Re: Why Rafale is a Big Mistake
If Gripen NG carries 1 ton more internal fuel than Tejas mk1, Gripen NG is good 1.5 ton heavier than Tejas mk1. And moreover, Tejas mk2 will carry more internal fuel. And range is dependent on fuel fraction and efficacy of the engine. If both Tejas mk2 and Gripen NG has the same engine then it boils down to fuel fraction.
Both Gripen NG and Tejas Mk2 are set to have the exact same empty weight. Both will be between 6.5-7 tonnes. So, the fuel fraction on Gripen is far greater.
So don't go on the published range by Saab. In that configuration, Tejas too can fly close to 3000km on internal fuel.
No it can't. I have official info on LCA's range and it is significantly less than 3000 Km.
Clue: LCA Mk1 carries fuel internally and manages to travel 1700 Km. You already know this. LCA carries the same amount of fuel in tanks as it does internally, but range from these tanks are just half what it gets with internal fuel. This is because of the extra weight and drag of the tanks. So, 1700+(1700/2). The answer is Mk1's ferry range with full drop tanks.
Gripen on the other hand carries ~3.5 tonnes of fuel internally and gets the same range as Rafale on internal fuel. Rafale has greater range because it carries more fuel externally. The addition of CFTs will further extend the range.
Because, nowhere I claimed Tejas mk2 will be superior than Rafale or even equivalent to Rafale. I just said whether we really need Rafale that badly to perform the specified missions in the IAF war doctrine that we should go ahead and buy this machine even when we have to pay $200million per unit.
We should buy it even if it costs $300 Million because LCA cannot perform the same missions. And I have already posted links where Air Marshals and Admirals are talking about Rafale costing $85 MIllion.
And not to forget the fighter finally won the bid in Brazil. There are no taker of Rafale, even their own air force don't want this overly priced fighter.
Incorrect. ALA fought tooth and nail to get more orders and they are. A 5th tranche of Rafale have been ordered. The company has an indent to manufacture 180 Rafales which the govt cannot back out of. The French govt has put orders on hold to allow Dassault to build export aircraft for India and possibly Qatar.
Also, a lot of times in the future, IAF was the first customer to a lot of jets. We were the first export customer to the Jaguar, Gnat, Ouragan, Mig-21, Mig-29, Su-30MKI etc. We start and the others follow.
And Rafale did not win the bid in Brazil. It won the technical evaluation like in Switzerland, Korea etc. However the tenders were not designed like our tender where we chose the two best aircraft. The other competitors basically chose any aircraft that was cheap. SO, they weren't looking at all the capabilities Rafale offered.
Again the same, no doubt on Rafale's capability but is it that badly needed?
Very, very badly needed. As of last decade. So, delays shouldn't happen.
The fact is any engine failure in the Himalayas means the pilot is also dead. He won't survive in those conditions, so it becomes imperative to operate only twin engine jets in the region. Apart from that the adversary is so powerful that a lot of single engine fighters won't really survive the threat in the region. We are not longer looking at a defensive posture when it comes to China, we want to be able to send an invasion force into Tibet. So, the equation has changed, we can also be the aggressors. And an aggressive force is going to need a more capable aircraft.
Bcoz, if we go ahead with this, IAF virtually will have no money left to seal the other tenders and will blackmail MOD and will snatch a pie of either from Indian Army's budget or Indian Navy's budget which will stall the overall modernization programme. FYI, IAF will even find it hard to allocate funds for the tenders that has already been sealed/granted to go ahead.
IAF will have to find a way to balance out the budget with the others. The actual cost isn't unaffordable.
Good to Talk realistic but more important is to talk subjective. IAF and USAF have nothing in common, other than few machines.
Incorrect.
Deep strikes mission of USAF is carried by stealth fighters and bombers not with some fighter which will illuminate the ground radar from more than 100+km.
No. Deep strike missions of USAF are carried out by a whole host of aircraft and a minor part of it is by using stealth fighters.
USAF is the daddy of all the air forces, except may be the Soviets. So, a direct comparison is moot. But suggesting deep strike is not possible for IAF is like saying you don't know shit about the air force and their mission.
Accept it. Rafale with PGM under it's belly can easily be tracked by 1980's era radar from more than 100 km.
Sure. And that's why it carries a very highly capable EW suite to protect itself.
The Rafale As Canada's Next Fighter – Part 2 | Ottawa Citizen
During NATO Mace XIII exercise in Slovakia, a Rafale B flew unmolested over a S300 radar (and was the only type engaged in the exercise able to do it)
Thus, be specific and site example from Indian context. In which of the previous war, did IAF went for deep strike mission on all front? Yes deep strike is required in one/two or few cases, but for that we have Su 30MKI in good numbers. And deep strike is possible only when adversaries frontal defence is destroyed. By then war will come to an end as no country these days fight a war like WWII.
Deep strike was exercised in every single mission of every war. But during the previous wars we didn't have a dedicated deep strike aircraft until Jaguar came into service.
Deep strike missions is the future of air warfare. This is what modern warfare is all about today. The goal is to strike at the heart of the enemy. So when someone comes up and says is cannot be done, that person has seriously no idea what he is talking about.
That's what I wanna highlight, that enemy don't have Ak-47 and there is no chance of them inducting in recent future.
Then have 100 and they will induct 1000. They are building ~200 Flankers of each version and they have already reached J-16 in the process. We can expect hundreds of Flankers at the front. And all new jets they are inducting today are more capable than LCA is in any role. They have already deployed AESA radar on their J-10s. Their J-16s are in the process of being inducted with AESA radars.
You have no idea about the capabilities of the Chinese. Go to the China section and start reading. As it stands today, they have better aircraft than we do and are inducting more than us.
Who claimed that by just adding AESA, it will be equivalent to Rafale avionics. I am accepting the truth that it may probably take another decade or more by DRDO to achieve the avionics level of what Rafale has. But to note, for deterrence purpose, we don't need avionics of this level. Avionics developed by DRDO with little extra effort and R&D is good enough to have upper hand against our adversaries (excluding 5th gen fighters as Rafale no way can stand against a 5th gen fighter).
It's good that you are not blinded by nationalistic stupidity, but what makes you think what DRDO is doing is enough? And what makes you think that Rafales are meant to counter Chinese 5th gen? Even if the Chinese induct their J-20 by 2020, it is still going to take them years to get to a decent number and build tactics for it.
Do you know that this isn't our first MRCA tender? We had a RFP out in 2004 with aircraft like Gripen, F-16 and Mirage-2000 and then we withdrew the RFP in 2005, and reintroduced it in 2007 with requirement for more capable aircraft like Rafale, EF and Super Hornet. Do you know what other incident coincided the time of withdrawing the first RFP? The Chinese operationally inducted the Vigorous Dragon in 2005. The J-10's induction coincided the MRCA program. So, that's where Rafale's efforts are focused at. When we go to war with the Chinese we are going to have to fight off hundreds of this bird, and we will need another equally capable or better bird to strike them back. IAF did not want more MKIs, and it was of strategic sense that they induct something as capable to counter this new threat while also not having to waste time learning to fly the new bird. So, IAF wanted a proven medium MRCA that could be inducted very quickly, so they didn't want a prototype either. At the same time, they wanted the OEM to transfer all technologies related to manufacturing and maintaining the bird at home, make it sanction free like the MKI.
And you also forget about another important requirement. Deep Strike. Yeah, we need the Rafales to go in and start the party by killing all the S-300 rip-offs. LCA can't do that. Other than the fact that it does not have equivalent avionics, it doesn't have the range or payload to handle such missions. Such missions require a lot of planning before committing to a strike, which require aircraft to fly a lot and have AWACS decide when to initiate a coordinated strike. LCA will have to land by the time all of this is done. And the aircraft will also have to be carrying enough bombs so all the radars and vehicles connected to the batteries can be take out in a single pass. That's what Rafale can do, even MKI cannot do this currently.
For the J-20, we plan on upgrading our MKIs to the latest standards possible and induct the FGFA alongside the J-20. Sure, the FGFA has been delayed a bit, but that doesn't change the fact that it will be the FGFA protecting the Rafale from future air threats.
There is a reason why IAF has not announced any NE or North Indian bases for LCA yet. The current known bases for LCA are Sulur, Thanjavur and a base in Rajasthan which is yet to be named (or it is named and I don't know it).
Wow. A fighter which successfully flew at Mach 1.1 at sea level, didn't/can't achieve Mach 1.4 . Silliest comment ever
This is the truth. LCA has to achieve this speed at high altitude where the air is thin. And the air intakes are too small for the engine to swallow enough air. They tried making changes with the auxiliary intakes, but still haven't managed a speed greater than mach 1.4. The design speed is mach 1.6.
If you go and watch the same video from vayu, but the third part, one of the air commodore was expressing his grief that how this has not yet been achieved and will not be achieved in Su 30MKI case. True, that many technologies have been shared but still after a decade and half more than 30% content are simply assembled by HAL. Please gain full expertise before quoting such arrogant comment.
What? What are you talking about?
It is clear you don't know but all the series 4 aircraft you see for MKI are indigenous. And this,
http://www.-------------------/2011/07/total-indigenisation-of-indian-sukhoi.html
"Next year, HAL will achieve 100 per cent indigenisation of the Sukhoi aircraft — from the production of raw materials to the final plane assembly," V. Balakrishnan, general manager, Aircraft Manufacturing Division, told.
"We're currently testing the locally produced engine for the Su-30MKI and are planning to launch its production in 2010." HAL would manufacture 60 Su-30MKI fighters in the full production cycle till 2015, he said.
Note that this is from 2010. The first indigenously made MKI was handed to the IAF in 2011.
Both the engine and the aircraft are produced fully here in India. This is the truth. Full indigenization of the MKI was a total success.
Look if you want to discuss something, I am ready for it. But don't even in dream try to insult me. You are talking about ToT and don't even know about the TOT level of Su 30MKI. I know more than enough for you silly ones to quote such statement.
If my posts have come out a bit harsh, then I apologize. There are plenty of characters on this forum who have your sentiments but are not willing to learn.
What is happening when Su 30 engines are failing in mid air?
Common sense. Do you see the fleet grounded? No. So is the media is making a mountain of a mole hill? Yes.
The engine failure incident was reported by the air chief himself and he said not to be worried about it and that the fleet will continue flying as is. He also said that there were just a few incidents.
No MKI engine has fallen from mid air.
What happened in case of blackout in mid air?
You mean a bad software patch? That was rectified. It just needed a software patch. Haven't you used a software or played a game where they release a patch to fix a bug? It's the same thing.
And this happened to very few jets, specifically the ones supplied by the Russians. It wasn't fleet-wide. This type of glitch happens to all air forces. The F-22's screens blacked-out when a squadrons was being relocated to Okinawa. It was a simple software error which they fixed after landing.
List of software bugs - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
While attempting its first overseas deployment to the Kadena Air Base in Okinawa, Japan, on 11 February 2007, a group of six F-22 Raptors flying from Hickam AFB, Hawaii, experienced multiple computer crashes coincident with their crossing of the 180th meridian of longitude (the International Date Line). The computer failures included at least navigation (completely lost) and communication. The fighters were able to return to Hawaii by following their tankers, something that might have been problematic had the weather not been good. The error was fixed within 48 hours, allowing a delayed deployment.
Can HAL rectify these problems on their own?
It is unnecessary for HAL to rectify it. If sanctioned by Russia, then HAL would fix it, or else the team which wrote the software will rectify it.
There are people who can rectify any defect in a car, or a bike or a computer. But they always prefer to send it to the OEM so they get to use their warranty. It is the same thing.
Because these technologies have not been transferred by Russia. And similarly there are many other critical Technologies. No country shares the entire source code or their own defence establishment will come under scanner if their customer shares these codes with their adversaries. So grow up and understand the exact meaning of TOT. Surely in case of Rafale the TOT will be higher but not entire.
Everything related to the MKI was transferred. Source codes for radar, flight control system, computers, everything. Without it we cannot integrate our own weapons on it, like we are with Astra, Sudarshan and Brahmos. More is expected from Rafale.
This is from Shiv Aroor's twitter acc.
What HAL do is simply repair and overhaul? Though these saves time and money, none of these are comes under the umbrella of what we call critical technology.
Not in the case of MKI, not in the case of Rafale. I have already explained why.
If you thought that Tejas can get inducted within 5-6 years of it's first flight, then it was your mistake. Or something came out of you because of patriotism.
Oh, right. So, it wasn't because ADA announced it publicly in 2001?
Yeah, it was blind patriotism to have believed that ADA will finish development by 2006 and FOC by 2008, it was their own words. My mistake for believing them.
It is very common for a fighter to undergo a decade of extensive flight trials before it is inducted. I agree in Tejas's case it's more than a decade. But you also need to consider that this virtually is the first indigenous fighter development program undertaken in India. It is common to take a bit longer and in addition to that change in ASR requirement by IAF made the matter worse. Entire flight performance and other related development had to start afresh.
ADA should have said this instead of taking the IAF and the country on a wild goose chase. Yeah, it was they who promised to deliver the LCA in 2006 to the IAF. That was the first date for IOC. And Phase II was expected to be finished in 2008, that's FOC.
And how you reached that figure of $10billion.
You brought it up.
Your quote:
Price:- Price of Tejas mk2 will be atleast one-fourth of Rafale. At $10 billion we can have 10 squadron of Tejas
The 25000 crore sanctioned for Tejas is for both mk1 and mk2 with the cost of development of Kaveri engine inclusive.
The figure is wrong and it is exclusive of Kaveri. The money sanctioned for Tejas Mk1 and Mk2 is 13000 crores and naval variant development is 3000 crores, inclusive in the 13000 crores. Kaveri is separate at 3000+ crore including the K-9+. We don't know how much is being spent on K-9+.
The 1550 crores used to setup the production line is not from this budget. IAF, IN and HAL are paying 25/25/50% for it.
So, it is less than what you have mentioned.
One-third and more of it went towards building aeronautical base in the country which future development will able to use.
Much more is required. FGFA program will see the addition of $2 Billion in infrastructure in the country. AMCA will also see a pretty large sum spent on infrastructure. This process will repeat for every project and not just for LCA.
Kaveri has found it's marine version and Indian railway has shown interest too. Add 20000 crore for 10 squadron. I would still cost $7.5 billion with so much output to show the world.
It's like you're pulling figures from thin air. No research, nothing.
It is very obvious for ADA/DRDO to ask for $2billion for development of a 5th gen fighter. Just search and find out how much other countries are spending.
This is just the beginning, phase I of the project, not completion of the project. There is the phase I where we will build the first prototype, that alone is $2 Billion. The equivalent to this was 2000 crores spent on LCA's first demonstrators and prototypes. Beyond that there will be two or three times more money spent for phase 2 which will be until FOC. This is separate from engine development which will cost well above $2 Billion.
So, India will also be spending billion of dollars just like other countries. Even FGFA will see a total investment of $11 Billion by two countries.
That just goes to show why Tejas is simply a low cost aircraft.
