MMRCA news and discussions.

Whats your Choice for the MMRCA Contest?

  • Gripen

    Votes: 5 4.9%
  • F16 IN

    Votes: 1 1.0%
  • F18 SH

    Votes: 8 7.8%
  • Mig 35

    Votes: 24 23.3%
  • Dassault Rafale

    Votes: 45 43.7%
  • Eurofighter Typhoon

    Votes: 20 19.4%

  • Total voters
    103

p2prada

Senior Member
Joined
May 25, 2009
Messages
10,234
Likes
4,015
haha turbulence, firstly drag is much higher at higher altitude, which is why the Jag flies at transonic speed at very low levels. maneuverability sucks at high altitude.
It's the exact opposite. The Density of air is lesser as you go higher up. That's why people carry oxygen when they climb the Himalayas. The fighters too carry their own life support system at high altitudes.

That means Drag is much lower as you go higher up. That's the reason fighters can go at their maximum speed at high altitude. Jag is slow anyways.

Nirbhay is being built for all 3 services and i am sure the MRCA, the MKI will be integrated to fire it. It is light enough to be carried by a fighter.
No it wont. The IAF will use it from ground launched systems. Have you ever seen a Tomahawk fired from a fighter before?

The SH was born out of naval requirement and hence USAF never really needed it coz they have the F-15
SH was born out of being broke. The Congress cut down on USN's budget and told them to replace the Tomcats. The Tomcats were expensive to maintain and were replaced by the Hornets. Critics already hated the hornets. The Superhornets received the most amount of punishment from critics simply because of its existence.

Please don't equate the F-15 with the F-18. The F-15 is a completely superior fighter in all spheres.

, The F-15 SE still remains undefeated in real combat with over 100 kills, missiles simply wont be able to touch the F-15SE because of its speed, it will out run everything in the air even if fired upon. besides the F-15 is much much more capable in weapons and payload, hands down. With its AESA, new EW suite and Aim-120D, it becomes even more effective.
The F-15 SE is a paper plane. Only 1 demonstrator been built till date. It's not even inducted.

obviously when f-14s had been taken out for the Hornets and SHs, people were not happy because all that thrust, range is not necessary because of the long range weapons it deploys.
LOL. You just gave an example of F-15SE and now you say all that jazz is not required. The F-15SE will deploy the same weapons as the SH along with a payload of 11 tons or more. The Hornet when it came out in 1986 did not fire the same range of weapons as it does today. The hornet was meant to replace a superior fighter due to lack of funds.

Also, the long range weapons can also be fired from the Viper, Strike Eagle and also our Jaguars once they get their new control units from Raytheon.

Besides the new engine will boost the SH's thrust and range by 20%. the F-35's top speed is mach 1.6, why i wonder is the USAF reducing its top speed, F-35 doesn't have TVC, i wonder why, they have that tech for a long time, they can put all that in, but its useless because this is the age of BVR kills.
The US suck at TVC. They could not make joints for the engines for it to work effectively.

F-35 is stealth and it has a high amount of agility. The speed makes no difference to the F-35. BVR means squat if the enemy can fire BVR too. BVR is only meant to keep the enemy fighter engaged until the time of merge. Merge is where the 2 fighters meet in a dog fight and the actual kill happens.

The fact remains any aerial threat approaching the Carriers are first neutralized by AEGIS which can destroy threats out to over 500km because they have the longest reach, if anything is left from the carnage the SH wipes them out. Its the same in our case any threat coming into our territory will be shot down by Spyder SAMs, Akash, MR-SAM etc which are being put in specific locations to prevent low level incursions.
LoL. its not as easy as you say.

By the time the aircraft actually are scrambled and reach the border zone, most of the incoming threats will be washed out by the SAMS.
Be happy with that.

Rafale indeed has 5 stations for heavy weapons but it can only carry 3, 2000lbs bombs which is one less than the SH. The SH can carry over 20 SDBs and hit hardened, moving or stationary targets out to a much longer range without having to get closer to the enemy. Rafale has to get close to drop its payload of PGMs again Paveways, ASSM, JDAM. SH can fire the JDAM-ER to over 90km, SDBs to 100km, AAGRM which is the best radar buster in its class, Rafale drops the inferior HARM and MArte.
US is the only country on the planet that can fire off so many LGBs. No other country has that amount of money or resources. All lesser countries will primarily use dumb bombs as their primary A2G weapons. The ability to shoot down a jeep from 100km away is something the US can be proud of. But, it has no value in a real war. IAF primarily uses 250 and 500kg bombs.

put two super hornets together, one G-variant with heavy jammers and one armed to teeth with 12 A2A missiles, the battlefield is clear of any possible threat, the jammers so powerful, the enemy can't track our aircraft, they hence become easy pickings for the SH.
LOL. More astounding stupidity. We wont be getting the Growler anyways.
The jammer jams both ways. It jams your own aircraft as well as the enemy aircraft. In the end both are blind.

Rafale can't compare to the SH in its netcentricity or maturity of its radar or the roles it can play.
I won't deny it. But, there is more to the plane than just a radar and weapons. Like I said, dump the MRCA and buy B-1Rs if you want only weapons and a radar.

SH is still the mother of all multiroles.
OK. Tell it to the pilot when he has a Flanker tailing him.

The SH using its A2A missiles and its AESA can track and shoot down incoming enemy A2A missiles that threaten its survival.
:rofl::rofl::rofl:

No point anymore. I am sure about the weed.

The chances of SH getting into a dogfight in real combat is remote.
All deep strike fighters will end up in dog fights against China.

LCA will be the fighter that plays those immediate interception and scramble roles just like the mig-21Bison does it now, Mig-29s play point defence roles and Mki is used for air superiority, with these working in tandem SH remains safe and free to pound heavy numbers at low cost which our arch enemy boasts.
All of this is in our territory. What about when the SH moves into enemy territory. There will be no Bison, Mig-29, and LCA backing up the SH. Backing up the SH using the MKI will be a waste of resources too.

moreover SH will also have added abilities with the P-8 which is like the ideal partner for maritime snooping, attack and defense.
So, will all other fighters, especially Jags after 2012.

You give too much credit to a fighter nobody wants. All that fan boy fantasy is useless when you are thrown into the real world.

Shooting down A2A missiles:rofl:
 
J

John

Guest
well P2P i never denied it, it is the weed, hash, ganja, charas, pills and much much more from columbia too. i know we'll keep going at it till the mrca is over so lets call it a break. SH can shoot down A2A missiles as well and IAF will know this when take it to trails. All this doubts you have about its abilities will be useless once it wins the deal and comes home to India. Because it will win the deal and sorry to say the decision will not make u happy. by F-15 SE i mean the strike eagle and not the silent one.

besides who says we wont get the Growler, when the SH wins we will indeed get some Growler versions. Thats the point, SH wont have to go into enemy territory to kill targets over 500km into enemy territory without crossing our own border. besides the Mki will be at the front providing air superiority in enemy territory while the SH wipes out ground targets.

EA-18G Growler Electronic Attack Aircraft - Naval Technology

In a surveillance-only configuration the Growler is armed with two AIM-120 air-to-air missiles for self defence. For stand-off jamming and escort jamming missions the Growler is armed with two AGM-88 anti-radiation missiles plus two AIM-120 missiles. In a strike configuration the Growler is armed with two each of AGM-88 HARM missiles, AGM-154 JSOW joint stand-off weapon (block 2 aircraft) and AIM-120 air-to-air missiles. While carrying out active transmitting jamming, the block 2 aircraft has the capability of handing off target data to other airborne, land or surface attack platforms.

being jammed urself while jamming was indeed an issue but it was an issue, not anymore. The growler can jam and still allow the wing man to fire weapons.
 

p2prada

Senior Member
Joined
May 25, 2009
Messages
10,234
Likes
4,015
besides who says we wont get the Growler, when the SH wins we will indeed get some Growler versions.
We wont get Growlers. Nobody except the USN can buy Growlers. Israel is the only country till date who gave us active ECM suites which they themselves have deployed. Not even Russia has given India access to their ECM technology.

Everybody gives only highly downgraded versions. ECM and ECCM is the solely meant for the country who developed it.

The Americans are not even releasing their ECM suite for the F-35 to partner countries. All member countries for the F-35 have to develop their own ECM or buy a downgraded version from the US. That's the primary reason for Israel to develop the F-35's ECM suite in India.

While carrying out active transmitting jamming, the block 2 aircraft has the capability of handing off target data to other airborne, land or surface attack platforms.
This is considering the enemy is not jamming the Growler. Don't forget that the Growler is supposed to be an airborne ECM platform. No airborne platform can ever match the ground based or ship based jammers placed on vehicles and ships. The Growler is primarily meant for protection against SAMs and enemy fighters. It in no way provides high capacity jamming.

The rest of the mumbo jumbo, you are free to keep it to yourself.
 

youngindian

Senior Member
Joined
May 6, 2009
Messages
1,365
Likes
77
Country flag
IAF’s search for jets to begin in B’lore

IAF’s search for jets to begin in B’lore



Monday 29 June 2009

The Indian Air Force’s (IAF) search for 126 multi-role fighters in a mega $10 billion defence deal is expected to kick start from Bangalore where the planes will undergo the first round of trials in a month or two.


The field evaluation trial will begin from the Yalehanka air base in Bangalore where the aircraft’s performance, system and tolerance of humidity trials will be tested. The process is likely to commence in July.

The fighters in contention are USA’s F-16 Falcon from Lockheed Martin and F/A-18 Super Hornet from Boeing, Sweden’s Gripen (JAS-39), Rafale from France’s Dassault Aviation, Russian MiG-35 and Eurofighter Typhoon from European consortium EADS.
Barring Typhoon and Grippen, other four had flown in the Bangalore air show in February last.

The no-cost, no-commitment trials would be in sequence, starting from Bangalore, sources said, adding that it might take two years to complete the trials.
Each company will be asked to bring two-three planes for the trials.
From Bangalore, the planes will go to Jaisalmer for hot weather and weapon trials.
The final phase of the trials would be conducted at Leh to judge their performance in cold weather and high altitude conditions.

After the Indian leg of the trial is over, there could also be another weapon-firing trial outside India, possibly in the manufacturing country.
Interestingly, though one of the competitors, Rafale, reportedly went out of the race due an incomplete tender form, it is believed to be back in the race, thanks to the diplomatic intervention from France.

These 126 medium multi-role combat aircraft will be one of the mainstays for the IAF along with Su-30 and indigenous light combat aircraft (LCA).
The IAF targets to bolster its squadron strength up to the sanctioned position of 39.5 squadrons by inducting MMRCA, LCA and Su-30s.

Former IAF chief Fali Homi Major had admitted that the IAF force strength was down to 34 squadrons, which is expected to go out even further in the coming years due to phasing out of aircraft of old vintage.
However, if the MMRCA deal happens in time and the LCA comes to the service by 2010-11, the IAF can hope to have the sanctioned strength by 2017 and a little more by 2020.

While 18 MMRCA will be purchased in flyaway conditions, the remaining 108 will be manufactured at the Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd under licence.
The MMRCA deal will also aid the IAF to simplify its inventory management rather than maintaining a large number of different aircraft.
 

Daredevil

On Vacation!
Super Mod
Joined
Apr 5, 2009
Messages
11,615
Likes
5,772
How important is Supercruise in the MMRCA competition?

How important is Supercruise in the MMRCA competition?

LiveFist 6/28/09 1:16 PM Shiv Aroor

Supercruise is not a qualitative requirement in the Indian Air Force's Medium Multirole Combat Aircraft (MMRCA) competition, but that doesn't mean it won't play a role. It should be noted that while the Request for Proposal (RfP) document was being drawn up (it took nearly three years), supercruise was listed in the original draft as a mandatory requirement that the IAF was looking for. Dockets of research on the physics of supercruise, including numerous unclassified presentations on the F-22 and Eurojet GmbH did their rounds around Vayu Bhawan for a while in 2004-05. An example of just what a catchword supercruise was for the MMRCA, is documented here.

To quote the text of that portion of the original RfP draft, the IAF put it down that supercruise was required for "game-changing tactical advantages in offensive and defensive spectrum" and also "lowered IR signature, rapid theater presence, evolutionary sensor/weapon kinematics and denial of enemy reaction time". Interestingly, the IAF refrained from putting down any additional parameters for the supercruise regime it was looking for.

Obviously, the IAF has never operated supercruising aircraft before. Its Hunters routinely went briefly supersonic in steep dives, but never has it operated aircraft that could travel faster than sound in sustained level flight with a meaningful military payload without engine reheat. For all the criticism that the Indian armed forces usually cut and paste from brochures to draw up their qualitative requirements, the IAF did some homework in earnest on supercruise. As a matter of fact, during one meeting of the Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA) in 2007, at which the Tejas' propulsion problems were being deliberated upon, then Chief of Air Staff FH Major apparently said that the agencies involved needed to ensure that the next-generation engine that would ultimately power the Medium Combat Aircraft (MCA) and the final integrated airframe, had supercruise capabilities.

Between 2004-07, the IAF had done some serious reading on supercruise, and formulated an opinion on the subject, apparently still a contentious one in military aviation research. However, the IAF finally decided not to push its case for supercruise in the final RfP document, which is why it does not exist in the final tender that was sent out to Saab, MiG, Boeing, Lockheed-Martin, EADS and Dassault. In the event, that was a wise decision. Because it would probably have sliced away most or all of the contenders any way.

In January this year, a Gripen demonstrator aircraft -- of the type on offer to India -- achieved supercruise. Pilot Magnus Ljungdahl said, "The flight was conducted over the Baltic Sea, my altitude was 28,000 feet and the speed achieved was above Mach 1.2. Without using afterburner I maintained the same speed until I ran out of test area and had to head back to the Saab Test Flight Centre in Linköping."

Does one test flight prove that the Gripen IN can supercruise? Does that go onto the aircraft's CV then? Possibly. The Eurofighter can also apparently supercruise according to EADS. But Saab and EADS don't talk about what fuel/weapons loads the aircraft can carry when supercruising. The other four jets in the competition make no bones about not being able to supercruise, though there's plenty of hypocritical rhetoric that still comes the IAF's way from Boeing/Lockheed about how supercruise is not as economic, useful or tactically dramatic as it's made out to be in a modern military scenario, and therefore shouldn't seriously figure among the "x-factor" parameters that will be tested during the trial evaluations. A little rich, coming from the companies that tom-tom the F-22's supercruise capability as though the aircraft has little else to offer.

I imagine the IAF has sunk its teeth meaningfully into the supercruise debate -- because it is a debate. There are a huge number of considerations that go into the ability to supercruise, and it's the total package that counts. An officer at the IAF's top gun school TACDE rattled off a few of these considerations: fuel fraction, flow efficiency, air intake design that won't shatter the turbofan compressor during the transonic flight spectrum, and dozens of other considerations.

These are, of course, entirely separate from operational envelope considerations, which would need to develop through doctrinal evolution, if and when the IAF does operate aircraft with a no-nonsense capability to supercruise in the real sense.
 
J

John

Guest
We wont get Growlers. Nobody except the USN can buy Growlers. Israel is the only country till date who gave us active ECM suites which they themselves have deployed. Not even Russia has given India access to their ECM technology.

Everybody gives only highly downgraded versions. ECM and ECCM is the solely meant for the country who developed it.

The Americans are not even releasing their ECM suite for the F-35 to partner countries. All member countries for the F-35 have to develop their own ECM or buy a downgraded version from the US. That's the primary reason for Israel to develop the F-35's ECM suite in India.



This is considering the enemy is not jamming the Growler. Don't forget that the Growler is supposed to be an airborne ECM platform. No airborne platform can ever match the ground based or ship based jammers placed on vehicles and ships. The Growler is primarily meant for protection against SAMs and enemy fighters. It in no way provides high capacity jamming.

The rest of the mumbo jumbo, you are free to keep it to yourself.
Australia has decided that 12 of the 24 Boeing F/A-18F Super Hornets it has ordered will be wired for electronic attack capabilities while they are still on the production line, allowing it to upgrade the aircraft to the US Navy's E/A-18G Growler configuration at a later date if it wishes to.

“Wiring 12 of the Super Hornets as Growlers will give us the opportunity to provide taxpayers with better value for money,” says defence minister Joel Fitzgibbon. “If finally pursued, the relatively small investment will significantly enhance the Super Hornet’s capability by giving electronic attack capacity and therefore the ability to nullify the systems of opposing aircraft.”

The wiring will add A$35 million ($23 million) to the A$6.6 billion that Canberra agreed to pay for 24 Super Hornets in early 2007. If all 12 aircraft were eventually converted into Growlers, it would cost an additional A$300 million. A final decision will not be required until around 2012, says the defence ministry.

The E/A-18G remains in operational test for the USN, but initial operational capability is expected shortly. The Growler is essentially an F/A-18E/F fitted with ITT ALQ-99 radar jamming pods and an interference cancellation system, Northrop Grumman ALQ-218(V)2 radio frequency receiver and Raytheon ALQ-227 communication countermeasures suite for electronic surveillance.

The modifications will give Australia the option to “significantly enhance” its aircraft, Fitzgibbon says. “It will also provide the Super Hornets with counter-terrorism capability through the ability to shut down the ground-based communications and bomb triggering devices of terrorists,” he adds.

Fitzgibbon meanwhile criticised the previous Australian Government that made the original order for not considering Growlers initially. John Howard's administration, which placed the order after deciding to retire Canberra's General Dynamics F-111 fleet and to provide a stop-gap ahead of the delivery of the Lockheed Martin F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, lost the 2007 general elections.

“It was apparent that the Howard government didn’t properly anticipate the need to retire the F-111 in 2010,” says Fitzgibbon (below). “If they had taken a more prudent approach in making the Super Hornet decision rather than rushing to fill their impending air combat capability gap, they may have realised that this was a more effective approach to take.”

Boeing is also considering a so-called “Growler lite” export version of the E/A-18G, which can be delivered without the radar jamming pods and interference cancellation system. The initiative targets international customers who are keener on the aircraft’s enhanced awareness capabilities than the Growler’s electronic attack aspects. Australia, Brazil, India and Japan are some of the potential customers for the Super Hornet and the Growler.

Australia to wire F/A-18Fs for Growler upgrade

the Aussies are getting 12 out of the 24 SHs to be wired as Growlers and have the option to upgrade them when needed. The Growler can't be jammed by any known chinese or Paki jamming systems whether on ground, air or sea. The F-18G is the world's most advanced airborne ECM platform and the Rafale can only hope to be able to match it and Aussies are getting the whole thing and not the lite version. I never said anything about it being able to match ground or sea based jammers but its the best for the air.

The modifications will give Australia the option to “significantly enhance” its aircraft, Fitzgibbon says. “It will also provide the Super Hornets with counter-terrorism capability through the ability to shut down the ground-based communications and bomb triggering devices of terrorists,” he adds.

i would like to see the Rafale shut down bomb triggering devices of terrorists. Proof again that SH still remains the ideal option, more advantages than the Rafale and at a much lower cost. Growler lite is for customers who don't want the full option Growler.

as for Israel getting the F-35 read on...

Israel 'close to deal on F-35' - UPI.com

TEL AVIV, Israel, June 24 (UPI) -- After protracted disagreements, the Israeli Defense Ministry was reported Wednesday to be close to sewing up a deal to buy up to 25 U.S. F-35 Lightning II stealth fighter aircraft built by Lockheed Martin, which Israeli leaders believe is essential to counter Iran's alleged nuclear weapons program.

According to the Jerusalem Post, the two sides reached an agreement on several Israeli demands to integrate Israeli technology into the aircraft. That followed a series of visits to Washington by the commander of Israel's air force, Maj. Gen. Ido Nehushtan, and the air force's equipment and procurement director, Brig. Gen. Kobi Bortman.

The final breakthrough came at the Paris Air Show last week when Israel's defense minister, former chief of staff Gen. Ehud Barak, Israel's most decorated soldier, met with top Lockheed Martin officials.

According to Israeli reports, the Americans agreed to allow the Israelis to incorporate their own electronic warfare and communications systems into the fifth-generation fighter, and to allow the Israeli air force to maintain the aircraft independently of the United States.

The Post reported that one of the Americans' "main concerns regarding the installation of Israeli systems was that it would require configurations to the jet's internal computer system and expose top-secret technology to Israel." The Israelis apparently agreed to bypass the computer mainframe when installing the systems.

Israel has made an all-out effort to acquire the F-35, also known as the Joint Strike Fighter, because its range, striking power and radar-evading stealth characteristics make it essential to counter the S-300PMU air-defense missile systems Jerusalem fears Russia will sell to Iran to protect its nuclear facilities and other strategic targets.

The mobile S-300 is one of the highly advanced air-defense systems in the world. Known in the West as the SA-20, it is capable of shooting down aircraft or cruise missiles from altitudes as low as 30 feet to as high as 90,000 feet.

Gen. Richard Hawley, former commander of the U.S. Air Force Air Combat Command, asserted recently, "For non-stealth aircraft, the SA-20 represents a virtual no-fly zone."

Moscow, pressed by Israel and the United States not to provide Iran -- or its Arab ally Syria -- with the S-300, has repeatedly denied that it intends to do so. But according to the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, a pro-Israel think tank, the Russians could still sell Tehran the S-300V, a less capable system known as the SA-12 in the West.

There has been repeated speculation that Israel may launch a pre-emptive strike against Iran's nuclear installations to block its efforts to enrich uranium to weapons grade.

U.S. President Barack Obama's administration has demanded the Israelis stay their hand to give his diplomatic outreach to Iran time to pursue an agreement with the Islamic republic that it will not build nuclear weapons.

From that perspective, U.S. agreement to allow Israel to fit its own equipment into the F-35 -- the crux of the standoff over the aircraft -- could be seen as an effort to placate the Israelis at this critical period.

"Israel currently believes that its F-15I and F-16I aircraft maintain a viable strike option against Iranian nuclear targets," according to a Washington Institute analysis published in March.

"As long as this remains the case, Israel may remain receptive to requests to give diplomacy more time. Increasingly clear, however, is that Israel regards the S-300 (in any configuration) as closing an important window of opportunity; Iran's acquisition of the S-300 would render Israel's current strike options dramatically more difficult, and could force Israel to considerably move forward any strike timetable."

Israel originally had its sights on the U.S. F-22 stealth fighter since development of that jet began in the early 1990s. But the Americans decided to block any foreign sales of the F-22, known as the Raptor and which is now in service with the U.S. Air Force.

Israel switched its sights to the F-35A, which is being developed by Lockheed Martin and eight foreign partners -- Britain, Italy, the Netherlands, Turkey, Canada, Australia, Denmark and Norway.

Israel wants an initial purchase of 25 aircraft, enough for one squadron with delivery starting in 2010, and an option for 50 more.


incredible isn't it, though the Issies don't get access to the mainframe which would be very stupid for US to just give it away after spending billions and years developing it, yet the Issies have permission to by-pass and add-on their own equipment.

AIRSHOW-Pentagon F-35 chief blasts Boeing comments

General calls Boeing remarks inappropriate

* Denies Washington offering partners "dumbed down" F-35 (Adds details, quotes and byline)

By Andrea Shalal-Esa

PARIS (Reuters) - The head of the Pentagon's F-35 fighter program blasted Tuesday what he called Boeing Co's inappropriate marketing of a new F-15 fighter model with radar-evading capabilities that it is marketing as an alternative to the Lockheed Martin Corp-built F-35.

Brigadier Gen. David Heinz, program executive officer for the F-35, said Boeing was free to market its F-15 "Silent Eagle" plane, but rejected a claim by Boeing executives that Washington was selling a "dumbed down" version of the F-35 to international partners.

"I state categorically that I am not doing a different variant of aircraft for my international partners today," Heinz told Reuters in an interview at the Paris Air Show.

He said foreign countries who bought the F-35 would be subject to a U.S. disclosure process and U.S. export controls, but the aircraft being sold today were the same airplanes that were also being built for the U.S. military services.

"So for Boeing to make statements about a 'dumbed down' variant ... is absolutely incorrect and it is speculative and I believe, a very disappointing marketing ploy to drum up business," Heinz added.

Boeing's military aircraft president Chris Chadwick said the F-15 was being marketed only to existing F-15 customers, and was not in direct competition with the F-35.

"If there are other customers who would like to talk to us about the enhanced version of the F-15 (the Silent Eagle) we'd be happy to discuss," he said, responding to Heinz's remarks.

Boeing's F-15 and F-18 fighter jets are competing against Lockheed's F-16 for massive fighter jet orders around the world. Analysts say Boeing, the top U.S. exporter and the Pentagon's No. 2 supplier in prime contracts, risks getting edged out of the fighter market altogether as the U.S. government focuses more and more on the F-35.

Keen to keep its fighter production lines open, Boeing in March unveiled an F-15 version that offers some radar-evading capability as an alternative for countries that can't afford the F-35 fighter being developed by Lockheed for the United States and eight other countries.

Boeing has said it is speaking to companies in the United States and abroad about co-funding development of a new F-15 version aimed at Asian and Middle East markets that would incorporate coatings to help avoid detection by radar.

Jim Albaugh, who heads Boeing's defense business, told reporters in Paris on Sunday that the new F-15 offered a comparable level of stealth capability to what Washington was willing to sell to foreign military sales customers.

"We are not trying to say that this is an airplane that has full-aspect stealth capability," Albaugh said. "It doesn't. But from a front-radar cross-section, it has all the stealth that has been approved for export by the U.S. government."

Heinz first criticized how Boeing was marketing its F-15 Silent Eagle at a news conference in Washington on June 2, and also took a swipe at its radar-evading capabilities.

He said Boeing's work to reduce the frontal radar signature of the F-15 Silent Eagle would give it an edge over other fighters of its generation, but was still no match for the F-35: "You put (the new F-15) against a fifth-generation guy, the second he turns, he looks just like the Goodyear blimp."

Last week, Air Force Chief of Staff General Norton Schwartz said the service was committed to buying the F-35 and should not get distracted by modernizing earlier fighters. It was more important to "make the leap" to the new plane and keep the unit cost for those airplanes competitive, he said. (Reporting by Andrea Shalal-Esa; Editing by Tim Dobbyn)

well what do u make of this??
 

Sridhar

House keeper
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2009
Messages
3,474
Likes
1,061
Country flag
Canberra has not formally placed an order for the advanced military jet, but wanted clarification from Washington on whether the aircraft could be purchased at a future date.

Boeing's Super Hornet program manager, Carolyn Nichols, said from the company's St Louis head office: "The RAAF has submitted a formal request for release for the Growler to the US Government. The export release of the Growler to Australia is still in review and in progress.

"Boeing does not have a marketing licence to market the Growler to Australia, so we did not participate in US Government top-level briefs that have been conducted on the Growler capability to the RAAF."

RAAF likes the sound of the Growler | The Australian


May be Australia will get this watered down Growler Lite

Boeing is also considering a so-called “Growler lite” export version of the E/A-18G, which can be delivered without the radar jamming pods and interference cancellation system. The initiative targets international customers who are keener on the aircraft’s enhanced awareness capabilities than the Growler’s electronic attack aspects. Australia, Brazil, India and Japan are some of the potential customers for the Super Hornet and the Growler.

http://defense-studies.blogspot.com/2009/06/australia-to-wire-fa-18fs-for-growler.html
 
J

John

Guest
Boeing is also considering a so-called “Growler lite” export version of the E/A-18G, which can be delivered without the radar jamming pods and interference cancellation system. The initiative targets international customers who are keener on the aircraft’s enhanced awareness capabilities than the Growler’s electronic attack aspects. Australia, Brazil, India and Japan are some of the potential customers for the Super Hornet and the Growler.

The can means customers can get the full Growler if need, the news you posted is old, as of now 12 out of 24 SHs for RAAF are being wired like the Growler and they have option to upgrade to full growler when needed at an added cost of $300 million. The news i posted is much more new and relevant. Aussies have the option for full Growler.
 
J

John

Guest
MMRCA Part 1 - The F-16IN Super Viper

The handful of IAF pilots who got a chance to fly one of the UAE Block 60 Desert Falcons at Yelahanka in February had fantastic things to say about the aircraft. They were sold on everything from the sidestick to the the phenomenally well-designed bubble canopy, and from the gorgeous low altitude handling characteristics to the add-on IR pod. And this is quite separate from their experience of the aircraft's cockpit avionics. That's something that can scarcely be overstated. Based on my personal discussions with pilots, Defence Ministry officials and others familiar with the aircraft, here's a run down of the F-16's strengths and weaknesses in the current MMRCA competition. Remember, this is an overview of the opinion in establishment circles on the aircraft, and not merely a reiteration of facts already in the public domain.

STRENGTHS

There is simply no denying the F-16's operational record, a statistic completely unmatched by any other fighter plane flying today. The figures speak for themselves: 13 million flight hours, out of which 400,000 hours have been spent in combat. The type has flown over 100,000 combat missions and has been proven to be a true multirole fighter. The type has scored 72 air-to-air kills in the combat missions it has been flown on. This is an aspect that enjoys very serious credence within decision-making circles. The fact that the fighter is owned and operated by 24 nations is another source of reassurance. The air force also views this as a de-risking aspect of any potential purchase. The aircraft comes equipped with an AESA radar (the Northrop Grumman AN/APG-80) that the IAF absolutely adores. The IAF also feels the MIL-STD-1773 data bus on the fighter will be an enormous and valuable legacy leap, and this has been a point of some discussion during internal presentations made on the MMRCA contenders. The aircraft's cockpit ergonomics has the IAF in raptures, including former chief S Krishnaswami, who flew an F-16I during a visit to Israel in 2004, and could barely stop talking about what an amazing cockpit it had. One of the F-16's principal strengths is also its unit price. At under $30-million a piece, the IAF views the F-16 as a highly capable fighter at a highly competitive purchase price. The fact that there have been 52 follow-on buys of the type are considered an indicator to the IAF that ownership/lifecycle costs are also competitive. The IAF doesn't miss the fact that the F-16 is one of only two aircraft in the sweepstakes that fits the original weight specs laid out in the original qualitiative requirement -- QRs which were substantially altered later to allow in heavy fighters. Finally, (and probably most importantly!), the F-16 has the backing of the United States government, the target of India's most ambitious current foreign policy initiatives. Needless to say, anyone who downplays that aspect, is doing so at their peril.

WEAKNESSES

Let's get straight to what the IAF and Defence Ministry don't like at all about the F-16. The fact that there is a steady phase-out/replacement programme underway in the US, despite Lockheed-Martin's repeated insistence that there are four large busy production lines. The fact that the US isn't buying anymore Falcons is enough to put serious doubts into India's mind. Picking up early on this, Lockheed has managed to convincingly drive home the point that the F-16 is the logical bridge to the F-35 Lightning II, though this is viewed by the IAF as too crafty. It's almost a fake pledge, considering the gargantual clearances and procedures that would be necessary for India to be considered a buyer of a fifth generation fighter plane. Lockheed's pitch about the F-35 has therefore backfired in parts. A senior IAF officer, recently retired, says "While we were initially only doubtful, the F-35 pitch proved beyond doubt that Lockheed is trying to squeeze the last few drops out of its F-16 production lines, and the Indian requirement is too mouth-watering for them to ignore." The fact that the aircraft is operated by a lot of other countries, ironically, has a minor backlash effect as well on the IAF -- some of the top brass feel that an ambitious new purchase like the MMRCA contract, should be for a unique and exclusive aircraft, not one that is owned and operated by a huge number of other countries (including Pakistan -- the radar signature debate holds credence, incidentally), even though they do reluctantly agree that under the bonnet, the F-16IN is hardly comparable to previous variants of the same type. Finally, relations with the Obama administration have cooled considerably compared to the phonecall-a-minute diplomacy with Bush Jr, and this itself has somewhat blunted the throbbing needle pointing to Washington, even though the President has made it clear that he plans to keep up the evolving strategic dialogue with India.

LiveFist: MMRCA Part 1 - The F-16IN Super Viper
 

Daredevil

On Vacation!
Super Mod
Joined
Apr 5, 2009
Messages
11,615
Likes
5,772
MMRCA Part 1 - The F-16IN Super Viper

already posted
 

p2prada

Senior Member
Joined
May 25, 2009
Messages
10,234
Likes
4,015
The modifications will give Australia the option to “significantly enhance” its aircraft, Fitzgibbon says. “It will also provide the Super Hornets with counter-terrorism capability through the ability to shut down the ground-based communications and bomb triggering devices of terrorists,” he adds.
This rests in the hands of the US Congress. The EA-6B Prowler is not available for export. Boeing will be happy to export, but its not their choice to make.


Boeing is also considering a so-called “Growler lite” export version of the E/A-18G, which can be delivered without the radar jamming pods and interference cancellation system. The initiative targets international customers who are keener on the aircraft’s enhanced awareness capabilities than the Growler’s electronic attack aspects. Australia, Brazil, India and Japan are some of the potential customers for the Super Hornet and the Growler.
Growler lite is an empty plane. Only fools will buy it. Nobody has the capability to fill it up with ECM suites.

i would like to see the Rafale shut down bomb triggering devices of terrorists. Proof again that SH still remains the ideal option, more advantages than the Rafale and at a much lower cost. Growler lite is for customers who don't want the full option Growler.
The ECM on the Rafale is completely different. The Rafale jammer directly attacks the enemy jammers using pencil beams. Growler send jamming signals all over the place. Growler Lite is for customers who will want to get fooled by Boeing.


According to Israeli reports, the Americans agreed to allow the Israelis to incorporate their own electronic warfare and communications systems into the fifth-generation fighter, and to allow the Israeli air force to maintain the aircraft independently of the United States.
Also called Mayawi, I have already posted this in the discussions.

The Israelis apparently agreed to bypass the computer mainframe when installing the systems.
Something that all airforces already do.

Gen. Richard Hawley, former commander of the U.S. Air Force Air Combat Command, asserted recently, "For non-stealth aircraft, the SA-20 represents a virtual no-fly zone."
Exactly why the SH is useless over the Himalayas. The EF and Rafale sis the closest to stealth we will get. The Chinese have the Russian version of S-300 and also their own reverse engineered version called HQ-9.


yet the Issies have permission to by-pass and add-on their own equipment.
That's actually insulting for such a close ally to be asked to bypass their own systems.

Brigadier Gen. David Heinz, program executive officer for the F-35, said Boeing was free to market its F-15 "Silent Eagle" plane, but rejected a claim by Boeing executives that Washington was selling a "dumbed down" version of the F-35 to international partners.

well what do u make of this??


It means Boeing is acting like a sole loozer. They no longer have fighters that can actually fight anymore. The F-15SE is a paper plane and in no way offers any kind of stealth features vis a vis a F-35. Similar to how Maruti was acting when TATA released NANO. Maruti said "We do not sell cars with 600cc engines like TATA." Typical loozers, cause no body wants the Maruti 800 now.

Nobody gives away their ECM technology, especially America. Countries buying the Growler will only end up with a tooth pick.
 
J

John

Guest
i just showed you that the Aussies are getting it, secondly we have Harpy to counter the S-300, no one is stupid enough to send a $130 million+ Rafale, EF or f-35 or F-22 to counter the S-300. Well Koreans are interested in the F-15SE and it is still way better than the Rafale on any given day, if the F-22 is not cleared for Japan, even Japs will order the F-15 SE. Any Issy strike on Iran will involve flooding Irani airspace with tens and tens of decoys while a Harpy or Harop flies at low altitude towards its target the s-300, thats if Iranis have it. While all this happens the F-35 will launch a couple of long range cruise missiles to take out the reactors.

Growler lite is an option but Aussies are wiring for Growler full option and they will eventually get it. The US has cleared it for export or else Boeing wont be able to wire it for the Aussies for full option Growler. And no Boeing is acting like a competitor, they are offering the F-15 SE to existing F-15 customers and they in no way can compete with the F-35 in all aspect stealth and they themselves say this. Besides the F-35 A is a f-16 replacement and will attract interest from existing F-16 operators. The F-15 SE will be stealthier than Rafale for sure and cheaper as well with much better avionics.

Besides the Rafale's radar which has a detection range below 180km is useless when having to detect cruise missile launches during heat of the battle and effectively countering them in time. Cruise missiles can only be countered if they are detected from far enough and the SH's radar has more than double the detection range of the Rafale. By the time the Rafale detects a Chinese sunburn its too late, The SH is ideal for such roles again at a lower cost. If the US hadn't cleared it for export the Aussies would not have got it and the Aussies seem very pleased to be getting it claiming unprecedented levels of attack options which means they have tested it themselves and are happy with it. Atleast its a toothpick, the Rafale at the moment is a limp dick.
 

Sridhar

House keeper
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2009
Messages
3,474
Likes
1,061
Country flag
IAF upgrade: trials for multi-role combat aircraft in Aug

BY: The Indian Express

Summer trials for 126 medium-range, multi-role combat aircraft (MMRCA) for the Indian Air Force (IAF) are set to kick off in August, with the government issuing the letter of invite to six contenders.

The process of inviting the suppliers will be completed in the first week of July. The trials will begin the following month and continue till April 2010.

The six companies in contention for the $10-billion deal are European Aeronautic Defence and Space Company (EADS), which has offered the Eurofighter Typhoon; American firms Lockheed Martin (F-16 Falcon/Block 52) and Boeing Integrated Defence System (F/A-18F Super Hornet); Russian Aircraft Corp’s MiG-35; Swedish Saab’s Gripen (JAS-39) and French major, Dassault’s Rafale. The contenders have reportedly agreed to participate in the field trials on a no-cost, no-commitment basis. This means that contenders would bring their aircraft and crew, with no cost to the government.

Industry sources said the trials would take place in three phases. “The first phase is usually a familiarisation phase, where the contenders would be staying at a training base. The second phase would initially be conducted in the country under local conditions and subsequently in the country of origin for weapons,” explained sources.

However, since they are starting late, only four of the six firms would be able to complete the summer trials by October and the rest would conduct their summer trials in March-April next year, said sources. The trials would be conducted in both summer and winter in varying climactic and altitude conditions in the cold Ladakh region of north India, the desert region of Rajasthan and hot and humid south India.

The evaluation trials would be conducted by various teams composed of test pilots, engineers and maintenance crew, which will be drawn primarily from the Aircraft Systems and Testing Establishment (ASTE).

State-owned Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL) would also be involved to look at issues concerning technology transfer and industrial partnership, besides the Centre for Military Airworthiness and Certification.

While commercial negotiations are expected to begin once the IAF completes its evaluation sometime in 2010, sources hoped the trials would not be delayed further, as it would not only make the existing technology outdated, but also push up the cost of the machines.

Once the trials and commercial bids are over, two to three top contenders would be shortlisted. “The list is based on three criteria — technical and field trial requirements, cost of the aircraft and country’s strategic requirement,”…

explained sources. Under the present terms and conditions, the first aircraft deliveries will commence only four years after a contract is signed.

The MMRCA deal is part of the modernisation plan in which India would be spending about $30 billion in the next five years to replace or upgrade obsolete weaponry and fleet….

IDRW.ORG Blog Archive IAF upgrade: trials for multi-role combat aircraft in Aug
 
J

John

Guest
i know Rafale will be the first to be tested, SH will be tested this year as well.
 

p2prada

Senior Member
Joined
May 25, 2009
Messages
10,234
Likes
4,015
i just showed you that the Aussies are getting it, secondly we have Harpy to counter the S-300,
Even China has Harpy UAVs. And try taking out a radar that cannot be seen.

no one is stupid enough to send a $130 million+ Rafale, EF or f-35 or F-22 to counter the S-300.
Yes, they will only send the cheaper SH to die. LOL. Stealth fighters are built for SEADs.

Well Koreans are interested in the F-15SE and it is still way better than the Rafale on any given day,
says you.

if the F-22 is not cleared for Japan, even Japs will order the F-15 SE.
Ok. Screw the MRCA and buy the F-15SEs. It's obvious they will order the old F-15SE. I would love to see if the USAF orders the SEs.

Any Issy strike on Iran will involve flooding Irani airspace with tens and tens of decoys while a Harpy or Harop flies at low altitude towards its target the s-300, thats if Iranis have it. While all this happens the F-35 will launch a couple of long range cruise missiles to take out the reactors.
Ok. This must be over Iran in the desert terrain, where everything is visible. Their small number of S-300 batteries will be overwhelmed. But, IAF is not going to fight the Iranians. We have to fight China. They may even have a 1000+ S-300s deployed and we might even know about it. That too in terrain where the SAMs can be easily hidden. Also, all this will have to be carried out over a dense electronic environment.

Growler lite is an option but Aussies are wiring for Growler full option and they will eventually get it.
Only Boeing has given the assurances. I don't buy it.

The US has cleared it for export or else Boeing wont be able to wire it for the Aussies for full option Growler.
The US Congress has banned the sale of the ALQ-99 and ALQ-100 pods along with the interference cancellation devices. A growler without these systems are a waste of time and money. This ban will not be lifted anytime soon.

And no Boeing is acting like a competitor, they are offering the F-15 SE to existing F-15 customers and they in no way can compete with the F-35 in all aspect stealth and they themselves say this.
Boeing hates the fact that their model X-32 lost against the Lockheed Martin's X-35. That's the reason for them to nitpick on the F-35. Also the fact that Boeing is a junior partner in the F-22 program. The stop of sale of F-22 has further irked Boeing. The loss of potential business selling F-22s has led to Boeing making the Silent Eagle.

Besides the F-35 A is a f-16 replacement and will attract interest from existing F-16 operators.
No doubt. That's the reason Australia will be replacing the Hornets and Super Hornets with F-35s.

The F-15 SE will be stealthier than Rafale for sure and cheaper as well with much better avionics.
Avionics on the F-15 will be good. no doubt. But, Rafale will still be stealthier than F-15SE because of its composite design.

Besides the Rafale's radar which has a detection range below 180km is useless when having to detect cruise missile launches during heat of the battle and effectively countering them in time. Cruise missiles can only be countered if they are detected from far enough and the SH's radar has more than double the detection range of the Rafale. By the time the Rafale detects a Chinese sunburn its too late, The SH is ideal for such roles again at a lower cost. If the US hadn't cleared it for export the Aussies would not have got it and the Aussies seem very pleased to be getting it claiming unprecedented levels of attack options which means they have tested it themselves and are happy with it.
Blah. blah. blah. As though you have the full data on the fighters. Sunburn is unstoppable.

Atleast its a toothpick, the Rafale at the moment is a limp dick.
More idiocy. The Rafale has a radar jammer. The Growler lite does not have a radar jammer. So, which is better.
 

p2prada

Senior Member
Joined
May 25, 2009
Messages
10,234
Likes
4,015
Why Composites

#

Very high specific strength. Which means very high strength and low weight
#

Great freedom of shape. Double curved and complex parts can be simple produced.
#

High degree of integration possible. Which means simple integration of stiffeners, inserts, cores, and production of self supporting structures in one or two production cycles.
#

Material can be tailored. Which means fit for the loads / performance the end product has to perform during its lifetime
#

Excellent fatigue endurance concerning number of load cycles (many times higher than with metals) and residual fatigue strength (aramide and carbon epoxy laminates retain more than 60% of their residual static strength, which is far more higher than is possible with metals.)
#

Excellent chemical resistance against acids, chemicals etc.
#

Excellent weather/water resistance. Material has almost no corrosion, takes on little water which leads to low maintenance cost especially on the long run.
#

Composites have excellent RAM features (Radar absorbing materials). It's also possible to make special laminates which are radar and sonar transparent.
#

Excellent impact habits
#

Excellent electrical habits, concerning isolation but also conduction, dielectric habits, EMS shielding etc. Structures can be tailored on RF transparency but can also be made RF reflecting. Great for telecom especially UMTS frequencies.
#

Great thermal isolation habits, fire retardancy habits, and high temperature performance
You don't get decent radar signatures when your plane is made of plastic. A metal plane, no matter how good the RCS reductions are, will be a big blimp on the radar, especially on the S-300PMU's radar screen. Replace the metals on the F-15 and F-18 with composites and then we will talk.
 

Soham

DFI TEAM
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2009
Messages
1,972
Likes
91
Country flag
John, please stop getting an Iran vs Israel and Australia vs China scenarios.
Especially something as lame as
Any Issy strike on Iran will involve flooding Irani airspace with tens and tens of decoys while a Harpy or Harop flies at low altitude towards its target the s-300, thats if Iranis have it. While all this happens the F-35 will launch a couple of long range cruise missiles to take out the reactors.
Also, no point getting the F-15 in the middle as it isn't an official contender, so its selection is devoid of possibility.

This competition has become a bit hazy as far as the requirements are concerned. The contenders range from Heavy, medium and light birds. Coupled with that, the confusion regarding the disqualification of fighters. Initially reports floated that the MRCA has to be twin engined, next we heard that the Gripen was chucked out, next the Rafale...

We have discussed every aspect to a bloody pulp and unless we get a basic idea of what the IAF needs, we'll just be moving about in circles.
 

F-14

Global Defence Moderator
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 20, 2009
Messages
1,563
Likes
27
Note: to the mods and shom lets keep this thread to just discussions iam planning to start a seprate thread to act as a resource pool for the M-MRCA competation what do you guys think ?
 
J

John

Guest
regarding ban on sale of jammers, any proof?? besides who said the USAF will buy the F-15 SE, i said the F-15SE is for existing F-15 operators like Saudi, Korea, Japan etc, i can pay for english comprehension lessons for u.

All that C*** about composites is useless coz the F-22 which is the only true stealth fighter deployed hardly has any composites. Composites are used very little on the F-22, most of its airframe is high strength titanium. Composites are indeed good but their sole purpose is to reduce weight, the F-22 has a lot more RAM coatings and a radar deflecting design and that's what makes it truly stealth. speaking of composites the EF's airframe has more of it than the Rafale.

speaking of RAM, the LCA has more composites than the Rafale too, given stealth coatings it will have a lower rcs than any of the mrca. Mayavi EW will outperform the Spectra hence the LCA mk-2 is bound to be better than the Rafale in SEAD missions. LCA mk-2 will also get the EL-2052 a far better radar than the RBE-2. Rafale can't deploy good Anti radar missiles like the SH can. SH can deploy ALARM missiles, AAGRM both capable of destroying shut down radars while the Rafale fires the martel and HARM both not capable of shooting down shut down radars. Again SH proves better.

Snecma lost the deal to develop the Kaveri engine anyways so another shot in the arm for the Rafale. so its either the GE 414 or the EJ2000 for the LCA and for commonalities sakes the IAF will go for the SH or EF for the MRCA. simple. We talk about going to war with China as if that will ever happen, even if it happens it will primarily be fought with ballistic missiles because none of our fighters current or future can actually survive in Chinese airspace no matter how stealthy they are, indeed they could have thousands of s-300s and going into in-land china is suicide. Any war between India and China is a war to the end as well, which we will remain hostile but will never actually fight the war. Besides if China indeed picks on India we'll have US support.

Our Harpys are better since China's Harpys weren't allowed to be upgraded due to pressure from US on Israel, we placed our order for upgraded versions after this fiasco.

Here is a document proving your full of crap p2p, the ALQ-99 is indeed cleared for export and that it is indeed better than many ground and sea based jammers and those were the older ones. read 3 paras before 'variants and upgrades' and 'world wide distribution' in the link below. The jammer has gotten a lot better since the document has been written. knowing that Boeing is currently wiring some of those SHs as Grolwers, I have all the reason to believe the full growler has been cleared for export to the Aussies. hope you dont need added english lessons.

TJS (ALQ-99(V)) - Archived 3/98
 

K Factor

A Concerned Indian
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2009
Messages
1,316
Likes
147
The Growler is the only aircraft in the world that has electronically blinded and then killed an F-22 !!. (Will post a link for this later, cannot find it now)

The Growler has so potent ECM/ECCM that 8-10 of them can black out an area the size of France.

No chance for Growler going to any other country, at least in the foreseable future..
 

Global Defence

Articles

Top