India opens bids in $10.4-bn combat plane tender.

[p2prada]

Well arundo, you apparently don't have a single hour on the type and yet you figure the EF is an orgy of shortcomings?
Is it because somebody told you so, or you just know it, or what?

People who build aircraft don't fly them. There are thousands of people in the world who know more about flying than the pilots themselves do.

 

[arundo]

An American General had good things to say about the EF. You can take his word for it.

Both IAF and IN had good things to say about Rafale. You can bet on that.

In the end the American fighters were rejected. I am happy.

I know and I appreciate your statements, you try to see the things factually and soberly...
I emphasized that the EF as a project (started more or less at the same time as Rafale) is far behind and that it had lost sight of timetable and budget. Vanadium tried to create the impression, that the costs of Rafale were horrendous, out of control and therefore India could not rely on the French.

Regarding your last sentence: is this the wish not to become dependent from the US or to strenghten ohter projects in order to avoid absolute US domination in the world market?

 

[arundo]

People who build aircraft don't fly them. There are thousands of people in the world who know more about flying than the pilots themselves do.

I think pilots will know about aircrafts, but not only the pilots. The most important is where the info comes from and which interests are behind. That's the reason why EF press releases cannot be the killer argument.

 

[Immanuel]

There has been a misconception that Raffy is ITAR free but Raffy too has critical parts coming from the US, TOT clearance for Raffy also has to come from the US. Both EF and Raffy have sensi US made parts and unkil will need to clear tot for either. That said too much independence from the US is no good either because if Pakis or China do start hostilities a friendly US can be of much help knowing that they certainly wont allow an entirely radical pak regime with nuke weapons.

There have been many exchanges and excercises between our SF units with the US to undertake such joint operations if things go south in Puki land. China well, taking on the fierce dragon will require US help, we alone realistically can't take on China and it would be naive to assume that a war between India and China would be limited to only our countries. China will try to use its assets in POK, PAK, and other areas under its influence, which will require the attention of our forces, a war between china and India would turn into a regional battle and very quickly a global war.

 

[Cola]

...I did never wrote that today's aircrafts have lots of shortcomings...

Well, I don't know. This is what you wrote:

...EF (there is indeed), of course, as this aircraft has been an "orgy" of shortcomings so far...

I just wanted to know how did you figure the EF is an orgy of shortcomings, as you eloquently put it.
Footage I posted earlier is hardy a biased source, obviously proving the opposite.
The EF delivers top performance and that costs money, always did and always will, so I'm not sure what you're trying to say, here.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

It seems EF won, Not sure but it seems..

 

[arya]

It seems EF won, Not sure but it seems..

that ok at least IAF will get some fighter planes , that good for our IAF strength

@kunal :: will you pls compare ef with f16 and china j17 , what type of role will they can play

 

[vanadium]

Well, I don't know. This is what you wrote:


I just wanted to know how did you figure the EF is an orgy of shortcomings, as you eloquently put it.
Footage I posted earlier is hardy a biased source, obviously proving the opposite.
The EF delivers top performance and that costs money, always did and always will, so I'm not sure what you're trying to say, here.

An orgy of shortcomings would suggest that the IAF in selecting--and possibly procuring such a weapon system--has been grossly incompetent. Well, most people know that is not the case, bien au contraire!

There is no point and is a sheer waste of time to discuss with people that are neither technically nor operationally competent in combat aircraft design and operations. People than can only trawl the internet and google around to vomit bureaucratic bits and pieces that suit whatever agenda they may pursue. I have no problem having serious exchanges of ideas with competent engineers and crew supporting Rafale. It is a good airplane, otherwise it would have not been down-selected. You can learn an awful lot from such discussions, but to go around in circles repeating that Typhoon is late, is not multirole, and blah blah is not the kind of enriching experience one should expect in a serious forum.

 

[p2prada]

Regarding your last sentence: is this the wish not to become dependent from the US or to strenghten ohter projects in order to avoid absolute US domination in the world market?

Neither. Even with our piss poor industrial performance, we have managed to keep our ancient Mig-21s flying with very bad external assistance. If sanctions were placed on India after the MRCA delivery was complete then it wouldn't be such a big problem for us because we would already have the requisite technology to re-engineer tools and parts for future use. We can use our own weapons and electronics if the need arises.

We cannot compete with US in the commercial area. They will make more advanced aircraft and we can at best hope to sell LCA to poorer countries. US will always have rivals who do not use US products. We can sell to them in the future. Until we come out with the first prototype of the AMCA, please do not put us on a pedestal no matter how economically rich we become.

 

[vanadium]

It seems EF won, Not sure but it seems..

Typhoon has all the right cards to win this competition and to deliver to the IAF an outstanding multirole fighter to dissuade adventurism in the region and, should this fail, to help the IAF achieve quickly and decisively air superiority and then swing into surface attack role.

But the game is not yet over and it is wiser to wait for the official declaration of the winning offer. This is as close as they come...

 

[p2prada]

Typhoon has all the right cards to win this competition and to deliver to the IAF an outstanding multirole fighter to dissuade adventurism in the region and, should this fail, to help the IAF achieve quickly and decisively air superiority and then swing into surface attack role.

The problem is we still don't know what IAF is looking for. A strike aircraft like Rafale or air superiority like EF. We may never know because the shortlist seems to indicate IAF is fine with either.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Typhoon has all the right cards to win this competition and to deliver to the IAF an outstanding multirole fighter to dissuade adventurism in the region and, should this fail, to help the IAF achieve quickly and decisively air superiority and then swing into surface attack role.

I am keep getting this swing marketing term, Doesn't a SU-30 too does swing ?

I am sure EF-2000 is a very good deigned Aircraft as per Pilot needs..

 

[vanadium]

The problem is we still don't know what IAF is looking for. A strike aircraft like Rafale or air superiority like EF. We may never know because the shortlist seems to indicate IAF is fine with either.

I guess the IAF is fine with both aircraft for the following overarching reasons (beyond the detailed scoring in the RFP):

1) First they do not look at a single point in time (a sort of time freeze), but possess more than a well educated guess of the evolutionary potential of the two weapon systems. So one has to have a dynamic rather than a static frame of mind in trying to understand their rationale;

2) They consider both machines multirole, albeit with different areas of excellence;

3) Time will soon reduce these differences (the timeframe of operational significance for MMRCA is about 2018 + 35 years life). This build-up interval is small compared with the period of operational activity, say 2018 to 2050 with a centre of gravity around 2035;

4) In a force structure like the IAF with many types in service and under development, with overlapping capabilities in many combat mission areas, the risk of getting it wrong is much reduced compared to a single- or a two-type force structure. In this sense they are comfortable with both machines, and of course with their planned insertions of technology, capabilities and customization.

I would add as further observations what follows:

a) Rafale will never be able to perform in A-A against very high threat (I underline the threat aspect, because if you lower it then everybody performs) as Typhoon. This is mainly due to inferior specific excess power in the high supersonic regimes of modern BVR combat and inferior radar (size, power and scan volume);

b) Typhoon will expand its surface attack capabilities as per IAF agreed plans and basically match Rafale´s ones. There is absolutely nothing in its inherent design architecture that would impede it. Even its bigger re-positionable radar will contribute by delivering outstanding SAR imagery from high standoff ranges;

c) From 2025 onwards the A-G mission areas will gradually migrate to the unmanned platforms. So if you look at the long-term viability of your investment--and I guess that the IAF will have considered these aspects--the multirole fighter optimized for air superiority will make more sense.

d) Air superiority will remain also in the future the key pre-requisite for conducting a successful air campaign and winning a war. There will be no substitute for manned fighters in the MMRCA timeframe of reference.

These observations are of course of academical nature and a contribution to a civilized discussion, as the IAF has already made their choice (the two finalists) and it´s now up to the other constituencies to issue their verdict.

 

[vanadium]

I am keep getting this swing marketing term, Doesn't a SU-30 too does swing ?

I am sure EF-2000 is a very good deigned Aircraft as per Pilot needs..

It is not really a marketing term but rather an operational one: in this case it swings from one phase of operations to another one. You can also swing during the course of a mission from an A-A to an A-G, if the opportunity arises.

I hope to see Typhoon and Su-30MKI swinging together soon...

One of the early Typhoon´s mottos: DESIGNED BY PILOTS FOR PILOTS

And the beauty is that it has been designed by the pilots of four major and diverse Air Forces. Four different ways of seeing and doing things made sure that no stone was left unturned in achieving a "pilot's friendly" machine. No cultural bias of a single nation. Inputs from guys who have flown the most varied types of combat planes (many with exchange pilot experience).

The result: a dream machine to fly!

The benefit: flying is no burden and the pilot becomes a battlespace tactician concentrated on the fight and not the flight.

 

[Payeng]

c) From 2025 onwards the A-G mission areas will gradually migrate to the unmanned platforms. So if you look at the long-term viability of your investment--and I guess that the IAF will have considered these aspects--the multirole fighter optimized for air superiority will make more sense.

Quite a valid point.

 

[arundo]

An orgy of shortcomings would suggest that the IAF in selecting--and possibly procuring such a weapon system--has been grossly incompetent. Well, most people know that is not the case, bien au contraire!

There is no point and is a sheer waste of time to discuss with people that are neither technically nor operationally competent in combat aircraft design and operations. People than can only trawl the internet and google around to vomit bureaucratic bits and pieces that suit whatever agenda they may pursue. I have no problem having serious exchanges of ideas with competent engineers and crew supporting Rafale. It is a good airplane, otherwise it would have not been down-selected. You can learn an awful lot from such discussions, but to go around in circles repeating that Typhoon is late, is not multirole, and blah blah is not the kind of enriching experience one should expect in a serious forum.

I do not go around in circles saying Typhoon is late, as my approach is neutral, basically... but it would not be serious to ignore sources having established facts which show that not everything is ok, but you repeatedly tried to do. If you looked for a serious discussion, you would neither have tried to reduce to absurdity technical-operational evaluations which put Rafale ahead or official reports and articles from recognized media, nor have said that the M88 is a crappy engine or tried to create the impression that India cannot rely on French.
Is this the way you intend debating seriously? Debating seriously includes admitting facts or accepting arguments without having to deviate from your own convictions.
Furthermore I have already pointed out, that the current M88 is not set in stone and that SNECMA is likely to release a stronger version of it. Of course, it is another question how much it will cost Dassault to integrate it on Rafale and who is going to pay, but as you said both planes are developing and will integrate more upgrades.

 

[arundo]

Well, I don't know. This is what you wrote:


I just wanted to know how did you figure the EF is an orgy of shortcomings, as you eloquently put it.
Footage I posted earlier is hardy a biased source, obviously proving the opposite.
The EF delivers top performance and that costs money, always did and always will, so I'm not sure what you're trying to say, here.

Well, I meant the program as a whole and not today's aircrafts. I admit that the term was a little heavy... But since you are playing with words and you seem to stand for a serious discussion here, I am a little surprised that Sukhish's remark that "Rafale is for aero-museum" didn't disturb you at all.
What I have been trying to say here is, that there is neither evidence that EF fits better to what IAF needs, nor that it is a superior aircraft. The sources I named and the evaluation results of 5 airforces can hardly be qualified as biased.
EF delivers top performance and Rafale too.

 

[Anshu Attri]

 

[death.by.chocolate]

b) Typhoon will expand its surface attack capabilities as per IAF agreed plans and basically match Rafale´s ones. There is absolutely nothing in its inherent design architecture that would impede it. Even its bigger re-positionable radar will contribute by delivering outstanding SAR imagery from high standoff ranges;

I disagree with (b) the Typhoon will not move mud as efficiently as the Rafale. Considering SAR works on the principle of Doppler return from the target I fail to see how a re positionable antenna is better?

 

[sob]

This is a very potentially dangerous information coming from the Finance Ministry.

Will China threat last 2 yrs? FinMin stalls military expansion - Indian Express

The second phase of the government's ambitious military expansion plan — worth Rs 65,000 crore — has run into rough weather. The finance ministry has red-flagged the plan with detailed queries and sent it back to the defence ministry with a bizarre question: will the Chinese threat last more than two years?While responses have been prepared explaining the impossibility of ascribing a time period to the threat or even speculating on what the situation will be two years from now, sources said, the political understanding is that the finance ministry is probably not keen to clear such a high-cost plan this financial year.

The whole MMRCA deal may be delayed.