Know Your 'Rafale'

[Tactical Frog]

The French are almost non existent in Iraq. There are surely no news in any mainstream media about the "french wrath" The French "efforts" in Syria/Iraq are meagre and insignificant. SCALP and Hammer are good missiles but they are too expensive for the French to use in Syria, After all its more expense than any gain. You can check your own source. So, there are meagre to almost non-existent strikes by your "formidable" SCALP or Hammer. and Rafale and Mirages there in Syria are for Ceremonial use only. The real effort in term of Fire power is being put by the Russians. The French did not have any plan, and after the Attack on Paris the french were gungho, But then after seeing the cost of few days of bombing, the French just mellowed down and its efforts possibly only limited to weekend sorties. You can go for the various sources and see how many sorties the French flew (which claimed vengence against IS for bombing paris) and the Russian sorties which came in support of Assad. The French presence in operations against IS are more than a year old where as the Russians have just completed 6 months and the results already show.

When you are faced with Raw facts this was the answer expected from you, thank god you croaked.

Map of French strikes last week :

 

[smestarz]

http://ultimaratio-blog.org/en/archives/5749

http://www.f-16.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=36&t=27332
And that was when Rafale didn't have an AESA and new GaN-based RF jammers & receivers.
I doubt MKI would perform better than Rafale... And Let me tell you that scenario I just gave, is pure Gold for IAF.

If we don't have to fight a two front war, we can have a much larger force concentration of aircrafts than what Chinese can bring in. They don't have airbases as close to LAC.

They also have Taiwan, Japan and US to take care of. You guys don't really know how wars are fought. Your obsession with numbers is making your view too narrow.

When a Spartan argued in favor of waging war against Macedon, citing as support their previous successes against Persia, King Eudamidas retorted "You seem not to realize that your proposition is the same as fighting fifty wolves after defeating a thousand sheep.

Firstly, If we have war with Pakistan, China is surely not going to jump in and threaten its own security, They have too much to lose. On other hand if China and India go to war, there is good chance that Pakistan will jump in as they have nothing left to lose.

What you mentioned, Those countries will not attack China, there is no strategic advantage, Rather China could safefy use its northern assets against those countrys and anhilate them, With ease. USA is too far to actually influence, unless it decides to move major part of fleet to South China sea and risking it. And USA will not do it against China and definitely not in favour of India.
Are you saying that Rafale has everything and Su-30 MKI is totally vulnerable? Lol and if so it this vulnerability not due to the nearsightedness of IAF?

If you are quoting the war between the Greeks and the Macedonians under Philip? The Spartans lost because of many reasons, the most importantly is that Philip had trained his soldiers very well The training was rigourous. This was not a war of spartan hoplites vs Macedonian, The spartans were well armed in traditional hoplite manner . The Macedonians employed a very long spear called SARISSA which was 9-21 feet and much longer than the Spartan Spear. Since Sarissa a long weapon was heavy, their sheilds were tied to their left hand (smaller sheilds) and both hands were used to carry the Sarissa, And when the action started, the sarissa armed Macedonian soldiers were able to break through the Spartain lines using their longer sarissa.

 

[smestarz]

Though war is the absolute test of the performance of a weapon system, Spectra has been extensively tested against French defence systems , which are not bad either. Next step of the game is to collect as much intelligence (SIGINT) as you can about Russian latest and most evolved systems and enter them in Spectra's threat library.

You really call flying in Mali and Libya as "War" ? Those poor buggers did not have a credible air defence, The russians are not claiming like France does, Russians just test their weapons, learn more and then get more input.

Do you know how SPECTRA is trying to build its threat library? When other countries go to exercises to home skills and get the pilots to learn, the French go only for trying to sniff the avionics and try to build the threat libraries.Selfish buggers. Why do you think the Americans dont want to send F-22 or F-22 to exercise with you? Now you know.. The French did the same during Red Flag 2008 also,. by the way SPECTRA is over rated. Has it proven itself? Seems in Libya the outdated SAM radar was able to track Rafale which was using its SPECTRA. Some one had posted this in this forum.

 

[Tactical Frog]

You really call flying in Mali and Libya as "War" ? Those poor buggers did not have a credible air defence, The russians are not claiming like France does, Russians just test their weapons, learn more and then get more input.

Do you know how SPECTRA is trying to build its threat library? When other countries go to exercises to home skills and get the pilots to learn, the French go only for trying to sniff the avionics and try to build the threat libraries.Selfish buggers. Why do you think the Americans dont want to send F-22 or F-22 to exercise with you? Now you know.. The French did the same during Red Flag 2008 also,. by the way SPECTRA is over rated. Has it proven itself? Seems in Libya the outdated SAM radar was able to track Rafale which was using its SPECTRA. Some one had posted this in this forum.

What a waste of my time you are ...depressing. I am precisely writing that war is the ultimate test ! Of course Mali doesn' t count, and Libya was hardly a problem. My point is that France is not going to start ww3 to prove Spectra for potential buyers like India.

France has little interest in collecting data about our allies in exercises like Red Flag. It is Russian systems that are of interest for us. Genius.

 

[smestarz]

Map of French strikes last week :

Just to point to you, the Attacks are in Iraq alone, and not in Syria, do refer to the map

 

[smestarz]

What a waste of my time you are ...depressing. I am precisely writing that war is the ultimate test ! Of course Mali doesn' t count, and Libya was hardly a problem. My point is that France is not going to start ww3 to prove Spectra for potential buyers like India.

France has little interest in collecting data about our allies in exercises like Red Flag. It is Russian systems that are of interest for us. Genius.

Surely the French planes are not really going against any American weapons armed country. But the French might not stop even building their library with even American avionics. Surely the Americans dont trust you in this case.

If you are depressed have a coffee maybe that might help you. There is no compulsion for you to reply to my post. Already a lot is known about Spectra and how well its over rated.

By the way, surely the French are not going to Start WW3, they are just happy with their small "play grounds" in Africa and Iraq.

 

[harsh]

http://ultimaratio-blog.org/en/archives/5749

http://www.f-16.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=36&t=27332
And that was when Rafale didn't have an AESA and new GaN-based RF jammers & receivers.
I doubt MKI would perform better than Rafale... And Let me tell you that scenario I just gave, is pure Gold for IAF.

If we don't have to fight a two front war, we can have a much larger force concentration of aircrafts than what Chinese can bring in. They don't have airbases as close to LAC.

They also have Taiwan, Japan and US to take care of. You guys don't really know how wars are fought. Your obsession with numbers is making your view too narrow.

When a Spartan argued in favor of waging war against Macedon, citing as support their previous successes against Persia, King Eudamidas retorted "You seem not to realize that your proposition is the same as fighting fifty wolves after defeating a thousand sheep.

I don't want debate on what rafale can do what it can't. Because nobody knows as you said.
Now take examples
Pakistan is not ISIS. china is dam serious rival with a huge airforce.
We need numbers to defend from them. In war china out number us 3:1. And we use to out number Pakistan 3:1 but now we have ratio in our favour 2:1 only.
We need numbers to defend ourself we don't need a fake champion.
Rafale can't even bomb ISIS( which have no airforce) effectively.
We have Pakistan (serious airforce) and china ( huge and powerful airforce).
In two front war scenario no 4th gen plane is effective. Only su 30 mki or f15 can do air superiority missions.
5th planes are required for two front war scenario.
A to G roles can be done by su30 as we saw in syria after we maintain air superiority on the opponent.
A to A roles only American or russian fill the no 1 spot no European aircraft is their to come close.
Typhoon taste the dust in recent exercise.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/59...n-Sukhoi-jets-Indian-pilots-training-exercise

Rafale feel even worse because this plane is not designed to do air superiority missions.
Even if rafale manage to good against our su 30mki( which is close to impossible).
Even then with 126 rafales we can't face china in numbers.
So we don't need franch fries ( rafale).
Its india man we need a full course meal which you don't have

 

[Archer]

@smestarz @Archer An officer may or may not be corrupt. And just because one officer was corrupt does not mean all of them are. But still it does not change the facts - just because you assume/accuse everyone of corruption does not make you a better judge of things in their area of expertise - regardless of what you'd like to believe.

Gessler, as far as I am concerned you are a fool, who even posts the stupid claims, that faker Senguptooo, a gradea fraud, posts as a fact. His brochures are one thing, but then there is the rest which anybody would know is cooked up.

The fact an idiot like you thinks that he can sit in judgment on other people speaks volumes. Anyone in India would have seen far more on all sides of the fence to see the kind of corruption that "their area of expertise" has foisted on India from the Vickers MBT, to the T-90 to countless other incidents.

Children like you have no clue of such things since you sit salivating over make believe theories of superiority based on imported arms, few of which work because of the aforesaid corruption while the truly corrupt retire on the basis of that illegal loot which was facilitated by the very same folks who ran this country for decades.

If at all corruption happened, it will be processed through the legal channels like happened in the AW-101 case.

Your stupidity is mind boggling. Are you even for real? Your image chosen for your ID pretty much depicts the same. Perhaps you should put King Louie to look really intimidating or better still, Batman glowering with his dark undies. We'll be really impressed with you then.

Meanwhile, do tell us about the hundreds of defence personnel, babus and politicians who have been brought to justice for cases of corruption?

The fact that you question the requirement itself (for medium-class fighters), which was successively pursued by changing Governments, top brass and foreign vendors ever since 2004...clearly shows that you're a kid trying to fill a man's shoes.

Dude, forget about talking about men and similar rubbish, when you are so foolish and out of your depth that these common sense issues were known to all when you were but a liquid drop in your dads gonads. Its sad though that his intelligence, hopefully which he must have had but you don't, didnt get through.

The medium class fighters rubbish is hilarious and when pushed most IAF officers even admit it would not have come about for the lack of reliability of the Sukhoi, because of which the old proposal, way before even the Ks were acquired, ended up getting urgency.

There is no medium class requirement from a competition which BTW fielded fighters like the Rafale and EF with the F/A-18 E/F against platforms like the Gripen. The lifecycle costs for many of these medium fighters would match the Sukhoi, never mind the investments in base infrastructure and all new test & deployment equipment.

No correlation between the wide disparity in capability never mind the ASRs which vendors were laughing at for their lack of specifity in some areas and over specificity in others, nothing but a repeat of the early 2000's era IAF requirement as a baseline.

Gessler, you are a fool. Go away and play with your toys, rather than posturing about a topic you know nothing about.

 

[Archer]

A far more detailed response to AW-101 scandal than just yelling corruption -

http://trishul-trident.blogspot.in/2016/04/italys-cruel-farce-indias-pathetic.html

What kind of idiot quotes some faker like the above on any serious topic. The man is the biggest fraud that exists on the net, with all sorts of cooked up theories on multiple Indian programs - anyone would remember the moron screaming of the Lora being Prahar and then being caught out and editing his blog, about the countless fake assertions made on Indian programs being imported etc. Only the most stupid of fanboys would take anything the man writes as credible, given his long history of cooked up claims.

The Italian courts ahave the testimony of one of the fixers in the AW-101 case openly bragging about how he subverted the Tyagi brothers. In the past most such incidents involving services impropriety at those ranks were hushed up to avoid morale and image issues, especially if the top chaps were part of the political you do my bidding, I do yours structure.

We have had an ex Navy chiefs son run an arms trade group and his grandkid get caught in the worst kind of elitist behavior. Another who runs a pro Pak group. Army chiefs who completely messed up a war campaign, others who were found to have booked apartments in a project intended for war widows.. no action was taken.

Listen kid, grow up and see the reality of India today. There are crooks in the wood work and in the system and they have been handpicked to rise. Ask around about what happened to the man who headed the Red team. How multiple programs of imports have amounted to nothing and the chaps in charge of their procurement all nod their heads and pretend it was all a honest oversight.

Clearly, you are so clueless that you have to depend on a shady chap like the above to feed you stuff. BTW, use your brains for once and figure out why is it that he constantly runs down Indian establishments and pushes for dubious imports.

 

[Gessler]

@Archer

Oh ofcourse, sir. I am a Grade-A fool and you are a genius. Whenever the country has to buy some military hardware, formulate strategic alliances and shape our foreign policy, they will consult you only.

As I already said, I don't give a shit what retards think about themselves, who they accuse of corruption, and who they think they are smarter than.

Oh, and I must also admit that every single man in uniform is corrupt and has no responsibility whatsoever. Whatever they buy, say that we need etc. is all fake and done with ulterior motives. We should never trust them at all - instead, we should indulge in self-delusions, make-belief and we should decide what the country should do based on our limited knowledge only.

After all, it is impossible for the IAF Chief to have a greater say on what his Air Force should buy than some retarded armchair general who won't even reveal his name...but gives lectures about responsibility.

Lol....as they say, even a cripple who never held a bat will lecture Sachin Tendulkar about how to play cricket.

 

[Tactical Frog]

Surely the French planes are not really going against any American weapons armed country. But the French might not stop even building their library with even American avionics. Surely the Americans dont trust you in this case.

Well . It is possible that there is some truth in this . I am not able to deny or confirm ! Surely India would love its Spectra threat library coming loaded with data about F-16 Raytheon radars

 

[Gessler]

We need numbers to defend from them. In war china out number us 3:1. And we use to out number Pakistan 3:1 but now we have ratio in our favour 2:1 only.

No. Instead, we need aircraft of greater quality and greater survivability - that is the rule. If you want to build numbers, you have to build numbers higher than your opponent. Against PLAAF that is impossible. So by default we have to concentrate on procuring aircraft of great qualitative advantage in the overall.

Anyway, PLAAF will not have such a great quantitative advantage against IAF in even a high-intensity war. There are 3 operational airfields on the Chinese side that can effectively engage IAF, we have more available airfields. Plus, PLAAF is never going to pit it's entire air force against India - if it does that, it will be totally defenceless in the Eastern Front, which is arguably a hotter and more contested region.

We need numbers to defend ourself we don't need a fake champion.

We have numbers.

~300+ heavy air-superiority fighters (Su-30MKI)
~200 medium multirole fighters (Rafale)
~200 light multirole fighters (LCA)

Plus, we will eventually have a minimum of ~250 FGFAs. But by the time the 5th generation numbers start filling, the older MKIs will begin their retirement process.

Rafale can't even bomb ISIS( which have no airforce) effectively.

Rafale has successfully decimated every single target assigned of it - whether it was against ISIS, in Mali, Libya or anywhere else.

We have Pakistan (serious airforce) and china ( huge and powerful airforce).

Oh, I wasn't aware of that reality. Thanks for reminding us all.

In two front war scenario no 4th gen plane is effective.

We are not procuring any 4th gen plane. Everything from LCA Mk-1A to Rafale and Su-30MKI are 4.5 gen and in successive tranches, each plane will receive the electronics capabilities of 5th generation aircraft, while some already have the performance criteria checked.

Only su 30 mki or f15 can do air superiority missions.

Oh and why is that?

5th planes are required for two front war scenario.

5th gen planes are required as an eventuality. One front or two front does not matter, it has nothing to do with procurement. What do you think? When IAF gets FGFA, it will not use them unless it's a two-front war?

A to G roles can be done by su30 as we saw in syria after we maintain air superiority on the opponent.

No Flanker is doing any A2G missions in Syria.

Only the Su-24 Fencer, Su-25 Frogfoot and Su-34 Fullback are. The Su-34 is really not as agile or as nimble as a Flanker, eventhough it shares visual similarities and the airframe - it's a dedicated long-range strike bomber.

Only Flankers operating in Syria are the Su-30SM and Su-35...who's job is to provide fighter escort for strike aircraft of the types mentioned above. As well as for local air-defence of the Khymeim AFB.

A to A roles only American or russian fill the no 1 spot no European aircraft is their to come close.

Rafale or Typhoon can easily beat any 4th/4.5 gen US air-superiority fighter in A2A missions. Only F-22 is the exception.

Typhoon taste the dust in recent exercise.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/59...n-Sukhoi-jets-Indian-pilots-training-exercise

In Cope India 2004, Indian MiG-21s smashed the super-duper USAF F-15C Eagles in air-to-air combat.

....your point is?

Rafale feel even worse because this plane is not designed to do air superiority missions.

Nonsense - there is not a single A2A flight regime, weapons or electronics capability that Rafale does not have that MKI or F-15 has.

Rafale is not a dedicated air-superiority fighter, that does not mean it cannot do A2A missions - that is simply absurd thinking and shows how immature you are. Most European countries, owing to their limited land and resources, has placed a greater emphasis on developing truly multi-role aircraft platforms rather than stick with the role-specific aircraft mentality of US and USSR.

But, in modern times it makes a lot more sense to pursue completely multirole aircraft rather than stick with role-specific models - as this saves a great deal of both purchase & maintenance cost, simpler logistics and greater availability rates. This is true especially for India.

That is why we are seeing the emergence of aircraft like F-35 - which are replacing both multirole fighters like F-16/F-18 for doing A2A missions as well as ground-attack aircraft like A-10 for doing A2G roles.

Even if rafale manage to good against our su 30mki( which is close to impossible).

Oh please explain to me (if you actually CAN) why is it that Rafale with...

• AESA radar,
• top-grade sensor fusion,
• much more capable passive targeting systems,
• supercruising engines,
• advanced RCS-reduction features,
• greater combat payloads and
• integrated with modern weapon systems like MICA and Meteor...

....is unable to beat MKI ??

Even then with 126 rafales we can't face china in numbers.

We don't plan to beat them with numbers. If you think we are, you're an idiot.

Its india man we need a full course meal which you don't have

Actually you're right about the first part, totally wrong about the second. Yes, we need a full-course meal that's why we are going for an all-encompassing multirole aircraft like Rafale. If we wanted a single dish, we would have stuck with role-specific aircraft and the concept of starting an MRCA competition would never have arisen in the first place!

Please, harsh. Wake up and smell the smoke.

 

[Archer]

Well . It is possible that there is some truth in this . I am not able to deny or confirm ! Surely India would love its Spectra threat library coming loaded with data about F-16 Raytheon radars

Tactical, when was the last time you guys sold ANY country your grade A stuff?

For the Mirage 2000-Hs we got RDM radars while you chaps had RDI.

So how realistic is it that you will even give us the all-up Spectra let alone preloaded with target information?

We both know, that the IAF has only got grade A kit out of a rare difference, eg Russian troubles and hence Su-30 MKI with then cutting edge systems the RuAF didnt have.

Otherwise, we mostly get what you are willing to export.

 

[Archer]

There is some thing missing so I would like to add that China operated its SAM in manner where one system protects another system with support from EW system making it much difficult to shoot down. In such a case even B 2 has problem punching through it .

The S3xx and S4XX chain PRC has set up, with overlapping protection from HQ-9/Tors etc is way beyond a token strike force of Rafales unfortunately.

 

[Tactical Frog]

Tactical, when was the last time you guys sold ANY country your grade A stuff?

For the Mirage 2000-Hs we got RDM radars while you chaps had RDI.

So how realistic is it that you will even give us the all-up Spectra let alone preloaded with target information?

We both know, that the IAF has only got grade A kit out of a rare difference, eg Russian troubles and hence Su-30 MKI with then cutting edge systems the RuAF didnt have.

Otherwise, we mostly get what you are willing to export.

Seems to me that things changed a lot since the 90s .. there are very few countries that can afford Rafale, so it has to come with its cutting tech to be sold. You will get the cream of the cream.

 

[Anupu]

@smestarz @harsh The arguments you are making don't make any sense.

Firstly, If we have war with Pakistan, China is surely not going to jump in and threaten its own security, They have too much to lose. On other hand if China and India go to war, there is good chance that Pakistan will jump in as they have nothing left to lose.

I gave you a scienario to solve not question whether it would hypothetically happen or not. Indian force concentrations even in case of a 2 Front wars would remain to be very high. I mean you guys thinking extremely simply.

What you mentioned, Those countries will not attack China, there is no strategic advantage, Rather China could safefy use its northern assets against those countrys and anhilate them, With ease. USA is too far to actually influence, unless it decides to move major part of fleet to South China sea and risking it. And USA will not do it against China and definitely not in favour of India.

No it won't if countries saw the China is so weakened as two remover frontline aircraft from east, they won't worry about making more aggressive moves. Also If Kashgar and Hotan are gone China can forget about air superiority. their jets would need refueling before they can hope to even conduct a small patrol. India would lock up the skies in Xinjiang and Chinese armor would be useless.

Are you saying that Rafale has everything and Su-30 MKI is totally vulnerable? Lol and if so it this vulnerability not due to the nearsightedness of IAF?

When did I say that? Kuch bhi bhai . If Chinese have J-11s and Su-27s who would take on them, and since I gave you all we could acquire till 2020, you would also have ALCM Brahmos on MKIs. You are not even trying to solve the problem.

If you are quoting the war between the Greeks and the Macedonians under Philip? The Spartans lost because of many reasons, the most importantly is that Philip had trained his soldiers very well The training was rigourous. This was not a war of spartan hoplites vs Macedonian, The spartans were well armed in traditional hoplite manner . The Macedonians employed a very long spear called SARISSA which was 9-21 feet and much longer than the Spartan Spear. Since Sarissa a long weapon was heavy, their sheilds were tied to their left hand (smaller sheilds) and both hands were used to carry the Sarissa, And when the action started, the sarissa armed Macedonian soldiers were able to break through the Spartain lines using their longer sarissa.

And you see why numbers are not the only thing. Remember what happened in islamic conquest of Sassanian empire.

War is not about numbers or technology. It is about a strategy and do you have tools to make that happen.

 

[manutdfan]

"SU-30 MK I is a superb dogfighter " is an absurd statement; in fact it is a dud so far as dogfighting is concerned. This plane even lags behind F-15!
Top ten dogfighters of 2015 were:-
1. SU-35
2. F-22/A Raptor
3. Eurofighter Typhoon
4.F/A-18 Super Hornet
5. Rafael
6. Saab Gripen
7. Mig-29
8. F-16
9. Chengdu J-10
10. F-15 Eagle

So your reply to an absurd statement is to compile an even more absurd list. So let me get this straight- Su-35 is the best dogfighter but the very aircraft from which it borrowed heavily is a dud You're aware of the fact that IAF Su-30MKIs have been kicking RAF and USAF's butt in 1 vs 1 engagements in exercises for the last decade or so, aren't you? Or is that news for you?

It is time DFI gave the downvote/dislike option so that kids don't get away with posting such :bs:

 

[Anupu]

I don't want debate on what rafale can do what it can't. Because nobody knows as you said.

No we know thats why they do exercises. And IAF did tests on the aircraft. They would have know all the features of the aircraft before choosing it.

Now take examples
Pakistan is not ISIS. china is dam serious rival with a huge airforce.
We need numbers to defend from them. In war china out number us 3:1. And we use to out number Pakistan 3:1 but now we have ratio in our favour 2:1 only. We need numbers to defend ourself we don't need a fake champion.

Your Argument doesn't make any sense buddy, you mean to say Israeli AF shouldn't have even tried to fight, let alone win. UK should have given up on Falklands.

Numbers don't win a wars. Never have in history. I gave you a scenario, you didn't try to solve it with given aircraft in IAF inventory, you could have tried to solve it without Rafale. And let me tell you, you could have. Wars are not fought with tech or numbers, but by strategy. But again you gave up the effort itself.

Rafale can't even bomb ISIS( which have no airforce) effectively.

The did bomb Libya with some serious anti-air. And MACE-XII was a simulated exercise in S-300 environment. Only Rafale could perform well. And militaries take their exercises very seriously.

We have Pakistan (serious airforce) and china ( huge and powerful airforce).

You are two focused on numbers if you saw where we have put our aircraft and how Indian s-300 battery would lock up Pak Airspace you won't be so confident about them.

In two front war scenario no 4th gen plane is effective. Only su 30 mki or f15 can do air superiority missions.
5th planes are required for two front war scenario.[\QUOTE]

An aircraft with AESA IRST and Meteor pulling +9/-3g can't do air superiority? And why is that? You are bieng too emotional buddy. It's not wrong to be wrong.

A to G roles can be done by su30 as we saw in syria after we maintain air superiority on the opponent.
A to A roles only American or russian fill the no 1 spot no European aircraft is their to come close.
Typhoon taste the dust in recent exercise.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/59...n-Sukhoi-jets-Indian-pilots-training-exercise

Rafale feel even worse because this plane is not designed to do air superiority missions.
Even if rafale manage to good against our su 30mki( which is close to impossible).
Even then with 126 rafales we can't face china in numbers.
So we don't need franch fries ( rafale).
Its india man we need a full course meal which you don't have

You don't realize their is no A2G role in military. Their is A2G capability and the roles can be either SEAD DEAD CAS etc. A2A of rafale is backed by the fact it has an AESA, advanced jammers, a maneuverable frame and great BVR missiles like Meteor and MICA. Your arguments are in summary based around.

• You think numbers matter too much.
• You refuse to accept the capability the aircraft has displayed.
• You don't think of weapons as tools to achieve goals and hence refuse to see the bigger picture that is strategy in real war, and what a weapon can bring to the table.
• You are being emotional about it.

Think rationally buddy and it's not bad to be wrong, you may privately think about it. Just try to solve the sample problem I gave you.

 

[harsh]

No. Instead, we need aircraft of greater quality and greater survivability - that is the rule. If you want to build numbers, you have to build numbers higher than your opponent. Against PLAAF that is impossible. So by default we have to concentrate on procuring aircraft of great qualitative advantage in the overall.

Anyway, PLAAF will not have such a great quantitative advantage against IAF in even a high-intensity war. There are 3 operational airfields on the Chinese side that can effectively engage IAF, we have more available airfields. Plus, PLAAF is never going to pit it's entire air force against India - if it does that, it will be totally defenceless in the Eastern Front, which is arguably a hotter and more contested region.



We have numbers.

~300+ heavy air-superiority fighters (Su-30MKI)
~200 medium multirole fighters (Rafale)
~200 light multirole fighters (LCA)

Plus, we will eventually have a minimum of ~250 FGFAs. But by the time the 5th generation numbers start filling, the older MKIs will begin their retirement process.



Rafale has successfully decimated every single target assigned of it - whether it was against ISIS, in Mali, Libya or anywhere else.



Oh, I wasn't aware of that reality. Thanks for reminding us all.



We are not procuring any 4th gen plane. Everything from LCA Mk-1A to Rafale and Su-30MKI are 4.5 gen and in successive tranches, each plane will receive the electronics capabilities of 5th generation aircraft, while some already have the performance criteria checked.



Oh and why is that?



5th gen planes are required as an eventuality. One front or two front does not matter, it has nothing to do with procurement. What do you think? When IAF gets FGFA, it will not use them unless it's a two-front war?



No Flanker is doing any A2G missions in Syria.

Only the Su-24 Fencer, Su-25 Frogfoot and Su-34 Fullback are. The Su-34 is really not as agile or as nimble as a Flanker, eventhough it shares visual similarities and the airframe - it's a dedicated long-range strike bomber.

Only Flankers operating in Syria are the Su-30SM and Su-35...who's job is to provide fighter escort for strike aircraft of the types mentioned above. As well as for local air-defence of the Khymeim AFB.



Rafale or Typhoon can easily beat any 4th/4.5 gen US air-superiority fighter in A2A missions. Only F-22 is the exception.



In Cope India 2004, Indian MiG-21s smashed the super-duper USAF F-15C Eagles in air-to-air combat.

....your point is?



Nonsense - there is not a single A2A flight regime, weapons or electronics capability that Rafale does not have that MKI or F-15 has.

Rafale is not a dedicated air-superiority fighter, that does not mean it cannot do A2A missions - that is simply absurd thinking and shows how immature you are. Most European countries, owing to their limited land and resources, has placed a greater emphasis on developing truly multi-role aircraft platforms rather than stick with the role-specific aircraft mentality of US and USSR.

But, in modern times it makes a lot more sense to pursue completely multirole aircraft rather than stick with role-specific models - as this saves a great deal of both purchase & maintenance cost, simpler logistics and greater availability rates. This is true especially for India.

That is why we are seeing the emergence of aircraft like F-35 - which are replacing both multirole fighters like F-16/F-18 for doing A2A missions as well as ground-attack aircraft like A-10 for doing A2G roles.



Oh please explain to me (if you actually CAN) why is it that Rafale with...

• AESA radar,
• top-grade sensor fusion,
• much more capable passive targeting systems,
• supercruising engines,
• advanced RCS-reduction features,
• greater combat payloads and
• integrated with modern weapon systems like MICA and Meteor...

....is unable to beat MKI ??



We don't plan to beat them with numbers. If you think we are, you're an idiot.



Actually you're right about the first part, totally wrong about the second. Yes, we need a full-course meal that's why we are going for an all-encompassing multirole aircraft like Rafale. If we wanted a single dish, we would have stuck with role-specific aircraft and the concept of starting an MRCA competition would never have arisen in the first place!

Please, harsh. Wake up and smell the smoke.

Yes gessler I know franch bottom is on fire and smoke is there but I am in no mood to smell that smoke.

Man you can't understand. Quality and quantity are different aspects. Both are important. You can not fill one with another. you must trade off between the two.
In this world everyone has its own standard and everyone is saying that he is the best.
Best is the one which works for you. Its just require the right mix.
First
Mig 21 beat f 15
Yes that news is right but I can't expect more from a brochure reading intellectual like you. You read the headline and forget to read the article.
In that particular excersice IAF used su 30 mki like AWACS. Its radar has 400 km range. So attacks are easy for mig 21 and defence is difficult for f15
F 15 was facing a legendary dog fighter with radar like mki. f15 lost just because of superior tactics of IAF.

In recent excersice with typhoon
Typhoon got beaten up in every department. Radar range manuevrability agility and of course tactics. Its like eagles vs pigeons

Rafale has no stealth it is just a 4th gen. If rafale has stealth then our lca is far more steathier than rafale.
We have more composite , y shape air duct and small size.

Rafale has small size advance radar. Which issmaller radar than our lca.
AESA even we have that in our LCA. so it is just standard equipment.

Rafale can take better payload I agree. But less thrust engine makes it less powerful. ( smallest in category).
Its like 500 cc royal Enfield which take more payload than 1000 cc yamaha R1. Later one has more powerful engine but can take less payload but R1 is fast racing bike and royal Enfield is like
Tez to chalti nahi chal hal laga k khet hi joot le isse.

Rafale AoA just limited to 30. May be you can claim more ( which is a lie)
But not even close to su 30.

Rafale doesn't have thrust vectoring.

Mki has armaments from all over world. We can integrate whatever we want. Even bharmos and astra tested first on su 30. So we can have all weapons on mki which are in our inventory
Rafale is just have usa and franch expensive weapons.

We integrated lightening pod on them if we want then we can integrate whatever pod we want.

We even have tarang radar a to g on mki developed by drdo.
So mki is flexible platform which can be developed as per our wish and can have capability whatever we like.
So mki is platform which is not limited to any country.
Rafale is just a aircraft with limited technology (only franch).

Rafale has spectra. But every aircraft has ccm. ( counter counter measures). Something is new is good but the edge is negated by its less t/r modules radar. Less thrust engine which generate less power for its power pack.
Typhoon is better air superiority fighter than rafale. Rafale is jack of all trade but master of none. Su 30 Is master of A to A and jack of A to G.
But more is it has a right mix for india. Less cost and bettet capability.
3 su 30 is always better than 1 rafale in any role.

 

[manutdfan]

There are different point of views. Like you say Rafales and Sukhhois are different planes yes (apples and oranges) but then both of them have the same role which is to dominate the air space and to take down enemy targets be it in air, on land or in/on the sea with the help of A2A, A2G and A2Sh weapons. Both are well armed for this purpose, but fortunately, we have Su-30 MKI in good numbers and with all the weapons that we need for these already in our inventory or are being developed and produced (like Brahmos NG)

One of the main problem with IAF is and was that its like a Fruit salad, there are too many plames in inventory. There are Jaguars, Mirage 2000, MiG-21, MiG-27, MiG-29, Hawk, Su-30 MKI, and many were ordered for some specific roles only but now with new developments some of these planes have become multi dimensional. For example Jaguar is a Deep strike plane, but during Kargil war, IAF was horrified to learn that it cannot be used to hit targets in Kargil. MiG-29 was purchased and used only as Air superiority plane, and after developments in Russia, now it is upgraded as an MRCA and its in a way able to use A2G weapons even in areas such as Kargil and will be able to do so quite successfully, and this is basically now the MiG-29 UPG. The much loved Su-30 MKI already been modified and has the capability to carry and launch A2G weapons and thus it will not only be an air dominance plane but it can be fitted to carry out A2G missions like Deep Strike, DEAD/SEAD missions without much of a hiccup.

Now many of the chair marshalls talk of different weight, We are not entering our planes in Olympics are we? Recently IAF has sent its planes for Red Flag 2016, we have sent our Su-30 MKI, what planes you think are against these planes? Only American F-15 because that is of the weight class and type as of Su-30 MKI or will it have different planes to face? In war, when facing a plane, no one looks at the weight class of the plane, For example If the PAF F-16 Block 52 are enroute to attack India, what would we answer them with, send the capable plane which is near and and intercept these planes (like LCA or Su-30 MKI ) or do we wait and then send say Mirage 2000 or MiG-29 because they are in the same class or type as F-15 Block 52.. Apples vs apples? Give it a thought. The weight class you mention is important if its a carrier based plane, because space on carrier is premium and hence heavier or bigger plane will mean less planes to carry.

And just for your argument about weight class, we already have MiG-29 and Mirage 2000 which belong to the "middle weight" that you insist on, so technically we have nice "HIMACHAL APPLES" so whats the point to add another apple say "FUJI APPLE" in the mix? So if you talk of the role, we already have MiG-29 and Su-30 MKI which fulfill the role for which Rafale is being sought, and for the weight class and role, we also have Mirage 2000 and MiG-29 UPG handling those roles, and since we already use these planes, we already have set their spare managements. So it makes better sense to order MiG-29 because its in same weight class and role as Rafale and also, we use about 100 of these planes already. What say? Now you can insist on rafale saying that well it has Mid wing, and so its more capable, or that it is designed to fly low and conduct deep penetration strikes. For these role you already have Jaguars and which are being upgraded.

The whim for Rafale in a way is like a LED TV set, you already have a nice latest 60 inch TV and you are happy with it, but then you want to buy another LED TV set which is way expensive simply because its made by SONY. I does not offer you a significant advantage over what you already have, just a different colour of Frame, but then the price of this TV is 5 times more. So IAF insists that it has to have that TV because it might lend a nice contrast to the room..

It is true, Rafale was designed to be MRCA from start, where as Su-30 MKI was developed as an air dominance plane, The reason was simple, that once you have air dominance, Any of your strike planes can conduct missions freely that is one school of thought. The other school of thought believes that Air dominance would not be achieved and hence it would be contested air space. Both schools of thought are true, Pakistan and China respectively. Russia realised it long time ago, and since they were undergoing defence cuts too (after dissolution of USSR) they felt that rather than redesigning the plane, it makes more sense to upgrade it with a good A2G pod and having A2G weapons certified on it and making it MRCA. Once the A2G weapons are dropped, the Su-30 MKI is the best air dominance and Dog fighter in South Asia. Even with A2G weapons still on the pylons, it is still one of the top A2A plane and can take care of itself.

If you see Russia, it is an evolution, earlier it relied more on many combat squadrons spread all over Russia, and then with cost cutting etc, they now use less squadrons but use more longer ranged planes, Thus one squadron of Si-30 SM does in a way replace 4 Squadrons of MiG-21 in the air space covered simply because Su-30 has a bigger combat Radius. Russia does not see itself as an air force that will wait for the enemy to attack and then send its planes to just intercept. Rather it sees itself that it will absorb the first attack and then go on offensive themselves. Indian doctrine is more defensive, where we hope to face the enemy on our grounds or contested grounds thus we want the enemy to throw punches and we shall face them and absorb them, we are not really having a doctrine which plans to have combat missions OVER ENEMY AIR SPACE only and hence limiting the action only over enemy space, Thus we have an aircraft which is developed for Air dominance (Su-30 MKI) but we do not really have an air dominance doctrine.

Rafale is designed as per requirement of European countries which are geographically small, (France might be similar in size to Rajasthan) and for them it makes sense to have small or medium range plane Having a long range plane does not really help them rather it would be adding to the cost.

Su-30 MKI is much more capable than Rafale in A2A and in an air combat, Su-30 MKI should shoot down Rafale 9 out of 10 times, and this has happened in Indo French exercise in recent past and when the Rafale fanboys are faced with this scenario they come up with the argument that its in different weight class. True that Su-30 MKI is heavy, but then does this weight hamper its ability to carry out ANY MISSION? This is the point to ask. Also any bird in IAF inventory can strike targets deep in pakistan but that is not the case with China, If India has to strike Chinese targets, it will need a plane that can carry heavy fuel and heavy load. IF Rafale is to strike say Guangzhou, (and lets say the chinese are caught unawares) then its possible with say 5 loaded external fuel tanks, what sort of war load will it be able to carry with 5 fuel tanks? Are we just planning to hit Guangzhou with A2A missiles? But on other hand, Su-30 MKI can carry out that mission with a very decent war load.

My view is that, if I am having a loaded Assault rifle, and enemy is just having a knife, it makes sense to shoot him or get him to surrender, it is stupidity to tell him "Well you can come with your assault rifle, I shall wait for you" this sounds good only in movies.

What Su-30 MKI gives india is an unfair advantage in terms of ability and that is very important in conflict, One should prefer not to go to war if you do not have an unfair ability. When two forces are balanced, the war will stretch on and it will hamper our development and also resources. But if you have an unfair advantage then you are in position to dominate the situation even wthout going to war.

Su-30 MKI was not a reactionary purchase, Rather it was well planned purchase to ensure that the threats from our neighbours are nullified, But during that time, the concept and importance of MRCA was lost to IAF and to most of the world, which were stressing more on Air superiority/Air dominance as most important role, and once that is achieve, even mediocre A2G planes can carry out strikes with impunity. Thus its only after the cost cutting became very important in most air forces the goverments saw the importance of moving away from specialised planes to MRCA that can fulfill many roles even during same mission,

On a personal level I want the Rafale but I don't need it (the classical need vs want conundrum). Basically the question is if the technological & geopolitical benefits are worth the billions that we're gonna spend on it.

I'm quite impressed by your analysis. However there are certain points that I would like to counter and couple of others that I agree with and would like to elaborate if I get the time