Nick, let there be no doubt about this. They paid extra 5 million per tornado unit so that Prince Bandar could get his lavish commission. However, even if Saudis are paying 20% extra for these machines (please correct me if if im wrong but they paid 4.7 billion pounds for 72 typoon units…weapons/support excluded), that works out to be around $100 million/EF unit. India wants full ToT and with all those ToT/Offset conditions, negotiations would be a lengthy process. Assuming India signs this contract in 2011/12, its easy to conceive EF unit price (at that time) to be around a $100 million figure even for India’s 126 machines. And as u rightly put it…The problem is that with 230 MKIs, the IAF will find it hard to justify the EF to the jacka$$es who presently run the MOD unless of course EF gives them much superior capability.

Add to this the fact that the Saudis are getting mainly the Tranche 2 @ this incredibly exhorbitant price! So what price will an IAF EF2000 cost when you add up the following:
1) Exhorbitant base model cost (its about USD 100+million for the Austrian birds)
2) Deep TOT
3) Additional Infrastructure setup
4) Latest iteration (Tranche 3 with AESA and the works)

They’d be looking at ~ $ 15 billion for this bird all said and done. And then there is the similar functionality of the MKI, whats the bloody point? The need is afterall for a “medium” level bird and the Ef2000 hardly fits in, esp. with the MKI around. Instead go the base model Rafale (RBE2+M88.2) way, its more of a medium bird (weight 2000kgs less), provides greater strike options, can be refitted with the Kaveris+AESA in due time and most importantly, has a better chance to fit in the budget @ about $ 60 million flyaway, around $80+ million per bird and the commonality with the already existing Mirage 2000 production set up in India should make it cheaper.

IMHO, the Gripen NG is good on paper, but presents some inherent problems when it comes to TWR and further evolution. I mean how much further can you take such a small airframe? The Gripen NG pics circulating on the net already make it look bloated. This apart from the huge amount of U.S. content. Naah, Rafale or MiG 35 for me please.

If it has to be a U.S. a/c, i’d want a super customized F-16XL with PW F110s and blk 60/Soufa type sensor fusion :diablo: The only thing that sucks about both the Rafale and F-16 is the small radome size 🙁

REgards,
USS.

Repeating my questions again, could someone pleease shed some light:

1) The Pirate IRST is supposed to detect targets @ 145 km. are these afterburning targets or non afterburning?
2) SImilarly, the Rafale’s OSF is suppposed to detect targets @ 130 km. are these afterburning targets or non afterburning?

Does anyone know? Thanks in advance.

USS.

I have to concur with Kaduna that the nation which is in the business of ELINT from outspace since 60s has seen through generation after generation of ELINT sats since then would be so hapless when it comes to picking and discerning radio emissions off a plane. If i am not wrong Airforce had a requirement for airplane tracking in “Joint Radar” (spaced based ofcourse) back in 70s. Also if you look at the Space based program it is an attempt to replace functions of AWACS,RIVET JOINT and JOINT STARS. They wouldn’t even divulge ELINT part of the requirements. I would think the technologies involved have become mature enough after 4 decades that US is feeling the need to streamline all it’s functions in SBR.

From a layman’s perspective, there is one inherent difference between trying to read ground/ship based radar frequencies and FCR frequencies of fighters. The latter move at high speeds all over the blasted place, i doubt satellites can keep easy track of such movements. OTOH, both shipbased and landbased platforms are relatively stationery and could be tracked better. JMT.
Perhaps Nick, Jonesy and the mods could shed some light here.

Regards,
USS.

Isn’t it true that FCRs can work in a number of frequencies? So how can satellites pick up all the required information on all the frequencies in a/c. If this was the case (and that too since the 60s), then why have they been making ELINT a/c? No point really.

Regards,
USS.

The most likely candidate is India for 2 reasons:
1) it has already signed a deal for “codevelopment” of radar with Israel for the LCA MMR, not to mention lca prototypes may be flying with El 2032s and hence the 2052 could very well be a simple step up.
2) Providing an alternative to the apg-79 for the IAF MMRCA race. The Shornet is a very likely candidate IMHO considering the recently formed nuke deal and the U.S. subtly indicated it wanted a piece of the indian defence procurment pie in return. India clearly wants deep TOT on critical components of the MRCA including the radar (which has to be an AESA), it is also reasonably clear that this would hardly be forthcoming for the Apg 79, so IMVHO to overcome said snafu, an israeli option is likely. Further, Boeing has already indicated a strong willingness to use the Israel modification route to the MrCA prize.

Regards,
USS.

Interesting development that brings out some questions:

This ‘Raad’ ASM flies 300+ km and is light enough to be carried by a Mirage III? Is there any such missile worldover? Most ASMs with such ranges (300km+) weigh well over a 1000kgs. The Scalp EG, taurus weighs close to 1300/1400 kgs, so does the Klub, the Brahmos weighs about 2500kg. The older ones such as the Harpoons, Sea Eagles, Exocets, Kh 31s all weigh from around 500-700 kgs with corresponding ranges of about 100-200 km. So, surely the Mirage III can hardly be the platform for this weapon? Also, what kind of guidance does this beast use esp. for such huge ranges, esp. if it is to be used for anti-shipping roles as some of the reports have suggested – INS/GPS+Datalink (for midcourse) and then radar homing in terminal phase?

Anyone have any answers?

Regards,
USS.

Your TWR figures are without any payload, just with internal fuel.

I was thinking 50-60% internal fuel with the rest in weapons, somewhat an air defence patrol.

The F-15E may be able to carry a 2500kg store, but certainly not the F-16 or the Gripen or any other Western fighter.

I thought perhaps the Super Hornet might have a good chance at it? ONe under the belly?

Scooter, Roger,
While LM has already worked with the ISraelis on the Soufa and have a ready flying product, one doubts the IAF will go for an F16 simply cause the PAF already flies something similar. At the same time, I wouldn’t put it past Boeing+Israel to come up with something for the Super Hornet, like I said, Boeing has already shown willingness to do this. Along with the Israelis & Indians (who are quite expert at modifying platforms with a variety of avionics), they could easily come up with a product suitable for the IAF. And the cost would definitely come down, one of the reasons why India buys so much from Israel is that it is quite competitive pricewise.

REgards,
USS.

I would agree that the MMRCA does not require the capability to operate from Carriers. Yet, I remember reading something to that effect many months ago. As for the F-18E or Rafale not being able to operate from the Vikramaditya. Both types are just as capable as the Mig-29K.

The Superhornet – perhaps. The Rafale – not without the M88.3. The MiG 29k has a LOT of power behind it to take off from the Vikads. The shornet might just manage it with a similar load. But with higher loads (close to max loads) its not going to make it. The MiG 29k with max payload of 5500kg has a TWR of 1.09 (and I don’t know if it can take off with that much). The Shornet with the same payload is better off – 1.12 and the Rafale is @ 1.00 from just real quick calculations. If either the Shornet of the Rafale start carrying more (which they are designed to do) I doubt they’ll manage it.
USS.