Know Your 'Rafale'

[Superdefender]

Uprated Kaveri, aka, 'Ghatak' will be the engine of AURA. Hence no question of Kaveri shutdown.

 

[garg_bharat]

LCA in its current state is not sufficient to substitute the roles of Jag, Mirage-2000, MiG-27 and MiG-29 that it should do to effectively augment heavy Su-30. And it has completely different from Su-30 technology chain and logistics which is not very good.
Developing more powerful LCA with Al-31F (117S) could cover all the isues easily.

Why. Jag drops bombs and rockets. LCA can do this.
LCA can take around 3 ton bomb load, not much less than Jag, or Mig-27.

LCA with BVR missiles and AESA should not be worse than Mirage-2000 or Mig-29. Its current radar is also sufficient for replacing Mig-21UPG at several second-line forward bases.

The major targets in Pakistan are located within 150 km of India-Pakistan border. For Pakistan, at around 10 forward bases, LCA is quite good enough.

LCA relieves Jag and Su30 if a situation develops in the East.

 

[Superdefender]

Why. Jag drops bombs and rockets. LCA can do this.
LCA can take around 3 ton bomb load, not much less than Jag, or Mig-27.

LCA with BVR missiles and AESA should not be worse than Mirage-2000 or Mig-29. Its current radar is also sufficient for replacing Mig-21UPG at several second-line forward bases.

You forgot IAF official also said - "Tejas switched to A-A after A-G, which is significant." Can Jaguar do that?

 

[gadeshi]

Why. Jag drops bombs and rockets. LCA can do this.
LCA can take around 3 ton bomb load, not much less than Jag, or Mig-27.
LCA with BVR missiles and AESA should not be worse than Mirage-2000 or Mig-29. Its current radar is also sufficient for replacing Mig-21UPG at several second-line forward bases.

So why do you need MMRCA?
The answer is range, combat radius and powerful avionics carrige (which requires more space and weight) and energy support capabilities (the current LCA cannot feed it by single F-404 gearbox). And of course, a more higher flight package.
If your LCA could be 412-like plane, it would posess both MMRCA and LCA fields reducing costs, optimizing structure and logistics and having wider abilities at the same time.
The other impoprtant question is LTF/LCA ability to act in one formation/tactical scheme with heavy dominator.
Obviousely they must have comparable flight packages for this (except payload and range). The current LCA is too underpowered for this.

 

[garg_bharat]

@gadeshi, LCA can be combined with Mig-29 and/or Su-30 in formation.

Warload in one flight may not be much use, as striking multiple targets in one sortie is more risky.

MMRCA has become outdated requirement because of delays. It is already replaced with growth in Su30. IAF is acting like an obstinate child, thats all.

IAF was using MMRCA to kill LCA. It didn't work.

India's requirements are not same as Russia's requirements or France's requirements.

That is why I said that LCA is fine for India. Future version will have higher internal fuel and higher load carrying capacity when engine is upgraded. Even today combat radius is 300km on internal fuel (higher than Mig-21 and Mig-27). With external fuel tanks, it can be increased to 500km.

 

[Superdefender]

@gadeshi, why are you comparing Tejas with MMRCAs? Nobody is saying LCA can take that role. It's atleast for last line defence. And one more correction. MMRCA tender did not happen to find out fighter with more rane and combat radius. IAF wanted an aircraft that can switch between air- -air and air-ground,i.e., multirole. That was the basic requirement. (Also medium)

 

[gadeshi]

@gadeshi, why are you comparing Tejas with MMRCAs? Nobody is saying LCA can take that role. It's atleast for last line defence. And one more correction. MMRCA tender did not happen to find out fighter with more rane and combat radius. IAF wanted an aircraft that can switch between air- -air and air-ground,i.e., multirole. That was the basic requirement. (Also medium)

Because of IAF structure optimization concerns we are talking about several pages from yesterday.
Any figter deal or program is useless without a proper structure matching the tasks and having reasonable costs and logistics.
Please read my posts about it several pages earlier.
this one and below: http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/threads/know-your-rafale.32861/page-112#post-1148198

 

[Gessler]

First off, without referring to any member, I'd say that people need to understand where to draw the line between the actual happenings and new, proposed methods. I personally advocate for what IS happening, as such, I have no problems with the IAF's light-medium-heavy category division as quite frankly, an alternative approach was either never proposed, or even if proposed, was not adopted due to any number of reasons.

IAF currently has two goals;

1) Replace older aircraft in service
2) Build the squadron-strength up to the planned 40-50 sqd level with modern planes

Here is official IAF plan for the foreseeable future;

LIGHT : Fulfilled by Tejas Mk-1, Mk-1A and Mk-2 versions. So far a requirement for 126 aircraft based on Mk-1 airframe has been outlined (20 Mk-1 and 106 Mk-1A). The Mk-2 could bring more. The eventual requirement is said to be in the region of 200+ units, although never officially stated. The Mk-1 itself was originally planned to replace all MiG-21 versions in IAF (say about 200+) but it could not and now it is hoped that Mk-1A and Mk-2 will replace them.

MEDIUM : Negotiations with Rafale as the preferred product for the MMRCA requirement have come a long way. An original requirement was for 126 planes, 18 from off the shelf and remainder 108 to be built in with ToT. That plan was scrapped and now negotiations are for 36 from off the shelf with atleast 90 built in here under Make in India. Going by the originally talked-of requirement (126+63), it's possible Rafale numbers will also eventually reach the 200 figure. A talk of how the MII production will take place revealed that another tranche of 90 aircraft (on top of the 36+90 being decided now) will be required.

This production will be entirely handled by Private-sector companies. It is imperative that MoD thought that such a large international deal should be made the most out of...hence continuing negotiations for other technological benefits, production deals and pricing.

They will eventually have to replace MiG-27 (~100) and Jaguar (130+) strike fighters in service while also helping IAF achieve it's 2nd goal, which is to build up squadron numbers. If the AMCA does not materialize for whatever reason, or if it does and were to be found inadequate, the job of replacing Mirage-2000 and MiG-29 aircraft (another 120-140) might also fall on the shoulders of Rafale.

HEAVY : Currently fulfilled by Su-30MKI, for which an extensive upgrade program is being contemplated. The originally planned fleet was for 140 aircraft, but several follow-up orders already brought that number to 272 (of which about ~240 are already in service) and could eventually reach the 350 figure...once the Strategic Forces Command (SFC) acquires some planes as well. Some of these future orders could be bought directly from Russia.

The FGFA and Su-30s could serve side-by-side for quite a while...but sometime in the 2030s, it will be the time to begin the phasing-out process of MKIs, starting from the first batches acquired in early to mid-2000s. In the distant future, FGFA versions will completely replace all MKIs.

The FGFA on the other hand is currently the only fifth-generaion project that IAF is seriously dabbling in. Numbers will be, just like as in the MKI or MMRCA deals, bought in tranches & blocks. First order is likely to be the 60-aircraft figure we've been hearing about. Eventual numbers will reach 244, or about as many as needed to replace MKI and meet all future requirements.

All in all, we have about 550+ existing aircraft that need a replacement in the foreseeable future. And that's not even counting IAF's other goal, which is to build up squadron numbers to standards deemed necessary to meet India's projected defence needs.

At 18 fighters per squadron, we will need approximately 800 modern/futuristic planes.

If that part of the problem is understood, we can get down to explaining to some people that I never said India should dump LCA or that LCA is useless. What I said was that IF a light, single-engined 5th gen fighter is considered, it will kill the LCA market as compared to such a 5th gen fighter, the existing LCA is obsolete and spending money on an advanced version (like Mk-2) does not make sense while a much-more advanced 5th gen jet in that same weight-class and category is ready for production!

This is why I said at the beginning of the post that one needs to know where to draw the line between present, real requirements together with the solutions that are being pursued for them ..... and propsals aimed at outlining different requirements altogether.

Going by the requirements IAF has projected, I have always said and will always continue to say that IAF needs Tejas. The problem only comes when certain 'indigenous' fanatics go overboard saying that only LCA, and nothing else should be built - that is a formula for suicide (much like how Lockheed thought they can replace every plane with a single wonder machine called F-35) and I feel it's my responsibility to breathe some sense into such people.

Btw, everyone have a laugh at Senator McCain rapping USAF top-brass about the F-35 replacing the A-10. The politicians know it's a sitting duck, the US Air Force knows it's a sitting duck, the Allies know that it's a sitting duck....they just are powerless to do anything about it! Such is the power of Lockheed lobby in the US govt.

 

[garg_bharat]

Everybody knows about IAF's plan. The only problem is, it is flawed.

1. The economic argument is not sound. India does not have money to buy and maintain the kind of planes IAF wants.

2. Nobody has replaced 3rd gen planes one-to-one; and same for replacing 4 to 5 gen. The number of planes has gone down with improvement in planes.

3. The medium and heavy category is an arbitrary and unique categorization. USA itself is standardizing on two planes F-22 and F-35. Many countries have just one type of fighter. So may be the categorization (light, medium, heavy) is based is what was available from Europe, rather than any real perceived need.

 

[PaliwalWarrior]

Sir, do you realize that in this case, not only MMRCA but LCA and AMCA are also stupid?

Please try to understand that if MMRCA is not coming, it's because IAF has found an alternative low-end 5th generation plane. A low-end 4th gen like LCA is obsolete and with the kind of high-end 5th gen techs (including several 5+ gen techs) that would be incorporated in FGFA and from there trickle down to the low-end 5th gen plane, even the AMCA becomes useless.

Either we take Rafale, LCA + AMCA, or we trash all of them and build a new 5th gen plane instead.

There is no need for rafale at these price levels

No tech of rafales will trickle down to amca lca

 

[garg_bharat]

Can India buy 500 4.5 and 5 generation planes in the next 15 years?? (almost all imports, as local production is stuck at 3++ or 4th generation by IAF admission); and pay for much increased upkeep and fuel bills at the same time?

So futuristic word is very troubling here.

If you look at the government budget, two holy cows which can not be touched are interest on gov. debt, and food&fuel subsidy. I asked one of my IAS friends as to why food subsidy is not curtailed. He says if the Gov does that, millions will go hungry as food prices will skyrocket. So half gov. budget goes only in these two heads.

What is left is distributed for other heads. This results in inflexibility for defence allocation. The defence services think its budget should increase rapidly, but the reality is any rise above 10% average in rupee terms is difficult.

 

[Gessler]

Everybody knows about IAF's plan. The only problem is, it is flawed.

1. The economic argument is not sound. India does not have money to buy and maintain the kind of planes IAF wants.

Oh god...another guy who think whatever amount is to be spent on MMRCA will be taken off a single year's defence budget. Forgot the fact that a great percentage of such contract value is to be re-invested back into India through various local production deals & offsets.

By the way, around $6 billions has been left unspent from last year's capital defence expenditure. Each year, such unspent amount is in billions of dollars. Even if whatever contract value of Rafale deal has to be given as spot-payment, we can do it. But that's not even the case! Whatever is the amount to spent, will be distributed over several years' capital outlays, maybe even a decade or longer.

Some would even say India cannot afford a $220 million apiece transport plane like C-17 or a $250 million patrol plane like P-8 but what do they know!

2. Nobody has replaced 3rd gen planes one-to-one; and same for replacing 4 to 5 gen. The number of planes has gone down with improvement in planes.

You are comparing apples to oranges. The matter is not about replacing older planes one-to-one, it's about meeting the procurement target of minimum 42 squadrons.

As I already mentioned before (obviously you missed the fine print) the IAF's procurement goals are two-fold;

1) Replace older aircraft
2) Increase squadron numbers to meet new perceived objectives

3. The medium and heavy category is an arbitrary and unique categorization. USA itself is standardizing on two planes F-22 and F-35.

That was the plan but it didn't play out that way. Even if we think F-35s will replace all F-16s eventually, the existing F-15C Eagle and F-15SE Strike Eagle (together about ~500 of them) are not going anywhere. Atleast not until a sixth-gen fighter comes along. But even then that sixth-gen fighter, together with F-22 and F-35 will be serving alongside each other.

USAF is currently also considering orders of several new-build F-15s. The fact that F-22 production line is closed gives them enough reason to seek more air-superiority planes for the near-future requirement.

 

[warrior monk]

Air Force’s Acquisition Budget 2015-16

Aircraft & Aero-Engine--18866.0 cr (2.78 billion dollars)

seeing the projected and allocation for defence over the years even 8 % growth is optimistic. Calculating the aircraft and aero engine acquition budget for India for upto 2030

Year ---- Acquition budget


2015-16 -- 2.78
2016-17 -- 3.00
2017-18 -- 3.24
2018-19 -- 3 .49
2019-20 -- 3.76
2020-21 -- 4.06
2021-22 -- 4.38
2022-23 -- 4.73
2023-24 -- 5.10
2024-25 -- 5.50
2025-26 -- 5.94
2026-27 -- 6.41
2027-28 -- 6.92
2028-29 -- 7.47
2029-30 -- 8.06
2030-31 -- 8.73

Total 83.57 billion dollars

See we don't have the budget for fancy western aircrafts . MoD thought 20-25 billion dollars maximum for 126 fighters including weapons so whichever fighter is chosen it should not cost more than 190 million including weapons and spares but Rafale costs far more messing our capital expenditure so it cannot be acquired in large numbers it will have to be replaced with something cheaper .

 

[garg_bharat]

Oh god...another guy who think whatever amount is to be spent on MMRCA will be taken off a single year's defence budget. Forgot the fact that a great percentage of such contract value is to be re-invested back into India through various local production deals & offsets.

By the way, around $6 billions has been left unspent from last year's capital defence expenditure. Each year, such unspent amount is in billions of dollars. Even if whatever contract value of Rafale deal has to be given as spot-payment, we can do it. But that's not even the case! Whatever is the amount to spent, will be distributed over several years' capital outlays, maybe even a decade or longer.

Some would even say India cannot afford a $220 million apiece transport plane like C-17 or a $250 million patrol plane like P-8 but what do they know!



You are comparing apples to oranges. The matter is not about replacing older planes one-to-one, it's about meeting the procurement target of minimum 42 squadrons.

As I already mentioned before (obviously you missed the fine print) the IAF's procurement goals are two-fold;

1) Replace older aircraft
2) Increase squadron numbers to meet new perceived objectives



That was the plan but it didn't play out that way. Even if we think F-35s will replace all F-16s eventually, the existing F-15C Eagle and F-15SE Strike Eagle (together about ~500 of them) are not going anywhere. Atleast not until a sixth-gen fighter comes along. But even then that sixth-gen fighter, together with F-22 and F-35 will be serving alongside each other.

USAF is currently also considering orders of several new-build F-15s. The fact that F-22 production line is closed gives them enough reason to seek more air-superiority planes for the near-future requirement.

1. Whatever is unspent does not get added to next year's budget. Typically the reduction in capex is due to increase elsewhere. The salary and pension expense has gone up massively. Remember money does not grow on trees.

2. Offsets cannot count in MOD calculations as this money does not come back to MOD coffers.

3. Older aircraft can be replaced by aircrafts which country can afford. As was the original plan. Replace Mig-21 with LCA.

4. Squadrons numbers can be increased by raising 20 squadrons of LCA (by 2030). If India can raise 20 sq. of Mig-21, then why not LCA.

Let the composition be:
20 sq LCA (or 10 sq LCA + 10 sq Gripen)
14 sq Su-30
3 sq Mig-29
2 sq Mirage-2000
6 sq Jaguar
3 sq FGFA (by 2030)

5. C-17 and P8 are not good examples. Russia does not have good analogues, so cheaper alternative is not there. These are not comparable to 40B Rafale in size (if 126 was bought). I said before and I say again, that India will have to make concessions to USA, not due to military reasons, but due to economic reasons.

 

[Superdefender]

Only buying of the selves will not take us anywhere. We have to plan to ramp up our production per annum significantly.

 

[garg_bharat]

2030-31 -- 8.73

Total 83.57 billion dollars

See we don't have the budget for fancy western aircrafts . MoD thought 20-25 billion dollars maximum for 126 fighters including weapons so whichever fighter is chosen it should not cost more than 190 million including weapons and spares but Rafale costs far more messing our capital expenditure so it cannot be acquired in large numbers it will have to be replaced with something cheaper .

You have taken past data for only 5 years. You should have taken the same 15 year data to project future 15 years.
The $ growth would not be more than 5% cumulative assuming rest as rupee depreciation.
Other problem is maintenance and fuel as this bill also increases and will eventually eat into capital budget.

I have seen projections which show that invisibles are stabilizing and future growth will be slow. That means services export are near a top. If such projections are true, then pressure on overall economic growth will be significant, as services economy is a significant driver today.

 

[Immanuel]

Most of the countries operating Typhoon (UK, Italy, Saudi, maybe Spain too) will eventually be using F-35 as well. In this case, the Typhoon will be air-superiority while F-35 will be manned ground-attack. Unmanned A2G roles will be taken care of in the future by the aircraft like BAE Taranis.

Something tells me that most Western air forces will resort to using drones for AD-penetration within the foreseeable future as Russian-origin air defence systems keep improving and are simply death-traps for aircraft. An unmanned plane removes the risk of endangering pilots, and can have much lower radar & infrared signature. A small, but precise payload can be carried. Larger drones in the future will be able to carry as much as fighters do today.

F-35 will only be bombing jihadi huts in the middle-east, can do little other than that. Australia is already trying to slash down it's F35 buy as much as possible and look for alternatives in the sixth-generation F-X project. It seems too skeptical at the moment, but it tells us that US corps. are seriously looking to cover up the failure that is the F35 and bring in a so-called "6th gen" fighter, which is essentially modernized versions of the tech already proven in F-22/35, but wrapped in a new airframe. This was revealed recently.

http://www.autoblog.com/2016/03/14/air-force-opposes-f-22-production-wants-f-x/

As far as Indian needs go, we would most probably go with Rafale as the medium-end, modernized MKI as the heavy (will be eventually replaced by FGFA in the 2030s) and keep improving the LCA as the light category. IF a light 5th gen plane is considered, it might kill both LCA+Rafale...but if not, only Rafale can be purchased as the MMRCA. No other plane in that category is viable regardless of what mediapersons say.

Another aspect to consider is the naval requirement. Having one plane for IAF and a different plane in the same category for IN is not viable. It will never happen, not in this country.

A US fighter makes no sense for India...especially outgoing models like F-16. F-18? Maybe...but that won't make much difference from Rafale (costly, twin-engined, etc.) anyway. Gripen? Possible, but it could kill any future development of LCA. The Indigenous lobby will not allow that to happen.

Typhoon is not possible either because we already concluded that it is more costly than Rafale...plus we have to replace strike planes like MiG-27 and Jaguar with MMRCA, and most Typhoon operators would rather use F-35 in those roles.

@gadeshi Really liked your analysis! You should check out IDF (*****************) where there is a thread called Light Stealth Aircraft (LSA). It is much similar to the category which the E-51 model you shown above is. Apparently an ex-Indian Navy Harrier pilot (you can find him by the name vstol jockey) has completed a design with his team and is negotiating with IAI for electronics support. You can check out the thread and maybe pitch in with your ideas.

Now IF such a fighter is inducted (single-engined 5th gen), it can potentially nullify the need for a medium 4.5gen (like Rafale or any other), but what can happen of such projects within the timeframes we need them? That is the problem.

The famed Rafale is also being used to bomb the said jihadi mud huts and in the context future ops, the F-35 will be used for whetever future wars need to be fought by the 3 services. Rafale deal first has to be cleared and at the said prices, it won't. The F-18H will be roughly half the cost of what is being quoted for the Rafae at the moment.

Rafale was never L-1, that has proven to be a farce. During that time it was declared that Rafale was 5% cheaper than the EF but we later end up staring at 70% cost escalations during negotiations even after the RFP was clear on what was needed. Please stop with your incorrect BS.

F-35 is bound to be the most used fighter of the next 30 years regardless of what anyone says.

 

[abingdonboy]

Now to be honest .. I am starting to lose hope @Gessler @abingdonboy
MoD' s play looks more and more inextricable. Seems like they want a new MMRCA competition now with most former bids ( Saab, Boeing, Lockeed) relaunched. But without officially announcing it. I am lost.

You'll be happy in a few weeks, don't worry

 

[Bahamut]

And some more light fighter projects:
Su-37 (Sukhoi LFI): http://www.paralay.com/lfi_su.html

Can India buy the design and plans of Su 37 from Russia like China did for J 10 and for what price ?Can you provide some info in eng on E-51 also?Thanks in advance.

 

[gadeshi]

Can India buy the design and plans of Su 37 from Russia like China did for J 10 and for what price ?Can you provide some info in eng on E-51 also?Thanks in advance.

Sorry guys, but I have no time to translate much Please use Google Translate.
AFAIK, this project is not so much detailed, preliminary I donno the other details except for those article in Russian that I've posted earlier. Some Sukhoi guys say that there are some detailed design computations but they seem to be not in an open access.