uss noviceThat is assuming that you can reach close enough to the coast of China, that in itself will be a challange and i have my doubts about how 1 or three subs are going to get close enough!
Its all about options Matt; something is better than nothing. 800 odd km with a 1 ton warhead, could mean well over 1000km with a 500kg warhead. Of course, in a few years you may see a longer variant or an Agni variant. Promising start though.
USS.
uss noviceBut it is an option! Isn’t it being offered to the UAE?
Indeed. Additionally, the Snecma-Kaveri JV comes to mind, the French had earlier proposed to fit the kaveri on the Rafale, so why not? It has an M88 core anyway!
As far as the sensors/avionics go, the Indian armed forces (IN & IAF) have been kept up on the Rafale for a long time it seems. IIRC, former CNS flew the Rafale way back when, further, Dassault chaps seem convinced that the IAF will emphasize performance and not be hoodwinked by a media blitz (from Aroor’s article).
FWIW, the Rafale’s TWR is right up there, only the Tiffy and possibly the 35 have a slightly better TWR. Otherwise, it is clearly ahead of the rest – F-16, F-18 and Gripen in terms of power. I don’t foresee any problems for it at Leh. Weren’t they also talking about how smoothly the hot weather trials went for them compared to the Shornet?
Don’t discount this bird, not yet.
USS
uss noviceThere are MUCH more important things in relation to 5th Gen than SC, IMHO.
1. VLO RCS airframe
2. Internal Weapons and LARGE amounts of internal fuel
3. Situational Awareness
4. Complete integration of all sensors, both onboard and off
5. Ease of maintenance and lower maintenance costs
So, basically the defining criterion for Gen 5 is # 1 – VLO airframe. The rest are available on other fighters one way or another.
USS.
uss novicefrench buying a sea gripen while building the rafale? now that would be interesting to see the politician responsible for that trying to justify it… :D:D:D
Will this one work? – “err well, we really needed a second type on our carrier(s) so that the Rafale doesn’t get lonely all by its lonesome self, as a bonus it also reduces the boredom associated with looking at the same a/c all the time – crew comfort is such a necessity on such dangerous missions”!
USS.
uss novice^ +1. Yup that would be fast, however, the VVS seems hellbent on this bird and have not really procured anything in decent quantities over the last 15-20 years, which could mean that (now that they’ve seen the beauty) they’ll go after it hammer and tongs!
USS
uss noviceThe quality of the spectra was again put forward.
Ahem, hate to make too fine a point of it, but did I not say that this little EW kit might have made a LOT of difference? Go Rafale – now to sign a deal for the MRCA! :diablo:
USS.
uss noviceOkay, I’ll take a shot at this one:
Maneuverability = Low speed turn performance.
Best performers – 1) MiG-29OVT, 2) F-22, 3) Gripen A
Maintaining energy – 1) F-22, 2) Gripen A, 3) MiG-29OVT
Agility = high speed turn performance plus ability to get into high energy state quickly.
Best performers – 1) F-22 (low drag design + insane TWR), 2) MiG-29OVT/Gripen A, 3) Gripen C.
When I think of agility I am thinking of an ability to manouver at 350kts+. It seems to me that aircraft that are very manouverable below 250 odd knots, such as the Shornet start to suffer when it comes to turning at higher speeds. Even TVC equipped a/c cannot really use TVC to make fancy manouvering at higher speeds. Most legacy birds will fall in this region, some more so than others. High TWRs are also important to enable a/c to regain energy and speed. Thus, I’d think that the Shornet is pretty manouverable but less agile. The MiG-29, flanker, F-16, F-15 are more agile even though the fulcrum/flanker are more maneuverable as well. The viper, doesn’t have that kind of TWR, but does not bleed energy quickly either; the fulcrum otoh supposedly loses energy quickly (supposedly more draggy?).
The eurocanards, the rafale and tiffy in particular are more agile – great TWRs, big wing areas offering great turn rates and lift, excellent wing sweep that does not allow energy to bleed quickly. The Gripen NG will also be great, especially since it improves TWR considerably.
In many ways the Mirage 2000 was more agile than its counterparts such as the fulcrum or viper; however, a poor TWR really did it in. If it had a decent TWR, that would be one helluva fighter. In some ways the Indian Tejas will better the paradigm laid down by the 2000. V.low wingloading + decent TWR. At the same time it has that cranked wing to give it better low speed ability.
In terms of a dog fight, it all depends on who plays to their strengths and gets the first look. Here the Gripen has the advantage since it is v.small. The F-22 is disadvanged cause it is huge. At higher speeds, the raptor will turn better, further it will lose speed slower and regain it faster, it will also have more endurance. The Gripen is next in line, although the fulcrum could regain energy really quick with its powerful RD-33Mk engines. The slower it gets (as the fight wears on), the more the fulcrum comes into its own. Of course by discounting the HMS/IRST we put the fulcrum at a severe disadvantage (with these two gizmos I think it could make life hell for the others)
JMT cents (won’t get you a cheap cuppa gas station coffee on most days!)
USS.
uss novicewhen the gorshkov gets delivered!
will they still want this since they are getting new P-8s anyways?
That a/c looks like it is in good condition. I wonder if they just keep it there to try out different goodies like a test bed. Doubt it though since the IN is sorely pressed for MMAs.
Btw, are those missiles Urans under the fuselage?
USS>
uss noviceOne most congratulate TEER on this news as he was the only person consistently saying that this massive order is in offing.
.
+ 1! Kudos to the deep undercover brother. We need more tidbits though! Now when is that deal for extra MKI going to materialize? Any chance of them being single-seaters? Also, which way doth the MRCA wind blow? Rafale/Tiffy vs. Shornet OR Gripen Vs. F-16IN? I have given up on the 35 getting to see IAF colors, no interest there it seems.
USS.
uss noviceMLD was the most advanced operational version. There were several other prototypes based on it ,both domestic and for export with various improvements including ECM , but none were proceeded with …Mig-29 was in the pipeline.
Equipement …well lets see, N-008 radar( Sapphire-23MLA-2) , TP-26 IRST, SPO-15L RWR, BVP-50-60 chaff/flare dispenser in overwing strakes ,A-321 digital nav system,LAZUR ARL-SM ground control datalink system, R-862 radio, ASP-17MLD computing gunsight wich also serve a radar indicator…plus various other items, RV-5 radioalt ,autopilot , angle of attack limitator and control system etc etc ..thats what i can remember from the top of my head…( hope i didnt made any mistakes)
Armament:R-24R/T BVR missiles , R-60 or R-73 close range dogfight missiles, Gs-23L gun , various bombs and unguided rockets for A/G work…
Upgrade pojects , several of them offered in the nineties, most advanced of them offering new radar ( Moskit-23), new missiles including R-77 , new A/G guided weapons etc …Only Angola’s Mig-23s are rumored to be upgraded significantly ,allegedly allowing them to fire R-77s, and i guess the above angolan ML(D) picture suports this rumour ( that they got /are getting upgraded) strongly …
Hope this helps:)
Thanks mate, that is indeed helpful. Would be great to see the bird get a glass cockpit + decent radar and R77 combo. SOLID.
USS>
uss noviceWell, I just remembered, since we are discussing Pibu’s article and diagram; it’d be great if he would clarify our questions himself. I know he used to post here every now and again, now would be a great time!
USS>
uss novicePlaneman,
I don’t know how you manage all those impressions, but I am impressed! Super effort. Would think the IFT probe would be retractable though.
Otaku,
Thanks for Pibu’s link. Hope some of the French boys here translate the nitty gritties, otherwise I’d have to google translate 😡
USS.
uss noviceJackonicko,
as it is the only official one and the only very accurate one giving specific results. Besides it is not only a lonely pilot opinion but an opinion which is backed by the french air force.
There are no official denial from the USAF for the moment…Which tells a lot for me !
Presence of UAE observers make french claims even more reliable.
Agreed, so far the words of Grandclaudon are closest to being official imho.
As far as the Rafale vs. F-22 scenarios go, it matters little as the Rafale is not designed to fight against a Raptor type least of all in the BVR arena. I doubt any tiffy or Su-35 will do much better.
WVR too, the Raptor enjoys some v.solid advantages over the rafale including a v.high TWR and TVC, though the rafale is tiny and would be harder to spot (still it would depend on how well the pilots were trained for WVR type battles). IIRC, Aeronavale Rafale Ms fared not too well against IN Shars in WVR scenarios despite being a much better platform. Shar pilots were quick to point out that the rafale pilots lost simply cause they didn’t train for WVR scenarios as much; if the tables were turned and Shar flyers piloted the Rafale, the results would have been overwhelmingly in favor of the Rafale.
USS.
uss noviceParalay, I think much of your work is great, but I do think your PAK-FA schematics need some revision (please don’t be offended- but given the nature of the heated debate over the inlets here and elsewhere, we need to clarify some observations).
The 1st pic below left shows:
(a) The long red line denotes the the upper right extension of the intake, taking the LEVCON root as a reference point.
(b) The short red line denotes the line-of-sight of the compressor/engine- clearly they are not aligned.
(c) The lower-right lip of the intake may be in line with some of the compressor BUT probably not, as the engine is vertically on a higher plane than with the intake lip (which droops down).The 2nd pic below right shows:
(a) The MLG wheel retracts and lies vertically in that sizeable well, if you watch the 1st flight video, when the MLG retracts, the wheel does not rotate to lie horizontally like the FLANKER/FULCRUM. Hence, the red line denotes the MLG diameter and the approximate protrusion into the intake wall.
(b) Your renderings do not effectively show that ‘shoulder’ (red ‘parallelogram’) and the evident height of the engine ‘hump(s), which converge.[ATTACH]181703[/ATTACH] [ATTACH]181698[/ATTACH]
Given these observations, one has to ask what %age of the compressor face will be visible, line-of sight.
Imho, worst case <10%, best case none at all.I appreciate how difficult these observations are to render.
+1. I’d agree, also what is that bulge in the intake facing (i.e. on the opposite wall of the intake) the MLG bulge on the outer surface of the intake? That little bulge has been intriguing and I have not seen any explanation for it so far. Any ideas (my guess is an attempt to hide the compressor face).
USS.
uss noviceCan anyone tell me what can be considered the most advanced version of the MiG-23? And, what weapons/equipment did/does it carry? Also, did the program to convert the MiG-23 to a pretty modern jet using the R77 ever materialize, I’d liked to have seen some MiG-21 Bison type upgrade on the 23.
USS>
Sign In
