French MICA (EM&IR) Missile vs Israeli Derby (EM) & Python 5 (IR) Missile

$30 Million, $100 Million, even $500 Million is too less for a missile of this caliber, especially looking at American costs. More believable if we were talking about China.

Cost of developing the Patriot alone was $8Billion as of 2003. I only wonder what the cost may be today.

While actual funding may have come from the US, a $500 Million contract is a pittance.

Look. I don't know exact statistics of the program, but I can say Raytheon may have been a developer and perhaps a system integrator of some specific components it was charged to make for IAI. Nothing to indicate the seeker, design and propulsion system is from Raytheon.

If Raytheon did manage to do what you say with just $500 Million, then it is fairly impossible to believe.

Of course, only the almighty US has the technology to supply our puny missile development program. France and Russia(with a superior missile development program) are unable to help us with this because they are backward old bats living in caves.

India can source anything from anywhere today. US has opened up it's entire market to us. Of course, we don't know the truth, but we can extrapolate that the components were tendered, and this tender, the US won.

No. It seems you are pissed off that SH lost in the Indian MRCA. This statement was entirely not needed in this discussion. Go check any open tender competition you want. The SH was always at the bottom of the table among all twin engine jets in all the competitions since Korea's FX competition in 2002. Dunno what you are pissed off about, that we chose the Rafale or rejected SH. Till date, no American jet was ever at the top of the table since 2002, including the upgraded F-15E. You are finding fault at the wrong place.

Can someone please explain why MOD cleared 950 million euros (about Rs 6,600 crore, 1.25 billion $ ) for 490 Mica infrared and radar-controlled air-to-air missiles
while in 2006 PAF ordered 500 AIM-120C-5 AMRAAM missiles for $650 million.
even there is 6 years gap it doesnt make sense.

Thanks in advance

Inflation and cost of labour(say 20-30%) and the fact that the C-5s are less capable than the latest MICA RF.

plz dont get me wrong ,i am not paki supporter but dont do u think that ur becoming too much biased & nationalistic

Even Derby is superior to the Aim 120C-5 outside of range.

seriously ?????

@p2prada
Korea 2002? You're short on facts as usual the F/A-18 E/F was first cleared for export in 2005 - it did not participate in the Korea competition. So far, the F/A-18 E/F has competed in India, Brazil and Japan. It hardly matters to me if India buys American arms or if American fighters / weapons are at the bottom every Indian evaluation, I was alluding to an established procurement pattern of the Indian MoD. India limits its procurement of offensive American weapons to niche weapons via FMS - weapons that is not available elsewhere.

As for Raytheon and the 'Stunner' 500 million dollars is a lot of money for R&E on a missile. You can't compare Patriot to the Stunner, the 8 billion dollars you refer to is the development cost for more than the missile. A comparable program is AGM-84 or Harpoon missile which cost 300m$ to develop.

Bottom line, regardless of what people like you and pack leader say the reality is Israel depends on US technology and funding across the board.

The Aim-120 C-7 compares well with MICA. Both have jamming detection capability. FYI, Derby and C-5 do not have home on jam capability.

The C-5 was configured in 1996 and produced in 2000. MICA has been upgraded after that and is more or less equivalent to the C-7(2006) and perhaps even the C-8(also called Aim-120D).

The Aim-120 C-5 is slower than both Derby and MICA. Only range is a problem and the C-5's range is quite significant. But the platforms matter too. At BVR engagement ranges of 30Km and lesser, both Derby and MICA will show superior performance to Aim 120C-5.

MICA is capable of 180 degree over the shoulder shots. In 2007 tests, the MICA EM fired from one Rafale managed to track and engage a target behind the first Rafale while a second Rafale provided coordinates. It was a BVR kill. C-5 is nowhere close to this capability. I am not sure if Derby is capable of the same.

it has
i quote
AIM-120 AMRAAM Slammer



no it has same mach 4 speed but with larger motor for increased range .
The AIM-120C-5 is a C-4 with a slightly larger motor in the new WPU-16/B propulsion section and a new shorter WCU-28/B control section with compressed electronics and ECCM upgrades.

that may be for IR variant not EM variant in bvr range but not at the same BVR range of RF version of MICA

but amraam is the most combat proven BVR in history do u have any doubt on that

Ah! My bad. I guess it was the F-15. Now why would Boeing pitch in with 2 platforms. But we can say for sure that the F-15 was below Rafale and EF too. This according to the Koreans.

You missed Malaysia, where SH lost to Su-30MKM. We have had their own officials who said even an upgraded SH with AESA will not match the MKM in many capabilities. However they did say that they still need a strike fighter like the SH and recently announced a second MRCA competition. Then there is Denmark, who chose F-35 over SH. They gave Rafale the next highest score. Greece is an old entrant and is still ongoing. UAE is a new entrant, but I am quite sure they will go for Rafale like Brazil will.

While it may be true for large platforms. It does not have to be true for less critical parts, like missile components for our missile program, which does not compare to equivalent programs in the US, in Russia and in France. You can say, for our needs, all three countries can deliver what we want.

Btw, Apache was won in a proper MRCA type tender where the Russian heli lost on 20 technical points. So, come up with better excuses.

This is a PAC-3 equivalent. Raytheon is building the missile firing unit and the launcher. That may have come up to $500Million. The missile's design, seeker, propulsion, radar, support structure etc is all Israel's work. It is obvious this will go into a few Billions to develop. And no, this isn't just a missile, it is an entire SAM system with it's own battery, command & control and support structure.

It is really simple. The missile may have been built on a certain level of US aid with a clause that some American company should be given some work. So, Raytheon won the missile firing assembly and logistics contract. That's about it. Israel may have depended on American technology and will depend on core American technology in the future as well. But when it comes to systems they are masters in, they have a thing or two to teach the Americans too. Case in point, do you believe the JHMCS is an American system? Answer: No.

The Israelis are working on Barak 8 system(equivalent to evolved sea sparrow) using Indian funds. The Russians, probably, have half their aerospace industry working on Indian money as well. You won't hear us singing about it. It is merely good business. They design, we build in our own country. Win win for both. It is your problem that you aid Israel.

Only C-7 and above have it. C-5 and below do not. Please learn about the different variants in the same missile family. This quote is being general.

And it gives a Mach speed of 3.5 at 30000 feet and 0.9 mach. Derby and Mica give Mach 4 at similar specs. C-7 gives Mach 4.

Nope. This is for both RF and IR variants. Both variants are essentially the same thing, but with different seekers. Seekers are replaceable on MICA.

So? AMRAAM has never been used against a capable enemy. Quite like Rafale's awesome capability in Libya. Let's see them go hit China or, heck, eachother. Then we will see how the claim stands. You don't beat up a cripple and claim you are the strongest in the world.

Anyway, put me in a F-22 and you choose the most proven 4th gen fighter in the world, F-16. Let's see who wins. There is a certain level of reliability after which battle proven or not does not equate to overall superiority.

how do u know C5 doent have it ????


same thing here also ???
plz provide links to justify ur POV


yes i know but u should clearly point out at which range the mock aerial combat happen ??? But usually RF variants cant manuveur / dont work well at short range thats why i stated IR variant . The RF variants can do high G manuveurs at comparitively long range than IR guided missiles .
Also AIMRAAM 's G manuverabilty at same range of MICA is lesser or greater that i am not sure .



well rafale 's air to air capabilty is also not proven in LIBYA becoz hardly i know any air to air combat happened in LIBYA .
AIMRAAM is the benchmark for BVR though .One may say whatever

Because the Americans said it does not. C-5's development started in 1996 against C-7s in 1998. It is the C-7 with home on jam. I had already mentioned it earlier as jamming detection.

I made a mistake here. Even the Aim-120D has a max speed of mach 3.5. Anyway, here is something interesting from Grisha.
Grisha's Missile \xc2\xabShoot-Off\xc2\xbb
So, it seems the speed has remained the same since the C-5.

There are other interesting points, like the claim that R-74 with it's combo IR and RF seekers(different versions like MICA) can take out the Aim-120D in flight. So, the claim is quite similar to how it was claimed the R-77 can take out the Aim-120 as well.

France, Israel and US haven't claimed the same for their own BVR missiles.

Janes mentioned BVR range, so that should go anywhere above 20Km.

No. It all depends on the missile design. A MICA IR and MICA RF have little to no difference. Quite the same with R-74 IR or RF. R-27 with the IR and RF have similar performance.

You are comparing the Aim-9 and Aim-120 combo. Both are missiles for different purposes. One is a short range missile with IR seeker while Aim-120 is a BVR weapon with a RF seeker. The IR guided Aim-9 can handle higher Gs than the Aim-120.

With powered flight and all the extra fuel, an Aim-120 is deadly in close combat. So, are all other RF and IR missiles.

No. Aim-120 is restricted to 30G. R-77 is at 40G. Astra is at 40G. MICA does so at 50G. Python V is at 100G. R-74 at 90G.

I wasn't talking about air to air capability. I was differentiating between proven and not proven and it's role as a benchmark for proving much more advanced systems.

The day we take delivery of the MICA for our Mirage-2000s, we have pretty much nullified the capability of the PAF's AIM 120C-5.

arrogant American learn some respect
my company made the first western ashm and ecm pod
this is my work we are talking about
the missile is fully made in Israel
the launcher is made by rayteon and payed thru American fmf cash

She is a lady sir.