ante_climaxNo actually it applies to all people I think. Majority of the people here think western equipment is superior while in forums like USSR and other Russian forums they say Russian stuff are superior.
Everyone likes thinking their stuff is decent.
ante_climaxErr, the link you quoted does not say they apolagised for saying they beat the Su-30’s at all, so for all you know they may have whipped the Su-30. What he apolagised for was other comments but nothing to do with comments about ‘scores’. In short your link proved nothing.
We have many other sources including USAF pilots saying what actually happened. If you want to see those look at the IAF discussion thread in this very forum. The truth i believe is somewhere between both.
He also talked a lot about Bisons having Israeli Radar and Jammers, while they have Russian ones and weren’t even present in the exercise. Can you imagine the number of refuelings the short legged mig 21s would have needed from India to Nellis ?
ante_climaxHow about glasses? 😉
“Against the much larger RCS Su-30MKI, the F-16s and F-15s won consistently during the first three days of air-to-air combat, he continues.”
Are you still believing that bull**** that guy said. Even after USAF said sorry and acknowledged that he was talking **** ? 😡
ante_climaxWould Saudis risk direct involvement in an India Pakistan war. Not at any stage I think :).
ante_climaxNo more than the hundreds of the F-16 pilots that fly each day………..Really, the single engine vs twin engine debate has been exhausted. With systematic evidence showing single aircraft are as safe as twin engined aircraft………
Less maintenance needed as well for single engined fighters. 🙂
ante_climaxthe IAF will most likely purchase US weapons if it does choose a US platform, primarily because its not an easy task to integrate a BVR weapon with a radar, with all its associated software/hardware and trials.
regarding WVR weapons, the IAF has integrated Magic 2s on MiG-21s and R-73s on the Mirage-2000s, but those are only WVR weapons.
as for ASRAAM on IAF Mirages, thats the first time I’ve heard it..could you provide a source? As far as I know, the upgrade was only to use Mica IR and EM missiles or Israeli weapons Derby and Python V if Vivek Raghuvanshi (a DDM journo) is to be believed.
Here is the source http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ASRAAM. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mirage_2000
It has sources for the information as citations.
Also its your personal opinion/choice to call it the ‘sewer hornet’ its mine to say that it represents poor taste.
ante_climaxNo? then why state that the shornet is by far more able than the rest of the MRCA candidates? Or do you think that F-15=F-18>MRCA candidates? Bold claim indeed!
Rafale demonstrated its AESA to the swiss very recently and the tech was supposed to be on par with the apg-79.
Go on tell us – how exactly do you compare the two? Esp. when its not even certain if India will be cleared for the aim-120D.
Another magnificent claim! here are some things to ponder:
1) The Rafale is distinctly smaller than the shornet thereby offering a smaller visual sig in the WVR game (kinda important factor that)
2) The rafale has better TWR/acceleration, making it more agile.
3) The rafale has long ranger IIR MICA which can be used in combo with the OSF to make a fully passive attack
4) The rafale can also use the ASRAAM a v.decent competition to the AIM 9X
5) The rafale may not have HMS as of now, but can easily incorporate one such as the topsight (as in the case of the m2k)
6) Airshow maneuvers hardly describe a/c ability, how do you know that a rafale can’t do everything the shornet did at aeroindia 07 (and do it better)?
7) Slow speed manouvers are fine and dandy, but the russki birds (mig-35/su-35, which are by far the kings of slow speed manouvers) have been heavily criticized for using manuevers which cause a huge loss in airspeed in a game where “speed is life”. If you really want to tomtom this capability i’d suggest backing the MiG-35 any day.yes, india has the notorious distinction of completely ignoring its airforce’s needs and preferences (mirage 2000-5) and expanding on a shortlist for the sake of it! Thereby putting the IAF and the nation’s security in a bind. Simply incredible! The damn nordic fools need to learn from india how procurement is to be done.
Are you privy to these proposals? If not please note that open source docs only point to tech transfer of critical components (aesa) if okayed by the congress/senate.
Regards,
USS.
In all democracies many factors matter than just the need of the Airforces.
That is why the United States Air Force is only getting far less Raptors than what they wanted. Also Mirage 2000-5 will only fill in the numbers it offers no advantage over the Pakistani upgraded f 16s.
Do you think Boeing and Lockheed is competing in this deal with severe handicaps like non sanctioning of weapons like AIM 120D ? If so they may as well give up before they started. The fact that Boeing has been one of the most active of the competitors mean they really think they have a good chance of winning it.
Rafale has not won any export orders to date, and there are clearly reasons for that. The Americans offer much mature platforms with already proven and integrated systems. The Rafale and Eurofighter for me are just waste of money. They like the LCA are fourth generation fighters developed when the world is switching by and large to fifth generation. It also makes perfect sense for any country opting for fourth generation fighters to go for tried trusted and proven platforms.
1, 1) The Rafale is distinctly smaller than the shornet thereby offering a smaller visual sig in the WVR game (kinda important factor that)
Which is not much of a boon, the Su 30 MKI despite its size is an excellent dogfighter. And contrary to the claims of an airforce Colonel who did not take part in the exercise, it performed well in Redflag in both WVR and BVR. So did the older Su 30 MKs in 2005.
3, The rafale has long ranger IIR MICA which can be used in combo with the OSF to make a fully passive attack
The effectiveness of such attacks have hardly been substantiated in any a2a engagements todate.
3. The rafale may not have HMS as of now, but can easily incorporate one such as the topsight (as in the case of the m2k)
The Rafale is all about will and can, while the Super Hornet already has all these operational.
4. 6) Airshow maneuvers hardly describe a/c ability, how do you know that a rafale can’t do everything the shornet did at aeroindia 07 (and do it better)?
We would not know as Dassault and Eads never sent their fighters to Aero India while the Super Hornet the F 16, Gripen and Mig 35 were all present. May be these two realize they do not stand much of a chance.
5, Slow speed manouvers are fine and dandy, but the russki birds (mig-35/su-35, which are by far the kings of slow speed manouvers) have been heavily criticized for using manuevers which cause a huge loss in airspeed in a game where “speed is life”. If you really want to tomtom this capability i’d suggest backing the MiG-35 any day.
Once again I think you are quoting the red flag colonel who spoke bull****, for which the USAF had to apologize to the IAF. He also said that Mig 21 Bisons did well against them in dog fights ! that too when none of those went to Nellis. Maneuverability is king when it comes to slow speed wvr combat and SH is only less maneuverable that the tvc migs.
ante_climaxThe MKI roughly plays the same role in the IAF as the F-15 does in the USAF.
Also keep in mind that the new MMRCA will probably have to be wired to accept and deliver the many munitions that are standard in the IAF fleet (R-73, R-77, etc.) as it is unlikely that the IAF will maintain a completely distinct supply chain of munitions for the MMRCA. How likely is that for an American aircraft?
IMO, people deeply overestimate the amount of ToT that the Americans will offer. Furthermore, the Americans have been very unreliable partners.
India will happily accept the 10%-15% avionics performance shortfall of choosing another aircraft from a more reliable partner who offers truly deep ToT and doesn’t demand intrusive base/equipment inspections, etc. etc.
While I do believe that it is important for India and America to work closer together in defence, the MMRCA is not the best place to start. A better model is to source American munitions and integrate them into our fleet (e.g., JDAM, JSOW, etc.), build a level of mutual understanding and trust, and work our way up from there.
Russian missiles on American aircraft may not happen but Israeli weapons is a possibility. Also i think India will buy American weapons if it chooses an American aircraft. IAF can integrate the US/Isreali weapons with the LCA as well. One has to remember that we uses entirely different french weapons for our Mirage 2000 fleet. We are integrating the AIM 132 with the Mirage 2000 now, as it can be integrated with the American types as well, that will offer some type of commonality.
If the IAF was not serious about the American ac. They would not have requested for their presence in the competition. The F 16s presence was requested by the IAF the F 18 was later added.
ante_climaxCan you provide some kind of link to back up that certainty? The USAF operates the F-15 (and now the F-22) primarily because they want air superiority over perceived opponents (MiG-29s/Flankers in case of the f-15 and Super Flankers etc in case of raptor). The Super Hornet for all its advantages is seriously handicapped by a poor TWR, legacy, non-bvr optimized airframe, outward canted missiles, lack of inbuilt IRST etc all of which are clearly standard features on today’s air superiority fighters such as a Super flanker, Typhoon or even a MiG-35. Ditto with the Rafale, which is an exceptional aircraft for its size and weight.
The Rafale has the SuperHornet on almost every criteria critical for a2a such as –
Supesonic performance
IRST
TWR
speed/accelaration
Fully passive attacks using OSF/Mica IIR combo.In A2G too it offers abilities the Shornet does not have:
AASM
Scalp EGAs far as price is concerned, the aussie deal does not point to the shornet as any great deal cheaper than the Rafale.
As far as TOT is concerned, so far Boeing has said no permission to share critical tech (read AESA) has been given by the US Govt. There is a reason why the superbug has gotten that moniker of sewerhornet on many fora. Hang around a little longer and you’ll probly find out.
in the current indian context, the rafale offers other advantages over the super hornet such as a degree of commonality with the Mirage 2000, thus reducing supply chain headaches caused by an entirely unique type. Not to mention the fact that the French have traditionally been considered strategic allies by India. IIRC, after the 1998 nuke blasts, the french reaction was markedly less critical than that of the US or other countries.
USS.
For the first part, I have never said the F 18 is used in the same sense as the F 15. I was saying why the Super Hornet is not used by the USAF, because it has fighters more suited for its needs.
As for the Rafales percieved superiority over the Super Hornet, it is still only developing an AESA assembly which will be a generation or so behind the American ones. And how do you compare the Metoer with the AIM 120 D, which would be available when the first aircraft is delivered.
Also Rafale offers nothing in a dogfight when compared to the JHCMS + AIM9x combo of the SH. It also has excellent slow speed maneuverability which was demonstrated in Aero India.
We are not like Norwegians to shortlist aircraft for the sake of it. If we wanted the MIG 35 or Rafale there will not be a competition between all these fighters.
As regards to ToT Boeing and Lockheed as well as other competitors have already given their proposals and they have already been examined, the trials are to take place next year. The only plane that has a chance of being rejected by now is the Eurofighter because of its high price.
ante_climaxthen why not have the USAF interested in it ? the fact is that being a development of a naval fighter, it lugs around weight that a land-based fighter doesn’t need at all. and there a host of deficiencies in the airframe that are well documented..
how does the idea of a FLIR in the centerline fuel tank sound to you? thats whats planned for the SH. and while its avionics and weapons are top-notch, the question is whether the IAF will get the freedom it wants, to modify, add and gain technology for DRDO’s future projects.
the Rafale is probably the best package among all the MRCA contenders, and comes with NO political strings attached..the last thing the IAF would like is to be hamstrung the way the PAF was when its F-16s were embargoed, leading them to cannibalising some to keep others flying. its only now that with the “war on terror” that they’re getting spares and additional airframes.
USAF operates different versions of the F 15 which can do all the jobs a SH can apart from carrier based operations. I am sure that is the reason why they don’t operate the SH.
Rafale’s only advantage over SH is ToT but given the current political scenario you may yourself be surprised at the amount of ToT the Americans are willing to offer. The SH is also cheaper than the Rafale and the Eurofighter and like I have said manytimes, it can potentially share its engine with the LCA.
ante_climaxthere are many changes- take a look at the PV-5, viz. 2 seater LCA. the N-LCA will share a similar OML, with the rear cockpit being used for an additional fuel tank. other than that, the drooped cockpit will be there and a totally new feature, the LEVCON will be added. it basically improves the low speed handling and also high AoA handling of the N-LCA. but the IN has also stated that it wants a higher thrust engine for the N-LCA and it could be the F-414, EJ-200 or the Kaveri-M88-2.
So i guess N-LCA will be even more delayed than the LCA mk2. I just want to see the serial production of LCA Mk2 for the IAF before the end of 2015. N-LCA is not that important. Since our carriers have limited capacity of aircraft, i would rather load it with more capable foreign ones. :diablo:
ante_climaxmost of them learnt to call it that at this very forum..I first saw the name “lawn dart” for the F-16 and “Sewer Hornet” and “Super Whorenet”, on this forum..;)
Where ever you have learnt it, it shows poor taste.
ante_climaxThe Super Hornet is pretty much capable as a land based fighter. The naval role it can perform is an added bonus whether we want it or not, its capable of doing that.
Its still the best package in the MRCA deal considering ability. Politics and ToT may be another issue altogether.
ante_climaxAnd will probably require the least changes to the airframe, intakes etc.
ante_climaxAt the moment we can only speculate. One can guess it will offer better low level performance. As for the F 414, that is the logical step for the LCA, but then again I won’t be surprised if they go for redesigning the Kaveri with foreign aid.
Sign In
