Know Your 'Rafale'

[ice berg]

From the first metal cut RAFALE entered service in 16 years is what MSD WOOLEN says in his article, From the first metal cut in 1993, the tejas took 18 years to attiain IOC and enter series production, Where is the 17 year old delay?Are people flying in a time machine?

Tejas - Feature - The Light Combat Aircraft Story by Air Marshal MSD Wollen (Retd)



The year to note 1993.




Having an extra engine alone is not a justification for the 16 and 17 years gestation period of the RAFALE and TYPHOON.

Both the above fighters took their time despite being from established production houses with huge technological and financial base 50 times bigger than HAL and ADA put together.

I have posted this article atleast 15 times in this forum, And people still say LCA is 17 years in DELAYED project!!!!!!!!!!!!

Incredible!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The only thing incredible here is your inability to read. From your own link:

1980 - 1989
1983
DRDO got permission to initiate a programme to design and develop a Light Combat Aircraft.

1984
Government of India set up Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA) as the nodal agency developing the LCA and managing the program.

1985
IAF generated Air Staff Requirements (ASR) for LCA in October 1985.

1986
Government allocated Rs. 575 Crores for the LCA programme.

Programme to develop an indigenous power plant (engine)- Kaveri was launched at GTRE.

1987
Project definition commenced in October 1987 with French aircraft major Dassault Aviation as consultants.

1988
Project definition phase completed in September 1988.

1989
Government review committee expressed confidence in LCA programme. It was decided that the programme will be implemented in two phases.
1990 - 1999
1990
Design of LCA was completed as a tail-less compound delta winged relaxed static stability aircraft.
Phase 1 (Technology Demonstrator) of the development was commenced to create the proof of concept.

1993
Full funding approved from April 1993 and development work for phase 1 started in June.


P.S it is new to me that Frence were involved in the project.

 

[sob]

You also have to take into account the time period when GTRE started toying with the Mig 21 engine to make a new engine for the future Aircraft.

 

[ice berg]

It still dont change the fact that funding were released in 86. The rest is project management.

 

[p2prada]

Re: ADA LCA Tejas Mark-II

Sure, what you bet? I cant speak for Pakistan. But the last Sino-Vietnam clash went from 79-89 in a span of 10 years. And that was after the cultural revolution. The chinese arms industry are quite abit robust now

I am not talking about rifles, bullets and grenades. I am talking about high technology items that cannot be replaced like how it was in WW 2. Aircraft, tanks, ships, submarines etc.

Nobody starts to produce what you needed after the war begin. You prepare for it by stocking enough supplies BEFORE the war.

That's how it has always worked.

Huh? They are adding 100 jets a year. 50 J-10As last year alone, not to mention J-11Bs, JH7s etc.

Okay, let's take 100 aircraft. Still can you replace 3 or 4 squadrons worth of aircraft that you lost in the first week of war in just a week. In WW 2 you could, today nobody can.

Otherwise I agree with your points. You need to learn to crawl before you learn to walk.

We are crawling, but that is only for the mil-industrial complex. Until they learn to walk, let the forces keep running with the help of imports until then. With multiple suppliers, we can import faster than China can make. If we are allowed to dig into the OEM country's war supplies, it would be even faster. Imagine if we lost 30 Rafales in the first week of war and within a week or two the French air force transfers 30 of their own ALA jets to India, the same with VVS Su-30SMs which are simply Russian MKIs. PAF did that throughout the wars in the past, where they received jets from other countries' war reserves.

During Kargil, we imported many LGBs directly from Israeli war stocks. Had we not had a defence relationship with them, we wouldn't have had the teeth to fight the Pakistanis as effectively as we did.

The thing is importing weapons systems is proven while our mil-industrial complex is doing what it can as of today. In the future it may improve, but we can't depend on it. For eg: What if we go to war over the border issue in a day or two? Where are these indigenous weapons to fight with? We need to fight with what we have not with what we will have or we wish we had.

It is all great to talk about indigenous capability, but it should first exist in order to talk about it.

 

[ersakthivel]

The only thing incredible here is your inability to read. From your own link:

1980 - 1989
1983
DRDO got permission to initiate a programme to design and develop a Light Combat Aircraft.

1984
Government of India set up Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA) as the nodal agency developing the LCA and managing the program.

1985
IAF generated Air Staff Requirements (ASR) for LCA in October 1985.

1986
Government allocated Rs. 575 Crores for the LCA programme.

Programme to develop an indigenous power plant (engine)- Kaveri was launched at GTRE.

1987
Project definition commenced in October 1987 with French aircraft major Dassault Aviation as consultants.

1988
Project definition phase completed in September 1988.

1989
Government review committee expressed confidence in LCA programme. It was decided that the programme will be implemented in two phases.
1990 - 1999
1990
Design of LCA was completed as a tail-less compound delta winged relaxed static stability aircraft.
Phase 1 (Technology Demonstrator) of the development was commenced to create the proof of concept.

1993
Full funding approved from April 1993 and development work for phase 1 started in June.


P.S it is new to me that Frence were involved in the project.

ofcourse, everything will be new to you,

Can't you read ENGLISH?

My post says from the "FIRST METAL CUT"

It means that both Rafale and Typhoon would have had a ten year feasibility study and project definition phase before the first metal cut, just like Tejas.

Or do you claim that RAFALe and TYPHOON makers straight away went into production facilities once the project was sanctioned , without having any blue print, and without any CFD software analysis and extensive wind tunnel testing.

Of course you guys in china won't need all that stuff, SInce most of the fighters you produced were copy of Russian designs, SO no project definition phase and wind tunnel testing are needed when you copy an established model.

SO The time line of tejas roughly correspond to them.

i

 

[ersakthivel]

It still dont change the fact that funding were released in 86. The rest is project management.

The 565 cr released in 86 went to establish infrastructure for the labs and facilities mostly , not to produce fighters.

besides what is the point of discussing tejas time line in in rafale thread?

 

[MAYURA]

Of course you guys in china won't need all that stuff, SInce most of the fighters you produced were copy of Russian designs, SO no project definition phase and wind tunnel testing are needed when you copy an established model.

They are also doing the same with their aircraft carrier.

 

[ice berg]

ofcourse, everything will be new to you,

Can't you read ENGLISH?

Not among the brighteste,are you.If I dont read english, what is the point of asking in the first place?

My post says from the "FIRST METAL CUT"

Only in your livid mind does a project start from "first metal cut".

It means that both Rafale and Typhoon would have had a ten year feasibility study and project definition phase before the first metal cut, just like Tejas.

Or do you claim that RAFALe and TYPHOON makers straight away went into production facilities once the project was sanctioned , without having any blue print, and without any CFD software analysis and extensive wind tunnel testing.

Only a fanboy will compare LCA with Rarael and Typhoon. They are arms and shoulders above LCA. LCA stands for light combat aircraft. You are comparing apple and orange.

Of course you guys in china won't need all that stuff, SInce most of the fighters you produced were copy of Russian designs, SO no project definition phase and wind tunnel testing are needed when you copy an established model.

That sentence summens up your ignorance pretty well. Every aircraft need a project definition phase and wind tunnel testing. It is not a model plan that you use to play, son.We are talking about REAL aircrafts. And how do you copy engines and radars btw? You do know that you need an INDUSTRY to build stuff right? How do you copy an aircraft without the EXACT same industrial base? So as usual you are using your livid fantasies.

SO The time line of tejas roughly correspond to them.

i

Nop, not even close.

 

[ice berg]

Re: ADA LCA Tejas Mark-II

I am not talking about rifles, bullets and grenades. I am talking about high technology items that cannot be replaced like how it was in WW 2. Aircraft, tanks, ships, submarines etc.



That's how it has always worked.



Okay, let's take 100 aircraft. Still can you replace 3 or 4 squadrons worth of aircraft that you lost in the first week of war in just a week. In WW 2 you could, today nobody can.

When was the last time someone lost 3 or 4 squadrons worth of aircraft in the first week between two more or less evenly matched opponent?

We are crawling, but that is only for the mil-industrial complex. Until they learn to walk, let the forces keep running with the help of imports until then. With multiple suppliers, we can import faster than China can make.

Only if they gave access to their own war supplies or taken from their existing force.

If we are allowed to dig into the OEM country's war supplies, it would be even faster. Imagine if we lost 30 Rafales in the first week of war and within a week or two the French air force transfers 30 of their own ALA jets to India, the same with VVS Su-30SMs which are simply Russian MKIs. PAF did that throughout the wars in the past, where they received jets from other countries' war reserves.

That depends on your political capital. That is not something you bet on. You are also on their mercy. WHich it the main point. If you can produce on your own, you dont need to be dependent on others.

During Kargil, we imported many LGBs directly from Israeli war stocks. Had we not had a defence relationship with them, we wouldn't have had the teeth to fight the Pakistanis as effectively as we did.

Will you be dependent on others for all your future wars?

The thing is importing weapons systems is proven while our mil-industrial complex is doing what it can as of today. In the future it may improve, but we can't depend on it. For eg: What if we go to war over the border issue in a day or two? Where are these indigenous weapons to fight with? We need to fight with what we have not with what we will have or we wish we had.

Agree, your military industry is not ready yet.

It is all great to talk about indigenous capability, but it should first exist in order to talk about it.

True that.

 

[p2prada]

Re: ADA LCA Tejas Mark-II

When was the last time someone lost 3 or 4 squadrons worth of aircraft in the first week between two more or less evenly matched opponent?

Lucky, aren't we?

Indo-Pak war of 1971 did not last more than two weeks, the numbers of aircraft lost is 3 or 4 squadrons worth for both sides. A future war will be even more intense, especially when both India and China can bring more aircraft to the theater.

That depends on your political capital. That is not something you bet on. You are also on their mercy. WHich it the main point. If you can produce on your own, you dont need to be dependent on others.

The dependency is primarily financial. Give them money they will give weapons. I would any day give $2 - 3 Million for a $1Million missile if it means I get to take down a $40Million Chinese aircraft rather than not having any missile at all.

All that dependency and mercy crap changes depending on how the country views the opponent as a threat. In a Indo-China war, the Americans will happily supply weapons at cheap rates while the French will double the costs. The Russians will have a strategic interest in a weakened China, so an advantage there too. China has more rivals than you think.

Israel will have no issues in transferring weapons and tech in a war against Pakistan.

Yes, the supplier will have some control, but the weapons are reliable and they "exist." Even with a vast mil-industrial complex that China has, there is no guarantee at all that the stuff you have made to date are reliable.

Will you be dependent on others for all your future wars?

Hopefully, no. Realistically DRDO and other DPSUs are yet to prove themselves.

 

[ersakthivel]

Nop, not even close.

See from the metal cut to service means , from the date of work on the first production version to entering service.It is 16 years for RAFALE, 17 years for typhoon, 20 years for tejas.(2635 cr for the construction(first metal cut) of first two Tds released in 1993.plane got ioc in 2013 and serial production started.):thumb:

If you say the project definition for tejas is started in 1986 , that is 7 year before the first metal cut, Then that sam period also of 7 year or so project definition phase existed for RAFALE and TYPHOON.So if we add 20=7 =27 years in total for tejas,
you can also add 7+17 for typhoon i.e 24 years,
for RAFALE 7+16 years =23 years.
The reason for long manufacturing phase of two decades for all RSS fighter is not due to the production problem, Because all of these were RSS, software driven fighters their software has to be validated for all flight profiles using extensive flight testing.


Theses are the total project period for most of the Relaxed static stability digital fly by wire FCS planes, that are conceived originally, not by copying someone else'e fighters.:taunt1:

This period has nothing to do with the fighter being single engined or twin engined. Test points for single, twin engine fighters are all the same. flight test period is also the same. FCS software writing for their RSS platform is also the same.

So your contentions RAFALE and TYPHOON program stnds head and shoulder over tejas program is actually a headless chicken argument.

What china does is enter into an agreement with russia for local production with TOT. Then they name their product as J-x, J-y, J-z.

Tell me one single chinese fighter that was not copied from russia.

Well regarding DRDO and DPSUs , other than thrisul missile which was junked , most of the products be it many types of radars (mud heads here have no reason to know that) from LRDE, pinaka multi barrel rocket launching system, ALH dhurv(it's LCH version is also shaping up well), ARJUN tank , Tejas fighter, astra air to air missile, 10 or so different versions of prithvi and agni nuclear capable missiles, Nuclear subs, many warships,torpedos for submarines, marine kaveri jet engine providing 12 mw power for indian warships,destroyers, frigates all have come out of DPSUs and DRDO labs and in service,

Only people with jaundiced eyes fail to take note of this .What more should be proven here by DRDO and DPSUs(realistically or hopefully)?

people arguing for foreign stuff should give the nation a guarentee that during an all out indo-china war, will the supppliers stand by us?
Other than US and Russia which cannot be intimidated by china, every other nation which supplies fighter planes to us will face a very ,very tough situation.The economic and military power of china with respect to these nations will only increase manifold in the future. SO does the chinese bargaining power with them,

Simply if china threatens that it will launch nuclear tipped ICBMs at nations that supply india during war time , how many nations will face up to this threat in the future.

For an india to keep looking at foreign shores for critical spares and supplies during a long drawn out war with the chinese is like a patient placed in an ICU.Chinese fighters all home made will come wave after wave. Some attrition will happen. Chinese will make it up quickly with local production. India won't be if it keeps on buying stuff.TOT and local production of foreign defence items are BS as most nations don't transfer the critical tech of their defence system to india.Only non-core stuff gets total TOT.



Only Russia and US have the capability to face up. So having 300 or more Tejas mk-2 willl swing the war in India's favour as step by step all parts of Tejas or any other DPSU or DRDO product will be localized , and this know how will be preserved within the county.And chinese know that india will have an unlimited supply of fighting material that cannot be stopped by it.That will bring real peace in Asia.

That is what is called comprehensive national power.

 

[CCTV]

See from the metal cut to service means , from the date of work on the first production version to entering service.It is 16 years for RAFALE, 17 years for typhoon, 20 years for tejas.(2635 cr for the construction(first metal cut) of first two Tds released in 1993.plane got ioc in 2013 and serial production started.):thumb:

If you say the project definition for tejas is started in 1986 , that is 7 year before the first metal cut, Then that sam period also of 7 year or so project definition phase existed for RAFALE and TYPHOON.So if we add 20=7 =27 years in total for tejas,
you can also add 7+17 for typhoon i.e 24 years,
for RAFALE 7+16 years =23 years.
The reason for long manufacturing phase of two decades for all RSS fighter is not due to the production problem, Because all of these were RSS, software driven fighters their software has to be validated for all flight profiles using extensive flight testing.


Theses are the total project period for most of the Relaxed static stability digital fly by wire FCS planes, that are conceived originally, not by copying someone else'e fighters.:taunt1:

This period has nothing to do with the fighter being single engined or twin engined. Test points for single, twin engine fighters are all the same. flight test period is also the same. FCS software writing for their RSS platform is also the same.

So your contentions RAFALE and TYPHOON program stnds head and shoulder over tejas program is actually a headless chicken argument.

What china does is enter into an agreement with russia for local production with TOT. Then they name their product as J-x, J-y, J-z.

Tell me one single chinese fighter that was not copied from russia.

what do you mean copy?
looks like?

ps. Can I said you are copy of your father?

 

[ersakthivel]

what do you mean copy?
looks like?

ps. Can I said you are copy of your father?

This shows your stupidity in medical science as well. No one is his father's copy. Is that what they teach you back in china?

A child gets equal number of chromosomes from both father and mother.In those chromosomes all the personality traits of both mother and father's family line are present.



Just post the pictures of the so called J-x, J-y and J-y with their original models of SU version , you will know that. I don't think you are dense enough even to recognize that.

 

[halloweene]

This shows your stupidity in medical science as well. No one is his father's copy. Is that what they teach you back in china?

A child gets equal number of chromosomes from both father and mother.In those chromosomes all the personality traits of both mother and father's family line are present.

In fact more genetic information from mother then father, specally in the case of sons (wont detail). But i think he was aware that it is an analogy. About Rafale program (because i dont want to eneter in a LCA controversy), it is noticeable that there was a long delay (several years) between end of development and first order for financial reasons.

 

[ice berg]

Re: ADA LCA Tejas Mark-II

Lucky, aren't we?

Indo-Pak war of 1971 did not last more than two weeks, the numbers of aircraft lost is 3 or 4 squadrons worth for both sides. A future war will be even more intense, especially when both India and China can bring more aircraft to the theater.

What theater? You may look at the conditions in the LAC. Not exactly suited for an air battle.

The dependency is primarily financial. Give them money they will give weapons. I would any day give $2 - 3 Million for a $1Million missile if it means I get to take down a $40Million Chinese aircraft rather than not having any missile at all.

Nop, the dependency is political. India can afford the financial cost. It was never about the money. YOu are dependent on that they want to risk their relations with China. Not given between consider the growing importance of chinese economy.

All that dependency and mercy crap changes depending on how the country views the opponent as a threat. In a Indo-China war, the Americans will happily supply weapons at cheap rates while the French will double the costs. The Russians will have a strategic interest in a weakened China, so an advantage there too. China has more rivals than you think.

Actually the countries you mentioned will be happy to see BOTH countries weakened, not just China. If you think otherwise, then you are not see this clearly. For them it is just pure business. Like I said before in a war between India and China, the only winner is the arm dealers. You also have a very simplistic view. It is not just about threat. They have to weight the pros and cons as well supply India with weapons. Strategic alliances change. The one selling you weapons today may refuse doing it tomorrow.

Israel will have no issues in transferring weapons and tech in a war against Pakistan.

Yes, the supplier will have some control, but the weapons are reliable and they "exist." Even with a vast mil-industrial complex that China has, there is no guarantee at all that the stuff you have made to date are reliable.

The only way of knowing this is testing them. Be it Israel or chinese. Chinese weapons are been tested in real war conditions. Notice the MANPADS in Syria right now?

Hopefully, no. Realistically DRDO and other DPSUs are yet to prove themselves.

Well, like everyone else, they need a kick in the rear from time to time. Been a government entity.

 

[halloweene]

Cant help posting it on a regular basis...

 

[p2prada]

Re: ADA LCA Tejas Mark-II

What theater? You may look at the conditions in the LAC. Not exactly suited for an air battle.

We will eventually have 80-100 MKIs and an equal number of Rafales in the NE. We will have double that number in the North to handle the dual threat of PAF and PLAAF. So, the areas are suited for air battles. At least 300 fighters from our side.

Nop, the dependency is political. India can afford the financial cost. It was never about the money. YOu are dependent on that they want to risk their relations with China. Not given between consider the growing importance of chinese economy.

The western countries can arm India and still maintain friendly relations with China. Don't forget that both Europe and the US are big markets for China.

It is always about the money.

Actually the countries you mentioned will be happy to see BOTH countries weakened, not just China.

Yeah, and that's the very reason why they will assist us.

If you think otherwise, then you are not see this clearly. For them it is just pure business.

One place you say it is not about money and the very next sentence you say it is about money. Make up your mind.

Like I said before in a war between India and China, the only winner is the arm dealers. You also have a very simplistic view. It is not just about threat. They have to weight the pros and cons as well supply India with weapons. Strategic alliances change. The one selling you weapons today may refuse doing it tomorrow.

Of course, arms dealers always make money during war.

Changing foreign policy is the reason why we are building such a large supplier base. We have Europe, US, Israel and Russia supplying arms today. Losing one of them won't make a big difference. The others will fill the void.

The only way of knowing this is testing them. Be it Israel or chinese. Chinese weapons are been tested in real war conditions. Notice the MANPADS in Syria right now?

It is easy to field test small systems, it is entirely different for large systems. Let's see when Syria uses Type 052Ds, Type 99Axs, J-10/J-20 etc.

 

[ice berg]

Re: ADA LCA Tejas Mark-II

We will eventually have 80-100 MKIs and an equal number of Rafales in the NE. We will have double that number in the North to handle the dual threat of PAF and PLAAF. So, the areas are suited for air battles. At least 300 fighters from our side.

Only if PLAAF intends to fly into indian airspace. What if they dont? If you have to come to them, then what?

The western countries can arm India and still maintain friendly relations with China. Don't forget that both Europe and the US are big markets for China.

It depends what they are supplying India with and what manners , right? You think they will transfer from their existin stocks. That is not given at all. Export and domestic items is not the same. Try not to confuse those two.

It is always about the money.



Yeah, and that's the very reason why they will assist us.



One place you say it is not about money and the very next sentence you say it is about money. Make up your mind.

You are not getting it. My point is that what they are willing to do is not solely dependent on what India is willing to pay. It is also a political decision. They cant afford to alienate China too much. Just business dosnt means it is all about money. It is to show you that they are the real winners no matter the outcome of war.

Of course, arms dealers always make money during war.

Changing foreign policy is the reason why we are building such a large supplier base. We have Europe, US, Israel and Russia supplying arms today. Losing one of them won't make a big difference. The others will fill the void.

That depends on what systems you are using. It is not that easy switching one system to another during a war. Not to mention the logistical nightmare of so many vendors.

It is easy to field test small systems, it is entirely different for large systems. Let's see when Syria uses Type 052Ds, Type 99Axs, J-10/J-20 etc.

A moot point, Su MKIs are not battle tested either. Does that means they are unreliable?

 

[p2prada]

Re: ADA LCA Tejas Mark-II

Only if PLAAF intends to fly into indian airspace. What if they dont? If you have to come to them, then what?

Be realistic. PLAAF will have to come into our airspace if they want any meaningful role against us. Even PAF will have to penetrate our airspace.

t depends what they are supplying India with and what manners , right? You think they will transfer from their existin stocks. That is not given at all. Export and domestic items is not the same. Try not to confuse those two.

This was already done for both PAF and IAF in the past. The Russians provided AWACS from their services in the 1971 war as well. Due to the classified nature of the previous wars, we still do not know the extent of Soviet cooperation in the past during wars. PAF was openly provided with jets from Middle Eastern countries.

You are not getting it. My point is that what they are willing to do is not solely dependent on what India is willing to pay. It is also a political decision. They cant afford to alienate China too much. Just business dosnt means it is all about money. It is to show you that they are the real winners no matter the outcome of war.

Selling weapons to India won't alienate China.

Also my point was we don't have to depend solely on our mil-industrial complex for weapons supplies, unlike China.

That depends on what systems you are using. It is not that easy switching one system to another during a war. Not to mention the logistical nightmare of so many vendors.

You are talking with peace time scenario in mind. Don't forget cash won't be a problem during war. We are not talking about changing platforms, that is impossible. We are talking about expanding existing capability. We have C-130Js. Assume one or two are destroyed, the US may send some from their stocks to replenish our fleet. MKIs are destroyed, we may be able to persuade the Russians to release Su-30SMs and so on. More than platforms, we will have multiple bases of supply for weapons like LGBs and missiles.

A moot point, Su MKIs are not battle tested either. Does that means they are unreliable?

I am not talking about proven capability, I am talking about reliability. These are entirely different. What is the guarantee your aircraft can survive the operations tempo required during war time? What if your manufacturers claims something like 3 sorties a day, but your maintenance crew only manage 1 or maybe 2 a day, if lucky. Reliability is different from proven capability.

 

[p2prada]

Anyway, we are completely off topic.