Know Your 'Rafale'
- Thread starter A.V.
- Start date
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2009
- Messages
- 13,811
- Likes
- 6,734
JAISWAL
New Member
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2010
- Messages
- 1,527
- Likes
- 1,027
Smaller French Firms Feel Offset Heat | Defense News | defensenews.com
.
Smaller French Firms Feel Offset Heat
Feb. 19, 2012 - 02:12PM |
By PIERRE TRAN
.
.
.
PARIS — Industrial offsets demanded in arms export deals by emerging-market countries are a source of harm for small and medium-sized companies, said Patrick Colas des Francs, chief executive of Coges, the trade show organizer for the Eurosatory land systems exhibition.
"Offsets are a threat to small and medium-sized companies," Colas des Francs told the French defense journalists' press club Feb. 15. "This is a real problem."
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...
.
........................ For full article please visit above link
.
Smaller French Firms Feel Offset Heat
Feb. 19, 2012 - 02:12PM |
By PIERRE TRAN
.
.
.
PARIS — Industrial offsets demanded in arms export deals by emerging-market countries are a source of harm for small and medium-sized companies, said Patrick Colas des Francs, chief executive of Coges, the trade show organizer for the Eurosatory land systems exhibition.
"Offsets are a threat to small and medium-sized companies," Colas des Francs told the French defense journalists' press club Feb. 15. "This is a real problem."
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...
.
........................ For full article please visit above link
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2009
- Messages
- 13,811
- Likes
- 6,734
Last edited by a moderator:
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2010
- Messages
- 1,662
- Likes
- 526
FYI ...
Figure it out on your own. Look up the definition of angle of attack. It is denoted by alpha.
Every fixed wing aircraft has an angle of attack.
If you have your own definition then please educate me.
Inclination Effects on Lift
Combat Aircraft of the Indian Air Force
Well, then you apparently didn't make any/enough research.
Size does not matter much, the same goes for the shape. Early "first generation" stealth aircraft were facet based, back then the theory was "more facets -> better stealth capabilities"... still some planes were designed whit more facets and less RCS than F117.
Last edited:
- Joined
- May 26, 2010
- Messages
- 31,122
- Likes
- 41,041
- Joined
- May 26, 2010
- Messages
- 31,122
- Likes
- 41,041
How it all played out
Insiders who are privy to the entire process of the MMRCA deal have a fascinating story to tell. The Russians, Swedes and the Americans initially underestimated the tight process laid down by the MoD and the requirements of the Indian Air Force (IAF). The Russians were the first off the block in rectifying their error. Long used to being the main supplier of military hardware to India, the Russians had mistakenly assumed that an upgraded version of MiG-29 would make the IAF bosses happy. But they were rebuffed in no uncertain terms and they got back to the drawing board.
The Americans believed their own hype about being the world's best air force with the world's best flying machines a little too much. They should have woken up when Indian pilots flying upgraded MiG-21 Bisons with Russian Phazatron Kopyo (Spear) radar, Vympel R-73RDM2 missile and the Beyond Visual Range (BVR) Vympel R-77/RVV-AEE air-to-air missiles licked the formidable F-15C and the F-16 Block 52 fighters of the USAF clean on one-on-one as well as in Dissimilar Air Combat Training (DACT) exercises in the Cope India 2004 in Gwalior. The USAF acknowledged that the Indian pilots displayed 'unexpected situational awareness and tactical maturity' and said that MiG-21 Bisons and Su-30MKIs were the toughest to counter.
But they didn't wake up. In the next Cope India exercise in 2005 in Kalaikundi airbase the Indian pilots operating in an AWACS environment for the first time responded to target information faster than their American counterparts. Yet again the Americans found their F-15C/D and F-16 Block 60 fighter aircraft being taken on by MiG-21 Bisons the Su-30MKI air superiority fighters. More often than not the Indians emerged victorious in Within Visual Range (WVR) combat and could hold their own in BVR combat. The subsequent Cope India exercises in 2006 and 2009 and the Red Flag Exercise in 2008 at Nellis Airforce Base in Nevada showcased India's appetite for high-performance aircraft and the advanced skill levels of its pilots. This was an emerging and confident India and the Americans underestimated the IAF's strategic insight and depth, requirements and the ability to absorb technology. What Boeing and Lockheed Martin initially offered was F-18 and an upgraded F-16 Block 52 aircraft respectively. Both had airframes which were over 30 years old and, more importantly, were often beaten or held up by upgraded MiG-21 Bisons and the latest Su-30MKIs.
The British and the French were smarter, quickly recognising India's increasing appetite for a strategic role in the larger Asian context and understanding that the IAF was looking for a top-of-the-line product. In the 2007 Indradhanush joint IAF-RAF exercise the British fielded the Eurofighter Typhoon. The Typhoons took on the Su-30MKIs and a mutual respect was born. In the subsequent Indradhanush exercise in 2010, the RAF specially invited Indian pilots to fly the Eurofighter Typhoon. One senior and experienced Su-30MKI pilot who had flown the Typhoon told this author that the aircraft was the best in terms of cockpit layout and pilot friendliness. It was a big endorsement as this pilot had flown a lot of world's best fighter aircraft. The French also used Garuda, the codename for the IAF-FAF joint exercise, to field Rafale against top-line Indian fighters and also allowed Indian pilots to fly the aircraft. A pilot who flew Rafale said that the learning curve in adapting to the aircraft was minimal as they had the experience of flying the Mirage.
The Russians tried to undo the damage of MiG-29 OVT by fielding the MiG-35, unveiled for the first time ever in the Aero India show in Bangalore in 2007. Even though the airframe was similar to MiG-29, again an over 25-year-old airframe, the plane had a Phazotron Zhuk-AE Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) radar, the first fighter in the MMRCA competition to offer so, an RD-33MK engine, a variant of the RD-33 infamous for its high-soot visibility, and a newly designed Optical Locator System (OLS). The major problem for the Russians was not the aircraft per se. It was an excellent aircraft with a practically next to nothing learning curve for integration with the existing IAF systems. After all India was the first non-Warsaw Pact country to have been offered the MiG-29. The aircraft had everything going for it, except spare parts, engine overhaul cycles and lifecycle costs. Sweden offered the SAAB produced JAS-39 Gripen. It was always considered the wild card and in every possible way it really was. The design, like the earlier Drakken and Viggen, was unconventional and it had a very high proportion of US-supplied hardware, including electronics, large portions of avionics and weaponry. In the end, only Typhoon and Rafale remained and Typhoon lost out on per unit acquisition cost and over lifecycle cost.
Analysis
Insiders who are privy to the entire process of the MMRCA deal have a fascinating story to tell. The Russians, Swedes and the Americans initially underestimated the tight process laid down by the MoD and the requirements of the Indian Air Force (IAF). The Russians were the first off the block in rectifying their error. Long used to being the main supplier of military hardware to India, the Russians had mistakenly assumed that an upgraded version of MiG-29 would make the IAF bosses happy. But they were rebuffed in no uncertain terms and they got back to the drawing board.
The Americans believed their own hype about being the world's best air force with the world's best flying machines a little too much. They should have woken up when Indian pilots flying upgraded MiG-21 Bisons with Russian Phazatron Kopyo (Spear) radar, Vympel R-73RDM2 missile and the Beyond Visual Range (BVR) Vympel R-77/RVV-AEE air-to-air missiles licked the formidable F-15C and the F-16 Block 52 fighters of the USAF clean on one-on-one as well as in Dissimilar Air Combat Training (DACT) exercises in the Cope India 2004 in Gwalior. The USAF acknowledged that the Indian pilots displayed 'unexpected situational awareness and tactical maturity' and said that MiG-21 Bisons and Su-30MKIs were the toughest to counter.
But they didn't wake up. In the next Cope India exercise in 2005 in Kalaikundi airbase the Indian pilots operating in an AWACS environment for the first time responded to target information faster than their American counterparts. Yet again the Americans found their F-15C/D and F-16 Block 60 fighter aircraft being taken on by MiG-21 Bisons the Su-30MKI air superiority fighters. More often than not the Indians emerged victorious in Within Visual Range (WVR) combat and could hold their own in BVR combat. The subsequent Cope India exercises in 2006 and 2009 and the Red Flag Exercise in 2008 at Nellis Airforce Base in Nevada showcased India's appetite for high-performance aircraft and the advanced skill levels of its pilots. This was an emerging and confident India and the Americans underestimated the IAF's strategic insight and depth, requirements and the ability to absorb technology. What Boeing and Lockheed Martin initially offered was F-18 and an upgraded F-16 Block 52 aircraft respectively. Both had airframes which were over 30 years old and, more importantly, were often beaten or held up by upgraded MiG-21 Bisons and the latest Su-30MKIs.
The British and the French were smarter, quickly recognising India's increasing appetite for a strategic role in the larger Asian context and understanding that the IAF was looking for a top-of-the-line product. In the 2007 Indradhanush joint IAF-RAF exercise the British fielded the Eurofighter Typhoon. The Typhoons took on the Su-30MKIs and a mutual respect was born. In the subsequent Indradhanush exercise in 2010, the RAF specially invited Indian pilots to fly the Eurofighter Typhoon. One senior and experienced Su-30MKI pilot who had flown the Typhoon told this author that the aircraft was the best in terms of cockpit layout and pilot friendliness. It was a big endorsement as this pilot had flown a lot of world's best fighter aircraft. The French also used Garuda, the codename for the IAF-FAF joint exercise, to field Rafale against top-line Indian fighters and also allowed Indian pilots to fly the aircraft. A pilot who flew Rafale said that the learning curve in adapting to the aircraft was minimal as they had the experience of flying the Mirage.
The Russians tried to undo the damage of MiG-29 OVT by fielding the MiG-35, unveiled for the first time ever in the Aero India show in Bangalore in 2007. Even though the airframe was similar to MiG-29, again an over 25-year-old airframe, the plane had a Phazotron Zhuk-AE Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) radar, the first fighter in the MMRCA competition to offer so, an RD-33MK engine, a variant of the RD-33 infamous for its high-soot visibility, and a newly designed Optical Locator System (OLS). The major problem for the Russians was not the aircraft per se. It was an excellent aircraft with a practically next to nothing learning curve for integration with the existing IAF systems. After all India was the first non-Warsaw Pact country to have been offered the MiG-29. The aircraft had everything going for it, except spare parts, engine overhaul cycles and lifecycle costs. Sweden offered the SAAB produced JAS-39 Gripen. It was always considered the wild card and in every possible way it really was. The design, like the earlier Drakken and Viggen, was unconventional and it had a very high proportion of US-supplied hardware, including electronics, large portions of avionics and weaponry. In the end, only Typhoon and Rafale remained and Typhoon lost out on per unit acquisition cost and over lifecycle cost.
Analysis
- Joined
- May 26, 2010
- Messages
- 31,122
- Likes
- 41,041
When strategy was technical
France has always been a difficult ally of the US. Like an extremely talented problem child, France has defied the US time and again. And this cock-a-snook attitude has been most visible in the field of defence and military hardware sales. Some call the French approach business-like, driven by self-interest and realpolitik. Critics, however, describe the French approach as one with a flexible moral compass.
During the 10-year Iran-Iraq war, the French played both sides admirably. While the Iraqis were given French warplanes, Milan anti-tank missiles and Exocet AM 39 anti-ship missiles, the Iranians were subtly directed to the Chinese who supplied them with sea-skimming Silkworm anti-ship missiles to keep the Straits of Hormuz boiling. The interesting point was that the French had secretly supplied the Chinese with the inertial guidance system and the solid fuel technology to the Chinese. But this was still minor indiscretion. The French looked the other way when Iraq acquired highly restricted Maraging Steel, used in uranium enrichment centrifuges, through a complex series of transactions, middlemen, and front companies.
Antony and his team seemed to know this history and felt that the French were more likely to part with critical technologies needed to enhance India's defence aviation sector than any other country. They had their own precedents too. When sanctions were imposed on India, especially on dual use technologies, after Pokhran II the Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) project was the worst hit. The US, which was supposed to help Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA) with crucial cockpit systems, avionics, Fly by Wire (FBW) flight control systems and engines (GE-404), backed out and refused to part with off-the-shelf units as well as the technology. The French decided to break ranks with the US and helped out.
People familiar with the LCA project contend that it's no accident that India preferred to go with a relatively complex tailless compound delta-wing design, a design philosophy followed by the European aircraft manufacturers. Rafale, Typhoon and Gripen are all delta-wing aircraft. Antony and his team were aware of the commonality of design philosophy between Rafale and Tejas. The commonality was strategic as it had the potential to comprehensively transform India's defence aviation sector.
The French support in helping India develop indigenous technological capabilities is by no means small. Three examples will suffice. First, Indian company Samtel, which produces state-of-the-art Heads up Display (HUD) display systems for Tejas and Sukhoi-30 MKI, is a joint venture with Thales, which has a 26% stake in it. Thales is one of a handful of companies in the world with proprietary avionics technology. Second, Dassault, which manufactures Rafale, was initially invited by ADA to provide consultancy services for developing the FBW system of Tejas. Third, when India's efforts to produce an indigenous engine (GTRE GTX-35VS Kaveri) for Tejas with 90 kilonewton (KN) thrust fell flat, it was the French Snecma that stepped in to help the Gas Turbine Research Establishment (GTRE) finetune the Kabini core of the Kaveri engine. Snecma powers Rafale with its twin M-88-2 engines.
Insiders also revealed that Antony and his team were not convinced about the American intentions to transfer core technologies. Their suspicions had solid grounds. Of course the sanctions imposed on India was one obvious ground, but the way the US pressured Israel, one its closest allies, to abandon the Lavi fighter aircraft project was another. In 1980, the Israel government authorised the Israel Air Force (IAF) to present its requirements and specifications to Israel Aircraft Industries (IAI) for the production of a 4th generation fighter aircraft. Called Lavi, it was jointly financed by Israel (60%) and the US (40%). The first prototype flew in 1986 and it became clear that the Lavi was far superior to the F-16, which constituted a substantial chunk of the IAF. The US started putting intense political pressure on Israel to cancel the project, eventually cutting off its part of the funding. Left with inadequate capital Israel abandoned the Lavi project. Rumour has it that Boeing and Lockheed Martin used its clout to put pressure on the US government
Nobody could have anticipated it, but the abandonment of the Lavi project led to the development of a direct threat to India. For the last three decades the Chinese have been on frenetic mission to modernise their armed forces by all means possible. Some military experts are convinced that the Chinese J-10 (manufactured by Chengdu Aircraft Corporation and internally designated as 'Vigorous Dragon') is a copy of the Lavi. The Chinese, of course, deny it. But the similarities between the two aircraft are uncanny. The Chinese do have a track record of using below the belt tactics to achieve their aims. In 2008, a furious Russia threatened to sue China when it copied the Sukhoi-27SK fighters and released them into the export market as Shenyang J-11. Despite the threat, the Chinese continue to produce J-11 and have thumbed their nose at the Russians by copying carrier-based Sukhoi-33 and releasing them as J-11BH.
The best example of Chinese underhand tactics was the way in which they acquired Admiral Kuznetsov-class aircraft carrier Varyag in April 1998 from Ukraine. Some military experts say that China's People Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) floated a front company called Chong Lot Travel Agency Ltd, based it in Hong Kong, and bought the aircraft carrier ostensibly to convert into a floating hotel and gambling parlour. For over ten years the ship disappeared from everyone's radar. Then it finally popped up as fully refurbished indigenous Chinese aircraft carrier for sea trials in August 2011. It will be China's first aircraft carrier.
Antony recognised the Chinese threat and got the previous National Security Adviser M K Narayanan on board. Together they met Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and decided to implement a comprehensive action plan to counter the increasing Chinese muscle. One part of the plan was a concerted upgradation of critical defence equipment. The upgrade programmes of MiG-29, MiG-21, Mirage-2000, Jaguar, T-72 and T-90 tanks are all part of this effort. But a more long-term part of the plan was to upgrade and build India's military industrial base, especially with regard to critical technologies.
Antony knew that India could never go the Chinese way of copying military hardware or reverse engineering technologies. He was clear that while India needed to be self-reliant on critical technologies, it could not do so on its own. It needed reliable partners. Using the blueprint of the successful Indo-Russian venture to produce the world's first supersonic cruise missile, Brahmos, Antony decided to scout for partners who would treat India as equals and at the same help the country develop competencies in critical technologies. This approach has resulted in a partnership with Sukhoi to develop a Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft (FGFA), tie-ups with Israeli companies to develop avionics and cockpit systems and German engineers to develop Arjun Mark II. The selection of Dassault Rafale is only a continuation of this well-thought out policy.
Analysis
France has always been a difficult ally of the US. Like an extremely talented problem child, France has defied the US time and again. And this cock-a-snook attitude has been most visible in the field of defence and military hardware sales. Some call the French approach business-like, driven by self-interest and realpolitik. Critics, however, describe the French approach as one with a flexible moral compass.
During the 10-year Iran-Iraq war, the French played both sides admirably. While the Iraqis were given French warplanes, Milan anti-tank missiles and Exocet AM 39 anti-ship missiles, the Iranians were subtly directed to the Chinese who supplied them with sea-skimming Silkworm anti-ship missiles to keep the Straits of Hormuz boiling. The interesting point was that the French had secretly supplied the Chinese with the inertial guidance system and the solid fuel technology to the Chinese. But this was still minor indiscretion. The French looked the other way when Iraq acquired highly restricted Maraging Steel, used in uranium enrichment centrifuges, through a complex series of transactions, middlemen, and front companies.
Antony and his team seemed to know this history and felt that the French were more likely to part with critical technologies needed to enhance India's defence aviation sector than any other country. They had their own precedents too. When sanctions were imposed on India, especially on dual use technologies, after Pokhran II the Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) project was the worst hit. The US, which was supposed to help Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA) with crucial cockpit systems, avionics, Fly by Wire (FBW) flight control systems and engines (GE-404), backed out and refused to part with off-the-shelf units as well as the technology. The French decided to break ranks with the US and helped out.
People familiar with the LCA project contend that it's no accident that India preferred to go with a relatively complex tailless compound delta-wing design, a design philosophy followed by the European aircraft manufacturers. Rafale, Typhoon and Gripen are all delta-wing aircraft. Antony and his team were aware of the commonality of design philosophy between Rafale and Tejas. The commonality was strategic as it had the potential to comprehensively transform India's defence aviation sector.
The French support in helping India develop indigenous technological capabilities is by no means small. Three examples will suffice. First, Indian company Samtel, which produces state-of-the-art Heads up Display (HUD) display systems for Tejas and Sukhoi-30 MKI, is a joint venture with Thales, which has a 26% stake in it. Thales is one of a handful of companies in the world with proprietary avionics technology. Second, Dassault, which manufactures Rafale, was initially invited by ADA to provide consultancy services for developing the FBW system of Tejas. Third, when India's efforts to produce an indigenous engine (GTRE GTX-35VS Kaveri) for Tejas with 90 kilonewton (KN) thrust fell flat, it was the French Snecma that stepped in to help the Gas Turbine Research Establishment (GTRE) finetune the Kabini core of the Kaveri engine. Snecma powers Rafale with its twin M-88-2 engines.
Insiders also revealed that Antony and his team were not convinced about the American intentions to transfer core technologies. Their suspicions had solid grounds. Of course the sanctions imposed on India was one obvious ground, but the way the US pressured Israel, one its closest allies, to abandon the Lavi fighter aircraft project was another. In 1980, the Israel government authorised the Israel Air Force (IAF) to present its requirements and specifications to Israel Aircraft Industries (IAI) for the production of a 4th generation fighter aircraft. Called Lavi, it was jointly financed by Israel (60%) and the US (40%). The first prototype flew in 1986 and it became clear that the Lavi was far superior to the F-16, which constituted a substantial chunk of the IAF. The US started putting intense political pressure on Israel to cancel the project, eventually cutting off its part of the funding. Left with inadequate capital Israel abandoned the Lavi project. Rumour has it that Boeing and Lockheed Martin used its clout to put pressure on the US government
Nobody could have anticipated it, but the abandonment of the Lavi project led to the development of a direct threat to India. For the last three decades the Chinese have been on frenetic mission to modernise their armed forces by all means possible. Some military experts are convinced that the Chinese J-10 (manufactured by Chengdu Aircraft Corporation and internally designated as 'Vigorous Dragon') is a copy of the Lavi. The Chinese, of course, deny it. But the similarities between the two aircraft are uncanny. The Chinese do have a track record of using below the belt tactics to achieve their aims. In 2008, a furious Russia threatened to sue China when it copied the Sukhoi-27SK fighters and released them into the export market as Shenyang J-11. Despite the threat, the Chinese continue to produce J-11 and have thumbed their nose at the Russians by copying carrier-based Sukhoi-33 and releasing them as J-11BH.
The best example of Chinese underhand tactics was the way in which they acquired Admiral Kuznetsov-class aircraft carrier Varyag in April 1998 from Ukraine. Some military experts say that China's People Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) floated a front company called Chong Lot Travel Agency Ltd, based it in Hong Kong, and bought the aircraft carrier ostensibly to convert into a floating hotel and gambling parlour. For over ten years the ship disappeared from everyone's radar. Then it finally popped up as fully refurbished indigenous Chinese aircraft carrier for sea trials in August 2011. It will be China's first aircraft carrier.
Antony recognised the Chinese threat and got the previous National Security Adviser M K Narayanan on board. Together they met Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and decided to implement a comprehensive action plan to counter the increasing Chinese muscle. One part of the plan was a concerted upgradation of critical defence equipment. The upgrade programmes of MiG-29, MiG-21, Mirage-2000, Jaguar, T-72 and T-90 tanks are all part of this effort. But a more long-term part of the plan was to upgrade and build India's military industrial base, especially with regard to critical technologies.
Antony knew that India could never go the Chinese way of copying military hardware or reverse engineering technologies. He was clear that while India needed to be self-reliant on critical technologies, it could not do so on its own. It needed reliable partners. Using the blueprint of the successful Indo-Russian venture to produce the world's first supersonic cruise missile, Brahmos, Antony decided to scout for partners who would treat India as equals and at the same help the country develop competencies in critical technologies. This approach has resulted in a partnership with Sukhoi to develop a Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft (FGFA), tie-ups with Israeli companies to develop avionics and cockpit systems and German engineers to develop Arjun Mark II. The selection of Dassault Rafale is only a continuation of this well-thought out policy.
Analysis
JAISWAL
New Member
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2010
- Messages
- 1,527
- Likes
- 1,027
India's arms deal draws Britain's ire
.
.THE Anglo-French rivalry that marked India's
colonisation has resurfaced in a new avatar with
India preferring French Rafale over Eurofighter
Typhoon, offered by a British-led consortium in
the biggest deal for fighter aircraft in the last two
decades.
THE Anglo-French rivalry that marked India's
colonisation has resurfaced in a new avatar with
India preferring French Rafale over Eurofighter
Typhoon, offered by a British-led consortium in
the biggest deal for fighter aircraft in the last two
decades.
By choosing the French medium multirole
combat aircraft (MMRCA), India, once the "jewel in
the British crown", also "disappointed" Germany,
Spain and Italy.
Leaders of the four, according to India Strategic
magazine, asked India to go for "a political
decision and select this otherwise very good
aircraft but the government, at the highest levels,
decided to go by the book only".
While details of the US$11 billion (RM33 billion)
deal are not available, the magazine says the
overall French costing was 15 per cent lower.
The Indian government announced its decision
on Jan 31, ending intense speculation, but not
lobbying perhaps, for a massive 126-aircraft deal.
Dassault Aviation will supply 18 aircraft in flyaway
condition within three years of the signing of the
contract. It will then assist state sector Hindustan
Aeronautics Limited and other private or public
sector companies in progressively manufacturing
the aircraft in India...
.
.
.................. For full article please visit link--
http://idrw.org/?p=8838
.
.THE Anglo-French rivalry that marked India's
colonisation has resurfaced in a new avatar with
India preferring French Rafale over Eurofighter
Typhoon, offered by a British-led consortium in
the biggest deal for fighter aircraft in the last two
decades.
THE Anglo-French rivalry that marked India's
colonisation has resurfaced in a new avatar with
India preferring French Rafale over Eurofighter
Typhoon, offered by a British-led consortium in
the biggest deal for fighter aircraft in the last two
decades.
By choosing the French medium multirole
combat aircraft (MMRCA), India, once the "jewel in
the British crown", also "disappointed" Germany,
Spain and Italy.
Leaders of the four, according to India Strategic
magazine, asked India to go for "a political
decision and select this otherwise very good
aircraft but the government, at the highest levels,
decided to go by the book only".
While details of the US$11 billion (RM33 billion)
deal are not available, the magazine says the
overall French costing was 15 per cent lower.
The Indian government announced its decision
on Jan 31, ending intense speculation, but not
lobbying perhaps, for a massive 126-aircraft deal.
Dassault Aviation will supply 18 aircraft in flyaway
condition within three years of the signing of the
contract. It will then assist state sector Hindustan
Aeronautics Limited and other private or public
sector companies in progressively manufacturing
the aircraft in India...
.
.
.................. For full article please visit link--
http://idrw.org/?p=8838
Last edited:
anoop_mig25
New Member
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2009
- Messages
- 5,807
- Likes
- 3,152
in above article its mentioned that Dassault is tying up with Anil Ambani's Reliance rather than Mukesh ambani . is it true . ??
H.A.
New Member
- Joined
- Dec 24, 2011
- Messages
- 1,445
- Likes
- 687
I have a similar question....If a company does such a big tie-up wouldn't it be all over the news, then why is it not coming up in the news...What is the actual deal about?
vanadium
New Member
- Joined
- May 5, 2011
- Messages
- 239
- Likes
- 44
You would find that Rafale stands head and shoulders above those jets. No surprise, really.
The two fighters shortlisted by the IAF were undoubtedly the best of the pack from a technical-operational point of view.
vanadium
New Member
- Joined
- May 5, 2011
- Messages
- 239
- Likes
- 44
Clearly not designed for stealth!RAM coated and angled for RCS reduction...
But stealth was not required in the MMRCA project
IAF will get its first stealthy fighter (FGFA/PAK FA) well ahead of France
Vishwarupa
New Member
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2009
- Messages
- 2,438
- Likes
- 3,600
Its probably lazy, poor journalism. Like the statement that the EF deal was led by the British (nope, German led) and the US/Uk arms embargo (nope, US only).
The rest of the article fist the UK's 'The Sun' tabloid style
..
:shocked:
p2prada
New Member
- Joined
- May 25, 2009
- Messages
- 10,234
- Likes
- 4,017
Note the complex body is pointing up. There is no angle of attack below the horizontal plane.
Like I said, you are treading on waters you have never never ventured into before. Learning aerodynamics isn't difficult. Even basic knowledge is enough. Anybody with such knowledge will point out the obvious mistakes in your posts.
Dunno what you are pointing at here.
death.by.chocolate
New Member
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2009
- Messages
- 300
- Likes
- 98
Yes..Yes, please elaborate
.
p2prada
New Member
- Joined
- May 25, 2009
- Messages
- 10,234
- Likes
- 4,017
Yeah. There is no guarantee Rafale is more stealthy than EF. Perhaps it may be like how the F-22 and F-35 are.
There are certain parameters where the F-35 is more stealthy while the F-22 is better in certain parameters. For eg the F-35 could be more stealthy at lower altitudes and a more varied bandwidth as compared to X bands at higher altitudes on the F-22. Perhaps we can find such differences between Rafale and EF too.
30 years down the line it would be fun comparing the two.
p2prada
New Member
- Joined
- May 25, 2009
- Messages
- 10,234
- Likes
- 4,017
I wouldn't be so sure, but then it may be right. All 3 aircraft, SH, Mig-35(maybe) and F-16 came with AESA radars unlike the Rafale or EF. But the AESA did not help Boeing beat the MKM in Malaysia, so we cannot say for sure how good the offer was in the first place. We know very well the Rafale and EF are more advanced than the MKI. So, we can consider the Malaysian competition as a political decision because of the Iraq war or perhaps the MKM was simply cheaper where the aircraft, maintenance, training and weapons systems came at $50Million a piece.
We can note that in every competition the SH came below the Rafale and EF.
| Thread starter | Similar threads | Forum | Replies | Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Rafale in Croatian Air Force | Military Aviation | 10 | |
| W | Rafale and F 18 super hornet shortlisted by Indian navy | Indian Navy | 21 | |
|
Indian Navy more likely to select F 18 than rafales | Indian Navy | 164 | |
|
|
Greek Rafale vs Turkish EF 2000 Who has the Technolocal Edge | Military Aviation | 5 |
