pharaon for MiG-21UPG, Zhuk-MF for MiG-29, Zhuk-MSF Sokol for Su-30, B004 for Su-34, Irbis for Su-35, Zaslon-M for MiG-31BM).

Very interesting list, but:
– France have experience with one PESA and one AESA.
– Isn’t that impressive list of radar just a consequence of the fact that Russia use different kind of airplane ?
– More important, aren’t most of them using the same technological bricks ?

I see every reason to have these pretty much on par.

Did I wrote somewhere that they aren’t on par ?

And trust me, I don’t give sh!t what source is enough for you. I would not waste a second of my life looking up something for a guy who has already decided that no source would be good enough, anyway.

Obviously, you’re not here for the discussion, just to make a cheerleaders show about your favorite products, it’s good to know.

If those “Malaysian specialists” came to a conclusion that the N011M was greatly inferior to the 79, then for many they would suddenly become “an undisputable source of objective information”.

Oh yeah, but when “Indian specialists” concluded that Typhoon and RAfale are above the Mig-35, it’s for political reasons only.
Cry me a river.

Such decision is always 70% politics. They have chosen EF and Typhoon bcs they obviously wanted to have an Euro-made fighter.

Could you provide me a source for that, please ?

Because that excuse can only be use when the buyer don’t have any risk of war at his door and as you must know, India isn’t in that situation.

Yet they are still not ahead.. Which also says something..

Could you provide me a source for that, please ?

And, no, a press release is not enough.