Know Your 'Rafale'

ace009

Freakin' Fighter fan
New Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2010
Messages
1,662
Likes
526
the author has some major beef with the rafale - which might be because he is ill informed, maybe he has a different perspective, it maybe that because he is indeed an EF fanboy. But the Rafale has won and is most likely going to be the MMRCA in IAF, so whatever the naysayers say, they are wrong because IAF found the Rafale as the best match to their requirements. Case closed.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Drsomnath999

lord of 32 teeth
New Member
Joined
Jun 17, 2011
Messages
1,273
Likes
1,376
Country flag
You two have issues, Sort it out through PM..

If that don't work, there is ignore option, use it..

This don't have to be public..
 
Last edited by a moderator:

p2prada

New Member
Joined
May 25, 2009
Messages
10,234
Likes
4,017
lol .. half of the rare craft is invisible, this can be used as stealth in late future (just kiddin..)
Perhaps we can. Gigahertz stealth is nearly achievable. Perhaps in the future, Tetrahertz stealth can become achievable.
 

Ray

The Chairman
New Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,132
Likes
23,841
My point is that there is nothing 100 % perfect.

We have waited years to just come up to some level so that we can address our national threat.

Should we wait longer for the real McCoy?

Maybe.

But what if we are attacked in the interim.

And anyway, even to be fully to operational strength it will take time and we are way behind!

Our artillery is still to see some guns brings it to the required operational efficiency.

How long are we to wait or should we have 'distress buy' at exorbitant rates once we are attacked like the coffins after the Kargil War when it was decided that it was an insult to send the bodies back in rum crates, as it was being done!
 

Parthy

Air Warrior
New Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2010
Messages
1,314
Likes
149
I don't buy much with the facts the author has given in this article.. Most parameters for Rafale is compared with F-22 & F35 which are totally different dimension birds...

All together, Rafale suits well into our IAF's requirement and as far as the ToT is provided which we requested!!
 

amitkriit

New Member
Joined
Jul 17, 2009
Messages
2,463
Likes
1,927
Do they get paid by Uncle Sam to write such articles? Do such articles benefit them in getting a US Visa?
 

Kunal Biswas

Member of the Year 2011
New Member
Joined
May 26, 2010
Messages
31,122
Likes
41,041
Smaller French Firms Feel Offset Heat


PARIS — Technology transfer and offsets are increasingly standard requirements of emerging markets, which seek to build up their defense industrial bases as part of economic development plans.


Demands by countries such as Brazil and India for the transfer of technology to set up local assembly of the Rafale may be acceptable to large companies such as Dassault, which builds the fighter jet, Colas des Francs said.

About 10 large companies, such as EADS, Nexter, MBDA, Safran and Thales, dominate the French land arms industry, but about 4,000 small and medium-sized companies depend on them for work.



Producers in countries such as India, which has a pool of information technology engineers, are building high-quality weapons, rather than cheap and basic products. The Indian variant of the Mi-24 attack helicopter was equipped with a thermal imaging camera and other sophisticated onboard equipment absent from the original Russian aircraft.

The United Arab Emirates demanded a local investment offset of 120 percent of the value of an unspecified French arms contract, Colas des Francs said.

Offset deals not only take production work away from French subcontractors and suppliers, but also provideaccelerated access to knowledge and skills that allows companies in the client country to compete in world markets, he said.

For instance, Renault Trucks Defense sold the Véhicule Avant Blindé armored troop carrier to Indonesia. Despite a no-export condition on that deal, the Indonesian model was found for sale in foreign markets, Colas des Francs said.

Offsets are common on civil contracts, such as China's demand for an Airbus 320 final assembly line.

Producers in countries such as India, which has a pool of information technology engineers, are building high-quality weapons, rather than cheap and basic products. The Indian variant of the Mi-24 attack helicopter was equipped with a thermal imaging camera and other sophisticated onboard equipment absent from the original Russian aircraft.

Turkish industry also is producing increasingly sophisticated arms, Colas des Francs said.
'Do You Want To Sell or Not?'

It is no longer possible to export a sophisticated weapon system without an offset and technology transfer arrangement, an analyst here said.

"The question is: Do you want to sell or not?" said Loïc Tribot La Spière, chief executive of think tank Centre d'Etude et Prospective Stratégique.

But even with the setting up of a foreign production line, not every subassembly or component part will be sourced from abroad, so there is a case-by-case approach. For the parts that will be made overseas, time is needed to establish the new supply lines, Tribot La Spière said.

The offset requirements should be seen as a "stimulus for innovation," pushing the supplier to climb the value chain and stay competitive, he added.

Even without the demands of a foreign offset deal, prime contractors would be pushing subcontractors in that direction, driving suppliers to "a pursuit of technological excellence," Tribot La Spière said. That pressure forces the supply chain to look for tomorrow's technology to stay in business.

As technology transfer is a standard requirement, the difficulty for exporters is to "play the game" while retaining control of key technology, particularly in the design area, which allows their customers quickly to become competitors, said research fellow Hélène Masson of think tank Fondation pour la Récherche Stratégique.

Offset agreements require prime contractors to get close to local subcontractors, or create a supply chain from scratch by bringing in local partners, she said.

"It's in this context that established subcontractors find themselves effectively excluded from the benefits of export con-tracts, unless they follow them abroad and create a local subsidiary," Masson said. "That's possible for large equipment makers, but a lot more difficult for small and medium-sized companies."

The demand for technology transfer in export markets is part of the "rules of the game," Thales CEO Luc Vigneron told journalists Feb. 16 at the company's technology day, a showcase of some 100 research and development projects.

"Accepting the rules of the game means we have to innovate further," he added. "We at home have to work on the next generation."

Asked if India could build an active electronically scanned array radar, Thales chief technical officer Marko Erman said, "Not in the very near future, but who knows?"

Erman later added, "To our knowledge, only France and the United States have operational actively scanned radars, but studies are being done in India."

India seeks 50 percent industrial offset and is in exclusive talks with Dassault to buy the Rafale, which operates a Thales RBE2 active scanned radar, to fulfill its multibillion-dollar program for a multirole fighter aircraft.

Export markets offer alternative sources of research and technology funding, given the defense budget cuts in European markets, Erman said.

The European Commission is working on a regime aimed at discouraging offset requirements among its member states. Poland, Spain and the East European countries still require offsets in foreign trade deals.

Arms manufacturers such as General Dynamics European Land Systems, Panhard and Rheinmetall are members of the European Club for Countertrade and Offsets, which acts as a forum and think tank on industrial offsets.
From:
http://www.defensenews.com/apps/pbcs...=2012302190008
 

weg

New Member
Joined
May 6, 2011
Messages
203
Likes
37
I don't buy much with the facts the author has given in this article.. Most parameters for Rafale is compared with F-22 & F35 which are totally different dimension birds...
I got the impression he thinks the Sukhoi PAK FA and stealth drones for ground attack are the long term future, not 4.5 gen Rafale/EF.

Technologies that are on order and within reach for India. Given the delays so far a further three year wait maybe worth it if it survives another forty years.

I think he has a valid point, after all a stealth strike drone is being developed jointly by BAE and Dassult.
 
Last edited:

ace009

Freakin' Fighter fan
New Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2010
Messages
1,662
Likes
526
Yep - it's the shame of Globalization. The Rich get richer, the middle class get screwed and the foreigners get a bone ...

However, it might be good for Indian companies and maybe the country too (doubtful, knowing the Indian babus) ....
 

sayareakd

New Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2009
Messages
17,734
Likes
18,953
Country flag
Asked if India could build an active electronically scanned array radar, Thales chief technical officer Marko Erman said, "Not in the very near future, but who knows?"
strange we have made LRTR and tested the missile defence before French, still they feels this way. Manufacturing and developing are two different things.
 

Armand2REP

CHINI EXPERT
New Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2009
Messages
13,811
Likes
6,734
Country flag
Offsets are write-offs for outsourcing that were going to happen anyway. Local industry has to move up the value chain. How can you complain about losing work on a foreign order when you wouldn't have the work without it? Moving shops to all corners of the globe increase local orders to fill the high-end gaps not given. High-tech industry is expanded locally while the nuts, bolts and screwdrivers are sent abroad. There is enough work in initial production and knock-down kits to make it well worth the effort until their lines take over. How many countries have successfully absorbed offsets to have an independent arms industry? None...
 

ace009

Freakin' Fighter fan
New Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2010
Messages
1,662
Likes
526
Offsets are write-offs for outsourcing that were going to happen anyway. Local industry has to move up the value chain. How can you complain about losing work on a foreign order when you wouldn't have the work without it? Moving shops to all corners of the globe increase local orders to fill the high-end gaps not given. High-tech industry is expanded locally while the nuts, bolts and screwdrivers are sent abroad. There is enough work in initial production and knock-down kits to make it well worth the effort until their lines take over. How many countries have successfully absorbed offsets to have an independent arms industry? None...
Firstly, the "moving up the value chain" mostly works in terms of being acquired by a bigger company - it's a Big Fish eat smaller ones - world.

Also, by that "None" you are excluding South Korea, South Africa, Israel and oh - the big one - China!!
 

Armand2REP

CHINI EXPERT
New Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2009
Messages
13,811
Likes
6,734
Country flag
Firstly, the "moving up the value chain" mostly works in terms of being acquired by a bigger company - it's a Big Fish eat smaller ones - world.
That is exactly what is happening in our reorganisation.

Also, by that "None" you are excluding South Korea, South Africa, Israel and oh - the big one - China!!
Israel didn't get there by offsets, they don't get any from US welfare checks. China doesn't get any either since the West don't do business with them and Russia didn't do it. South Korea still imports more than half of their equipment so it is hardly independent. South Africa is worse off than ROK.
 

ace009

Freakin' Fighter fan
New Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2010
Messages
1,662
Likes
526
Isarel's military industry was pretty much born out of US copies and licenses.
China did have "offsets" , mostly from Russia when they "licensed" techs from the Russians and then copied them.
ROK has been using TOT from USA for decades and SA from the-brits.
you think of Offsets as termed in the MMRCA - spelt out clearly probably for the first time. In truth offsets are jut part of TOT, which is generally fone by beg borrow or steal. This time Indians are actually "buying" technology openly.
 

Armand2REP

CHINI EXPERT
New Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2009
Messages
13,811
Likes
6,734
Country flag
Israel and China didn't get their defence industries by offsets, they got them by reverse engineering. Israel is hardly independent with big ticket items having to be imported. ROK has done a decent job with JVs, offsets and their own R&D but big ticket items still have to be imported. I think of offsets as foreign industry reinvestment which is what they are. ToT is purchased.
 

jackprince

Turning into a frog
New Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2009
Messages
5,149
Likes
17,916
Country flag
I got the impression he thinks the Sukhoi PAK FA and stealth drones for ground attack are the long term future, not 4.5 gen Rafale/EF.

Technologies that are on order and within reach for India. Given the delays so far a further three year wait maybe worth it if it survives another forty years.

I think he has a valid point, after all a stealth strike drone is being developed jointly by BAE and Dassult.
With the rising tension between China and India we may not have 6 more year (3-4 year for development + 2-3 yr for production). Given how much time has already been wasted, we need a solution for Mig-21 fleet immediately. Particularly since Russians have proven time and again that they can't be relied on about the project time-line

Also, with the advent of radar technology, the days of complete stealth may be numbered. Since BVR missile tech hasn't yet matured and EW systems of the most modern A/Cs to a level able to jam missiles, stealth A/Cs at BVR range might not be much effective. In that case, A/Cs like F-35 which have bargained stealth for maneuverability may become redundant. There the Rafale or Typhoon would still be very much viable.

P.S. Off topic. Can anybody point me to the ground-based radar thread?
 

lemontree

New Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2009
Messages
815
Likes
647
Poor article by an officer who has not done proper research. He has equated the Rafale with the JF-17...I'm rather speechless.

As per Aviation experts, "Rafale" can only be compared with Eurofighter Typhoon manufactured in 2003, USA/UK: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter in 2008; Chinese FC-1 / JF-17 in 2006 and J-10.
His views are quite daft when he states that ....
The 'Eurofighter' could also be offered to Pakistan and others interested in gaining a security edge in the region
.

I stopped reading after that point, as it does not appear the he has any understanding on the subject, inspite of being an NDC graduate, and has done his Staff College from Canada.
 

Kunal Biswas

Member of the Year 2011
New Member
Joined
May 26, 2010
Messages
31,122
Likes
41,041
New horizons
The Week, Feb 21

The main challenges in inducting the Rafale to the IAF will be training and infrastructure

It was after a long selection process that the French Rafale emerged as the aircraft that will be inducted into the Indian Air Force from 2015. The 052,000-crore Medium Multi-Role Combat Aircraft deal involves the induction of 126 fighter aircraft, with an option to induct 63 more, if required, at a later stage. Apart from the huge money and the leap of technology involved, what does the deal mean from a fighter pilot's point of view?
[...]
The air force is more technology oriented than the army or the navy. In a combat scenario, all other factors being the same, the air force with better technology will come out ahead. With two nuclear-armed neighbours, and given India's political relationship with them, it is imperative that the IAF has the best technology that the country can afford. The MMRCA deal is about induction of such technology.
[...]
In 1985, I joined the newly inducted Mirage-2000 fleet. The aircraft was a technological marvel. What surprised me the most was the ease with which you could adapt to and assimilate these new technologies. I think it was the way in which it was presented to the pilot in the cockpit. It all seemed so natural and logical, and left you wondering how you managed without these technologies so far. While the aircraft performance was in a different league, mainly because of the innovative fly-by-wire system, basic flying was extremely simple. It was the management of the onboard systems that required skill. The availability of onboard systems like the multimode radar and the navigation and weapon-aiming systems made it possible to exploit the aircraft operationally for tasks limited only by your imagination. Also, the Mirage-2000 has an exceptionally good flight safety record.

As I went up in the hierarchy of the IAF, I got to see these aircraft from a different perspective. As the chief operations officer of a flying base, and thereafter as a base commander, I realised that the MiG-21 and other Soviet/Russian aircraft were not really maintenance friendly. Keeping these aircraft fly-worthy was a challenge. Compared with them, the Mirage-2000 was in a totally different league.

The Mirage-2000 is built on a modular concept. Most modules had built-in test equipment. If the test showed 'no-go', the faulty module just had to be pulled out and replaced with a functional module, and you were good to go. Even the engine was a module. Replacing an engine, which is required at times, took a little more than an hour. In the case of the MiG-21, an engine change was a major job which took significantly longer time and more effort to accomplish.
In 1993, I was part of the team bringing in more Mirage-2000 aircraft from France. Dassault, the manufacturer of the aircraft, made it a point to show us the Rafale, which was in the process of being operationalised for induction into the French air force and navy. The aircraft embodied an extension of the Mirage-2000 philosophy, but was more than a generation ahead in technology.

My association with the Mirage-2000 fleet included a fair amount of interaction with the French representatives, especially from Dassault. They are hard-nosed businessmen. If you have the money, and are willing to pay, they will deliver the required service. They did not seem too concerned with matters like foreign policy. However, like any businessmen, they will not waste an opportunity to exploit the customer if the opportunity arises.
In 2006, I was part of a delegation to the Farnborough Air Show. The Indian delegation was in demand because of the MMRCA deal. We were given briefings by all vendors in the fray. One common point about the two American vendors, Boeing and Lockheed Martin, was that, when queried about specific equipment or weapon options for the F-18 and the F-16, the standard reply was "We will have to check with the State Department". I do not think Dassault does business under such constraints.
The induction of the Rafale will pose challenges to the IAF. In my opinion, the main challenges will be training and infrastructure creation. The assimilation of these new technologies will not pose much of a problem, but the volume of personnel to be trained, especially for maintenance, will be a challenge. Induction of such high technology will also require the creation of dedicated equipment servicing and repair bays, and other allied infrastructure. This is a mammoth task.

The author has flown more than 3,500 hours on various fighter aircraft, including the MiG-21 and the Mirage-2000.
Full article:
http://week.manoramaonline.com/cgi-b...entId=11073115
 

Articles

Top