Know Your 'Rafale'

[asianobserve]

Flying off a UK carrier?

That's the French CDG.

 

[Kyubi]

Some of you guys are underestimating the IAF people who selected the Rafale aircraft.
The IAF was never going to buy the upgraded MIG-29 with its outdated electronics.

The fact of the matter is that there are only 2 guys that can sell you a state of the art fighter with the latest engine, electronics, radars, and sensor technology. Those 2 guys are the Americans or the Europeans. Its not all about airframe technology anymore.

The Russians are falling behind. Plus.....given this stupid American habit of changing their rules and defense export policy based on which administration is in office - you can hardly blame the IAF top brass for not wanting to be saddled with a state-of-art American fighter that is prone to sanctions. In that sense, I have to say that the French have been a much more reliable partner.

Coming back to this deal......The Russians were never in it to begin with. The MIG-29K was a non-starter to begin with.
So it might be fine for the navy to load an aircraft carrier with MIG-29-K series, but it would not have served the need of a frontline fighter to protect your country.

AS for this TOT stuff......lets just face the facts - nobody is going to share their secret sauce with you. All the Russians are doing is sending over knocked down kits of the Su30MKI that the Indians assemble at HAL, and throw in some of their own electronics. They may also manufacture some body panels, gear, etc in India. If you want to live in a dream world......you can call this TOT. At best it creates some jobs and some work for smaller Indians companies making sub-assemblies. Probably the total cost of every SU30MKI will be lower, if it was manufactured in fly-away condition in Russia rather than shipping parts to HAL.

The Offset Clause creates a conundrum for a foreign company bidding in India.....they basically have to make promises and guarantees that they can't keep.
Even the IAF guys don't trust HAL......then how do you expect the foreign manufacturer to trust HAL, and be fully responsible for what comes out from the HAL line.

I totally agree with your POV on technology of American and Europeans being superior to the russians, but sir the point being here is that how much of money the exchequer needs to shell out...It will deplete our forex reserves which is just not right way forward for a struggling economy like ours, regarding the work-share agreement, there is an inherent need for HAL to take up the production process, this will give them the opportunity to modernize their production lines viz a vis with its European counterparts. If it had been the other way around if Reliance or any other company with no credible history of aviation industry is entrusted then i am presuming that the costs are gonna escalate even further than what it is now.

What i am trying to say is MMRCA competition was itself so badly timed that we have ended up with an aircraft which is a burden on our exchequer, also it was announced when we had a potential 4th gen aircraft going through its 1000 + flight test hr and a potential 4.5th gen aircraft being readied in few yrs to come. With all these things shaping up we've had the rafale deal to face with. Hence if the deal doesn't go through with its present costs escalation the govt of the day needs to focus more on Tejas MkII, Kaveri etc pump them with more funds and also have a production line that churns out Tejas mkI aircrafts on war scale footing. If the deal does go through then the onus should be on Dassault to sort out diff with HAL and agree on work share that is beneficial to both and other pvt companies of Indian origin.

 

[bose]

Some of you guys are underestimating the IAF people who selected the Rafale aircraft.
The IAF was never going to buy the upgraded MIG-29 with its outdated electronics.

The fact of the matter is that there are only 2 guys that can sell you a state of the art fighter with the latest engine, electronics, radars, and sensor technology. Those 2 guys are the Americans or the Europeans. Its not all about airframe technology anymore.

The Russians are falling behind. Plus.....given this stupid American habit of changing their rules and defense export policy based on which administration is in office - you can hardly blame the IAF top brass for not wanting to be saddled with a state-of-art American fighter that is prone to sanctions. In that sense, I have to say that the French have been a much more reliable partner.

My argument was that if IAF have to replace Mig-21's [the initial intent of MMRCA] it is better to do that with Mig-29 K's equivalent upgrade, If I would have given the option I would have started the replacement of Mig-21's 15 years back and the and saved the IAF from using the out of life span Mig-21's risking pilots life... IAF is also sadled with depleting fighter streangth and is in difficulty in case of two pronged war scenario...

At the same time go full steam for large scale production of LCA Tejas Mark - 1 & II to fill in the numbers...

Coming back to this deal......The Russians were never in it to begin with. The MIG-29K was a non-starter to begin with.
So it might be fine for the navy to load an aircraft carrier with MIG-29-K series, but it would not have served the need of a frontline fighter to protect your country.

AS for this TOT stuff......lets just face the facts - nobody is going to share their secret sauce with you. All the Russians are doing is sending over knocked down kits of the Su30MKI that the Indians assemble at HAL, and throw in some of their own electronics. They may also manufacture some body panels, gear, etc in India. If you want to live in a dream world......you can call this TOT. At best it creates some jobs and some work for smaller Indians companies making sub-assemblies. Probably the total cost of every SU30MKI will be lower, if it was manufactured in fly-away condition in Russia rather than shipping parts to HAL.

The Offset Clause creates a conundrum for a foreign company bidding in India.....they basically have to make promises and guarantees that they can't keep.
Even the IAF guys don't trust HAL......then how do you expect the foreign manufacturer to trust HAL, and be fully responsible for what comes out from the HAL line.

Totally agree to it...

It is no doubt that Russians has fallen back on the aviation Technology... but India has no option with limited resources to go for the cheaper Russian products, which considering the types of the advaseries around SU-30 MKI is more than capable to defeat them...

The IAF / MOD thinking of short cut route to getting the technology through TOT is not going to happen lets be clear on it, no one will give, be it Russians, Americans, French or any others... India have to go for a hard route of investment in R&D and involving universities and private enterprise for developement of engines or avoinices or any weapon systems.... the sooner the realization comes the better it is for us...

We have seen that in case of Scorpiene, now in case of Rafale, and will not be surprised simillar fate happens for FGFA...

 

[mattster]

I totally agree with your POV on technology of American and Europeans being superior to the russians, but sir the point being here is that how much of money the exchequer needs to shell out...It will deplete our forex reserves which is just not right way forward for a struggling economy like ours, regarding the work-share agreement, there is an inherent need for HAL to take up the production process, this will give them the opportunity to modernize their production lines viz a vis with its European counterparts. If it had been the other way around if Reliance or any other company with no credible history of aviation industry is entrusted then i am presuming that the costs are gonna escalate even further than what it is now.

What i am trying to say is MMRCA competition was itself so badly timed that we have ended up with an aircraft which is a burden on our exchequer, also it was announced when we had a potential 4th gen aircraft going through its 1000 + flight test hr and a potential 4.5th gen aircraft being readied in few yrs to come. With all these things shaping up we've had the rafale deal to face with. Hence if the deal doesn't go through with its present costs escalation the govt of the day needs to focus more on Tejas MkII, Kaveri etc pump them with more funds and also have a production line that churns out Tejas mkI aircrafts on war scale footing. If the deal does go through then the onus should be on Dassault to sort out diff with HAL and agree on work share that is beneficial to both and other pvt companies of Indian origin.

do you really believe that LCA is a 4th gen aircraft. The are hundreds of pages on the LCA here on this forum with guys claiming the LCA is superior to the latest F-16s, Saab gripen, etc. The LCA may be a commendable effort for a country that is building its first aircraft after some 50 years or so from scratch......but i highly doubt it is anywhere near the capability of Rafale.....I even doubt if it can go head to head against the latest block 60 F-16s, even if the F-16 is a 30 year old airframe.

You are not being realistic when it comes to HAL. India does not have the type of efficiency....I mean GOI or any government owned Indian company is not going to become a model of efficiency, quality, or speed. The fact of the matter is that HAL is a lumbering slow company that can't operate like a private company. This deal needs to happen - since no one in the IAF is holding their breath waiting for HAL to become the savior.

 

[halloweene]

That's the French CDG.

Yes, but Rafale is the only foreign fighter certified for operations from US carriers.

 

[Immanuel]

Some of you guys are underestimating the IAF people who selected the Rafale aircraft.
The IAF was never going to buy the upgraded MIG-29 with its outdated electronics.

The fact of the matter is that there are only 2 guys that can sell you a state of the art fighter with the latest engine, electronics, radars, and sensor technology. Those 2 guys are the Americans or the Europeans. Its not all about airframe technology anymore.

The Russians are falling behind. Plus.....given this stupid American habit of changing their rules and defense export policy based on which administration is in office - you can hardly blame the IAF top brass for not wanting to be saddled with a state-of-art American fighter that is prone to sanctions. In that sense, I have to say that the French have been a much more reliable partner.

Coming back to this deal......The Russians were never in it to begin with. The MIG-29K was a non-starter to begin with.
So it might be fine for the navy to load an aircraft carrier with MIG-29-K series, but it would not have served the need of a frontline fighter to protect your country.

AS for this TOT stuff......lets just face the facts - nobody is going to share their secret sauce with you. All the Russians are doing is sending over knocked down kits of the Su30MKI that the Indians assemble at HAL, and throw in some of their own electronics. They may also manufacture some body panels, gear, etc in India. If you want to live in a dream world......you can call this TOT. At best it creates some jobs and some work for smaller Indians companies making sub-assemblies. Probably the total cost of every SU30MKI will be lower, if it was manufactured in fly-away condition in Russia rather than shipping parts to HAL.

The Offset Clause creates a conundrum for a foreign company bidding in India.....they basically have to make promises and guarantees that they can't keep.
Even the IAF guys don't trust HAL......then how do you expect the foreign manufacturer to trust HAL, and be fully responsible for what comes out from the HAL line.

Actually to clearly claim that Russians are falling behind is not very smart, true they lag a bit behind in AESA and other Avionics however they do show ingenuity in systems like OLS, High Alpha performance, let's be honest in a 1 to 1 guns Dogfight, the Mig-29, MKI, Su-27 will turn circles around any modern EU or US fighter. Also US/ Europeans have much to learn about RAM jet tech and supersonic ruise missiles. Still many Russian missiles remain uninterceptible. They possess tremendous ability to throw knockout punches.

MKI is a deep-TOT deal that allows for source code adjustments and though no country will share their secret sauce, incase of the MKI, it is the most TOT we could get out of a deal. HAL makes 72% of the fighter's components while absorbing that tech fully including radar, engines, tvc nozzels, OLS etc.

Russian team visits HAL's Sukhoi facility

That is a big amount of work considering the fleet size will eventually touch 272 or even 300+ is Rafale deal or MRCA in egenral is futher delayed, also keep in mind HAL and IAF will be key in coming up with enhancements for future upgrades as the key user.

Now I don't doubt for a second the Rafale is capable bird, possibly the overall champ but at the current negotiated prices of 120-140 million excluding weapons per unit is far too much, its current A2A loadout of Mica is not really a match to the R-77 and the Meteor is expected to cost well over one million+ per piece and AASMs cost well over 100K euros piece for the simplest versions. These prices are exhorbibant and don't fill the numerical gap of over 300 fighters being phased out in the next few years. More so for the same amount, we can get a Mig-35 which is far more modern airframe with a mix of Israeli avionics for less than 70 million per unit including a similar TOT structure. The Mig-35 with its current Russian avionics might not be the best but with EL-2052 AESA(outperforms the RBE2 AESA), Virgilius EW suite (similar to Spectra), OLS, IRST & TVC it is more than capable of taking on most comers.

I reckon for the same price of 18-20 billion we can get easily get 200 Mig-35 with weapons instead of 125 Rafale without weapons.

Doing the math: 200 Mig-35 as a combined fleet out performs 125 Rafales as combined fleet, that is a 75 aircraft difference. IAF has to deal with the possibility of a two front war and here numbers are needed.

The Mig-29K alone has plenty of improvements

The latest has 15-20% composite airframe,
- Slightly bigger wings and ailerons, new wingspan is 11,99 m against 11,36 m.
- Bigger horizontal stabilizers and rudders,
- Wider spine with bigger internal fuel tanks, 1.5 time more fuel.
- Bigger additional fuel tank is allowed (grow from 1520 l to 2150 l)
- Higher load, (4500 --> 5500 kg )
- Antiradar coating,
- Higher trust engines RD-33MK (2x8300 --> 2x9000 kg on afterburner), with longer MTBO/MTBF (2000 --> 4000 hours)
-Reduced infrared emission of the engines,
- Smokeless burner
- FADEC full control system for engines
- Longer life of airframe. Growing up from 2500 fly hours or 20 years rised to 5000 f/h or 30 years.
- Higher number of loading points (9 instead of 6) and heavier weight is allowed for new more heavy missiles.
- Dorsal air intake inlets are removed, fuel tank is installed instead.
- Inlet defense system is installed (grids).
- Totally redesigned canopy
- Service improvement , on-condition maintenance, fuel economy with 2.5 times reducing of flight-hour cost.
- Fly-by-wire
- Refueling capacity
- Open architecture of avionics
- Anti-corrosive defense of a naval aircraft level.

Mig-35 in addition has

- no dorsal air brake (rudders are used instead),
- 11 points of load instead of 9
- 6500 kg max load instead of 5500
- Difference in chassis
- Airframe life 5000 -->6000 hours or 40 years
- AESA radar
- Missiles warning system
- Broader weapon spectrum (+3M-14, 3M-54, KAB-1500)
- Advanced IRST
- Trust vectoring engine
- Better avionics

Also weapons like Brahmos Mini can be easily integrated in the future.

The most important specs of MiG-35 (two-sitter MiG-35D) are as follow:

Normal take-off mass --- 17,500 (17,800) kg
Maximal --- 23,500 kg
Max. landing mass ---16,800 kg
Internal fuel --- 4,800 kg
Max. load --- 6,500 kg
Max. speed
- low 1,400 km/h
- high 2,100
Mach 2.0
Gmax --- 9.0
Ferry distance
- internal fuel ---2,000 (1,700) km
- 3 external tanks ---3,000 (2,700) km
- 3 e.t. + 1 refueling ---6,000 (5,700) km
Take-off strip --- 550 m
Landing strip --- 600 m
Engines --- 2x RD-33MK
Power 2x 9,000 kg on afterburner

If we acquire the Mig-35 with pimped up Israeli, Indian avionics we can pretty much have an aircraft totally customized for the IAF pretty much like the MKI. Also we would benefit from common Mig-29 UPG and Mig-29 K engines, costs would be streamlined. Iaf being among the most experienced Mig-29 users will have no difficulty adapting and futher enhancing its already honed fighting tactics with the Mig-35.

Rafale deal makes no sense in such a case.

 

[halloweene]

High Alpha performance, let's be honest in a 1 to 1 guns Dogfight, the Mig-29, MKI, Su-27 will turn circles around any modern EU or US fighter

You are confusing manoeuvrability and agility. Pivoting around a movement vector wont make you turn, or at a too high enrgy depletion cost.

PS. Would you imagine that IAF pilots didn't test MMRCA contenders vs Su30?

Also US/ Europeans have much to learn about RAM jet tech and supersonic ruise missiles

. I'm confused, i thought there is something called ASMP/A existing and meteor?

Now I don't doubt for a second the Rafale is capable bird, possibly the overall champ but at the current negotiated prices of 120-140
million

Which price you don't (neither do i) have any idea of, and furthermore what is included in it...
About the missiles, there is much more in them than simple max range : quality of sensors, NEZ etc.

Virgilius EW suite (similar to Spectra)

simply laughable Virgilius suite is a light EW suite developed for choppers aswell as planes etc. Nothing to do with a heavy EW suite that was fully integrated in a plane since its design... It is nowhere to fully merged to the combat system as spectra is, do not use interferometers etc. etc.

The latest has 15-20% composite airframe,

half of Rafale

Bigger additional fuel tank is allowed (grow from 1520 l to 2150 l

How many vs up to 5x2000L tanks? Just asking

Higher load, (4500 --> 5500 kg )

vs 9.5 Tons on 14 hardpoints...

- Airframe life 5000 -->6000 hours or 40 years

. vs 7000 without refurbishing on Rafale (conservative estimation)

Higher trust engines RD-33MK (2x8300 --> 2x9000 kg on afterburner), with longer MTBO/MTBF (2000 --> 4000 hours)

Due to modular construction and in line diagnostic, MTBF do not exist anymore on Rafale. Ever heard of Tac cycles measurements? Be serious, compare their performances (pressure ratio, inlet temp, T/W ratios ...)

Also weapons like Brahmos Mini can be easily integrated in the future.

And not on Rafale? Tell me why plz.

high 2,100
Mach 2.0

Smthing is wrong with maths here?

Gmax --- 9.0

vs 11 on war setting for Rafale. But of course Mig 29 will circle around it no?

internal fuel ---2,000? (1,700) km

vs 2100...

3 external tanks ---3,000 (2,700) km

vs 3700

3 e.t. + 1 refueling ---6,000 (5,700) km

Rafale operated a war mission more than 6000 Kms in Mali, including dropping 6 bombs each...

If we acquire the Mig-35 with pimped up Israeli, Indian avionics we can pretty much have an aircraft totally customized for the IAF pretty much like the MKI. Also we would benefit from common Mig-29 UPG and Mig-29 K engines, costs would be streamlined. Iaf being among the most experienced Mig-29 users will have no difficulty adapting and futher enhancing its already honed fighting tactics with the Mig-35.

. So you will have to pay for the "pimp up" and will not have what RAale offer you : a suite originally designed for the plane... India would be using enough Rafale or UPG so as commonality argument will not have any relevance (specially as you are tlaking about navy and air force).

Rafale deal makes no sense in such a case.

. No YOU don't

 

[Kyubi]

do you really believe that LCA is a 4th gen aircraft. The are hundreds of pages on the LCA here on this forum with guys claiming the LCA is superior to the latest F-16s, Saab gripen, etc. The LCA may be a commendable effort for a country that is building its first aircraft after some 50 years or so from scratch......but i highly doubt it is anywhere near the capability of Rafale.....I even doubt if it can go head to head against the latest block 60 F-16s, even if the F-16 is a 30 year old airframe.

You are not being realistic when it comes to HAL. India does not have the type of efficiency....I mean GOI or any government owned Indian company is not going to become a model of efficiency, quality, or speed. The fact of the matter is that HAL is a lumbering slow company that can't operate like a private company. This deal needs to happen - since no one in the IAF is holding their breath waiting for HAL to become the savior.

Well i never mentioned in particular that Tejas is gonna go head to head with Rafale, I mentioned that the MKII is more or less in the same league as what Rafale is , and for your information the Rafale that we will get will not be having AESA radar as it is scheduled to be included as an upgrade in the current squadrons of the french airforce, by the time we will get the first aircraft we will be having a potent 4.5th gen Tejas MKII ready to be mass produced with all the necessary 4.5gen tech included, but in the case of Rafale we wont be having an aesa radar, OBOGS etc we may have to shell out couple of billions to avail this tech and that too as a MLU.

To futher the arguement i dont think F -16 has AOA of 22 to 24 degrees as it is with Tejas and RCS is far lower than F-16 etc there are several other points on which Tejas scores better than F-16 but forgive me i dont have the necessary details, my inference is from what i have read through this forum where members like @ersakthivel and @ Kunal Biswas have discussed. I have to go through each and every posts to come up with suitable proofs.. so forgive me... but to categorically say that Tejas is nothing but an inadequately designed fighter jet is not correct IMHO.. Pls give me some time where i can come up with suitable facts and figures available on net to counter your statements.

Thank you

 

[halloweene]

nd for your information the Rafale that we will get will not be having AESA radar as it is scheduled to be included as an upgrade in the current squadrons of the french airforce,

Totally wrong, every new build Rafale since last year is equipped with AESA. Where did you get that info???

About Tejas, i have nothing against it, but there is a huge size, payload and range difference with Rafale. Simply a different class of plane (which do not mean better or worse).

 

[SajeevJino]

Totally wrong, every new build Rafale since last year is equipped with AESA. Where did you get that info???

true

Six of the 11 Rafales delivered in 2013 were equipped with an AESA radar

Dassault Sees More Rafale Opportunities As Indian Deal Nears

 

[ersakthivel]

Well i never mentioned in particular that Tejas is gonna go head to head with Rafale, I mentioned that the MKII is more or less in the same league as what Rafale is , and for your information the Rafale that we will get will not be having AESA radar as it is scheduled to be included as an upgrade in the current squadrons of the french airforce, by the time we will get the first aircraft we will be having a potent 4.5th gen Tejas MKII ready to be mass produced with all the necessary 4.5gen tech included, but in the case of Rafale we wont be having an aesa radar, OBOGS etc we may have to shell out couple of billions to avail this tech and that too as a MLU.

To futher the arguement i dont think F -16 has AOA of 22 to 24 degrees as it is with Tejas and RCS is far lower than F-16 etc there are several other points on which Tejas scores better than F-16 but forgive me i dont have the necessary details, my inference is from what i have read through this forum where members like @ersakthivel and @ Kunal Biswas have discussed. I have to go through each and every posts to come up with suitable proofs.. so forgive me... but to categorically say that Tejas is nothing but an inadequately designed fighter jet is not correct IMHO.. Pls give me some time where i can come up with suitable facts and figures available on net to counter your statements.

Thank you

one tejas mk-2 is never going to be equal to one rafale .

but for the same cost 3 tejas mk-2s in combination with su-30 mki can do the job in an effective manner is our argument.

so the hugely expensive rafale deal does not justify the cost .other than that no one is saying that RAFALE is equal to tejas mk-2 in one on one comparison.

 

[Killzone]

@halloweene
No doubt Rafale is an extremely competent plane as proven by extensive IAF trials.

But there is a difference between making a good fighter plane and a successful economical project.
Rafale the project has not been as successful as Rafale the plane because of cost vs capability issue.

So far no one in the whole world has considered buying the Rafale as a bright idea, not even the Petrodollar sponsored Gulf states.

India wants TOT from MMRCA more than a fighter jet IMO.If we wanted numbers, we could just get more MKIs since IAF already operates them in large numbers.I think IAF expected similar amount of TOT from MMRCA as the MKI deal but the French have proved less willing to part with their technology than Russians.
Without TOT, going for Rafale does not make much sense.It would be wiser to just procure more 4.5gen aircrafts which are already in our inventory.
As things stand, MKIs are enough to decimate PAF, while deterring PLAAF until FGFA and AMCA come along.We don't really need to induct another 4.5 gen platform when the world is moving to 5th gen unless we get substantial TOT

Another gripe I have against French planes is costly MLUs.I read some reports that MLU of Mirages cost more than brand new planes of similar capabilities.What if that happens with Rafale as well ?

 

[Kyubi]

one tejas mk-2 is never going to be equal to one rafale .

but for the same cost 3 tejas mk-2s in combination with su-30 mki can do the job in an effective manner is our argument.

so the hugely expensive rafale deal does not justify the cost .other than that no one is saying that RAFALE is equal to tejas mk-2 in one on one comparison.

yes true i never meant even MKII to be equal to Rafale on a one on one basis, what i intended was in terms of technology, MKII will be similar to what is being offered on Rafale, yes there are gaps with respect to endurance levels, MTOW,Range etc and i never intended to pit a single MKII with Rafale, the point i wanted to make was the current MMRCA deal in its entirety was introduced at a wrong time. Instead MKII should have been propped up.

And you have been quoting the same, that to utilise the resources, the money to improve MKII so as to field more no's so that it can take up roles similar to what a single Rafale would have done. I am just trying to echo the same here.

 

[halloweene]

true




Dassault Sees More Rafale Opportunities As Indian Deal Nears

The first 5 delivered were the last Tranche 3, with PESA radar (one exception being the C137, a Tranche 3 equipped with AESA, DDM NG etc for test purposes in oct 2012). The following six (and now all of them) are Tranche 4, equippend with AESA radar. PESA isnt anymore in production.

 

[halloweene]

Another gripe I have against French planes is costly MLUs.I read some reports that MLU of Mirages cost more than brand new planes of similar capabilities.What if that happens with Rafale as well ?

MLUs are expensive on any plane, see future super sukhoi? But as much as brand new plane with similar capabilities? Why do you think IAF chose to do that MLU?

 

[SajeevJino]

The first 5 delivered were the last Tranche 3, with PESA radar (one exception being the C137, a Tranche 3 equipped with AESA, DDM NG etc for test purposes in oct 2012). The following six (and now all of them) are Tranche 4, equippend with AESA radar. PESA isnt anymore in production.

as of Now ..France is the second Country who have Active AESA Equipped Fighter Jets

 

[Killzone]

MLUs are expensive on any plane, see future super sukhoi? But as much as brand new plane with similar capabilities? Why do you think IAF chose to do that MLU?

Because those jets were under Strategic Air Command which means they are tasked with delivering nuclear bombs in a doomsday scenario.
So India could not afford to not have a reliable second strike capability in case of nuclear attack.

 

[Immanuel]

You are confusing manoeuvrability and agility. Pivoting around a movement vector wont make you turn, or at a too high enrgy depletion cost.

PS. Would you imagine that IAF pilots didn't test MMRCA contenders vs Su30?

. I'm confused, i thought there is something called ASMP/A existing and meteor?
Which price you don't (neither do i) have any idea of, and furthermore what is included in it...
About the missiles, there is much more in them than simple max range : quality of sensors, NEZ etc.

simply laughable Virgilius suite is a light EW suite developed for choppers aswell as planes etc. Nothing to do with a heavy EW suite that was fully integrated in a plane since its design... It is nowhere to fully merged to the combat system as spectra is, do not use interferometers etc. etc.



half of Rafale

How many vs up to 5x2000L tanks? Just asking

vs 9.5 Tons on 14 hardpoints...

. vs 7000 without refurbishing on Rafale (conservative estimation)

Due to modular construction and in line diagnostic, MTBF do not exist anymore on Rafale. Ever heard of Tac cycles measurements? Be serious, compare their performances (pressure ratio, inlet temp, T/W ratios ...)

And not on Rafale? Tell me why plz.

Smthing is wrong with maths here?

vs 11 on war setting for Rafale. But of course Mig 29 will circle around it no?

vs 2100...
vs 3700
Rafale operated a war mission more than 6000 Kms in Mali, including dropping 6 bombs each...

. So you will have to pay for the "pimp up" and will not have what RAale offer you : a suite originally designed for the plane... India would be using enough Rafale or UPG so as commonality argument will not have any relevance (specially as you are tlaking about navy and air force).

. No YOU don't

ASMP is made in limited numbers, secondly its a tactical missile and is not capable of very low level cruising and Meteor is not operational and isn't an entirely French endeavor, everything propulsion is German. Also, I am not comparing the Mig-35 to Rafale, rather merely stating that Mig-35 does have significant improvements over existing Mig-29s and with some basic tinkering it can be turned in a great aircraft at a good price.

So the rest of your reply can go down the

Rafale is a slightly better aircraft due to longer range, increased useful payload and data fusion however not worth it for the prices being negotiated. You may claim you don't have an idea of the price but well all indications show the cost of 125 fighters + TOT + life cycle costs is around 15-20 billion i.e 120-140 million+ per bird excluding weapons, now I argue the cost for the Mig-35 in the same manner would be around 70 million per bird i.e for the same price as the 126 Rafale we can get 200 Mig-35s. This presents a numerical advantage. Also the fleet would fit in perfectly with the Mig-29UPGs and Mig-29K in the inventory already. Also considering the MKI was running circles around the Rafale during excercises and confirmed BVR kills, there is little reason why Mig-35 MKIed can't stand up to the challenges of anything Pak or China can throw at us. Also Rafale isn't the adversary for IAF. Mig-35 is more than enough to handle current regional threats.

dna exclusive: 100% price escalation on Rafale fighter aircraft to Rs 1.75 lakh crore likely to dent IAF's strike capability | Latest News & Updates at Daily News & Analysis

Mig-35 with EL-2052 would have a far better radar which out performs the RBE2 AESA with nearly double the detection range and lot more tracked targets. Rafale's RBE2 AESA is inferior to even standard Block 60 APG-80 and APG-79 from the SH. With OLS UEM and OLS K we would have built in IRST and trumps the FSO in the Rafale.

http://eurasianhub.files.wordpress.com/2013/04/mig35_specifications.jpg

http://www.aereo.jor.br/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/mig-35-4.jpg

Now if we consider the need for numbers and the dire shortage of numbers in the IAF 200 Mig-35s for the same price as 126 Rafale is a far better economic decision. Rafale's current and future MLU costs will only be much more prohibitive and though we may have a good fleet of capable aircraft, we're buying a massive financial trap with very little add combat benefits.

 

[Immanuel]

TRISHUL: Virgilius AESA-Based Internal EW Suite For MiG-29UPG & Tejas Mk2

As far as Spectra EW vs Virgilius EW suite is concerned, Virgilius atleast has some specs in the open forum and it can effectively jam upto 16 aircraft, now unless I see some Spectra specs, as far as I am concerned they are the same. There is no evidence to effectively prove the Spectra is better than the Virgilius. Moreover Mig-29 UPG has it and having it on the Mig-35 would be easy and bring in commonality. Operating the Mig-35 would also bring in billions in savings with engine commonality.

 

[Immanuel]

MLUs are expensive on any plane, see future super sukhoi? But as much as brand new plane with similar capabilities? Why do you think IAF chose to do that MLU?

Nah not all upgrades are expensive only French ones. We are upgrading the entire fleet of nearly 60 Mig-29s for less than a billion. Brand new build Super MKI cost 100 Million a unit and upgrading 80 of the first existing MKIs to Super status costs around 2 billion, cheaper considering the Mirage cost us 2 billion plus for a 50 aircraft fleet.

IAF to upgrade Su-30MKIs to 'Super Sukhoi' standard - Economic Times.

In future dollars, each Rafale MLU will cost us anywhere between 60-70 million eventually.