Know Your 'Rafale'

[Kunal Biswas]

A landmark for India and France

The declaration that the French Dassault Aviation was the lowest bidder for the estimated $18-billion, 126 multi-role combat aircraft deal is a landmark event both for India and France. In fact, it is a fitting culmination of the blossoming of ties between the two countries over the last two years during which French President Nicolas Sarkozy offered India transfer of nuclear technology when all other countries were creating obstacles.

This deal is a win-win situation for both countries. For the Indian Air Force, Dassault's Rafale multi-role jet fighters will boost its fighter squadron numbers, which had seen a drop in recent years. India had always enjoyed an edge over Pakistan in conventional air power, but with the drop in the IAF's fighter squadron power this edge was nearly lost. Now the IAF will regain its sharp edge vis-à-vis our neighbour. The interesting angle is the boost that this deal, when finalised, will give Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd because while the first 18 Rafale jets will be delivered in "fly-away" condition, meaning made in the Dassault factory and flown to India, the remaining 108 aircraft will be made at HAL's facility with Dassault transferring technology.

There is still, however, one contentious issue left to be completed and that is the final price that India will pay. Negotiations are expected to start soon. As of now Dassault is the lowest bidder, followed by EADS Eurofighter, a German-led European consortium which was the second-lowest bidder. The government of India has a benchmark price that it has worked out which is kept secret. The government will try to get the French nearer this benchmark; only then will the deal be completed. EADS is hoping that the French will not relent too much on price and that they, therefore, might still get the deal. But this might be just wishful thinking as for the French this deal is almost a do-or-die one.

The French defence minister is reported to have warned that the Rafale programme could be in danger if buyers do not materialise. The sale of the Rafale was hit because of its price. The aircraft has been in action in Afghanistan and Libya. The excellence of the fighter is not in doubt, it's the price. For the French it should not be too steep a price to have to stoop to conquer. President Sarkozy is aware of what this deal means to his image and his country. The contract is expected to be signed in the next five to six months and with French savoir faire there is no reason why it should not go through.

A landmark for India and France | Deccan Chronicle

 

[Kunal Biswas]

More air cover for the moment

Any major defence contract by the Indian government takes a tortuous, often controversial and always expensive path. It is almost a matter of relief that the medium multi-role combat aircraft contract is now in the homestretch, with the French Rafale fighter the only surviving candidate. The
sheer length of the five-year selection process has meant the contract's price tag has doubled from its original $10 billion. Given that the Indian Air Force has been steadily shrinking during that time, many would argue it barely matters which aircraft is chosen or how it fits into the country's defence strategy.

Unfortunately, the country cannot afford to be so flippant about its primary air fighting platform, a weapon the country will now have to depend on for at least the next two decades. More than almost any other weapon system, the choice of a primary fighter determines the trajectory of a country's future strategic relationships. Such multi-billion dollar deals are also the best opportunity for it to fill in the gaps of its own military industrial sector. Finally, the aircraft must also be chosen with an eye to future threats a nation may face. The choice of the Rafale as the preferred bidder comes up half-full when measured against these indices. France has given India the odd helping hand in the past. But it has no influence or power in the parts of the world that India must operate. It can never be a strategic partner in the fullest sense of the word, though it can partially compensate with the provision of technology. France has committed to a generous technology transfer. Such transfers are gifts that rapidly fade thanks to obsolescence. The real issue is whether India's fledgling military industrial sector will learn to develop its own innovation cycles and grasp systems integration through this purchase. This is only partly a French issue. The defence ministry's continued dependence on the state-owned Hindustan Aeronautics Limited and Defence Research and Development Organisation does not bode well for India extracting as much as it should from the aircraft.

Finally, the Rafale is by all accounts a world-class fourth generation fighter — though its failure to find even one foreign buyer over the past quarter of a century raises questions. However, the Rafale will be the backbone of the Indian Air Force even a decade from now. If China has, as it claims, a fifth generation prototype, then the Rafale will be a multi-billion dollar intermediate step rather than a giant leap to security. Defence deals are so shrouded in secrecy that understanding the logic of what was done and why is nearly impossible. That sort of transparency is the most important requirement of arms procurement — and one that this contract has only taken baby steps towards.

More air cover for the moment - Hindustan Times

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Decoding 'Rafale' – the beast India bet upon

Now that French aviation major Dassault's fighter jet 'Rafale' has emerged victorious in the dog-fight for India's multi-billion dollar contract for 126 new-generation fighter jets, here's a closer look at the beast we have bet on.

Undoubtedly, Rafale is one of the most modern fighter aircraft in the world today, having proved its mettle in Afghanistan and Libya.

Termed as an 'Ominrole' fighter, the Rafale is versatile and is designed to excel in all sorts of mission conditions as it can engage targets in air, ground or sea with equal agility and precision. India is buying single as well as twin-seat versions of the aircraft.

Fast with Extended Reach

The Rafale boasts of a top speed of Mach 1.8 (1.8 times the speed of sound) with a range of 3,700 km. Its operational altitude ceiling is 50,000 feet.

Rafale's closet competitor Eurofighter Typoon can achieve better speeds but has considerably less range.

The Workhouse

The Rafale is powered by two Snecma M88-2 engines which generate 50 kN (11,250 lbf) of dry thrust and 75 kN (16,900 lbf) with afterburners. The engines can rev-up to combat mode from idle mode in just three seconds.

Decoding 'Rafale' – the beast India bet upon
Superior Design

Rafale is very stable at supersonic speeds thanks to its 'Delta Wings' and closely coupled canards which maximise manoeuvrability, while withstanding 9 g or -3.6 g forces.

Canards increase agility of the aircraft during dog-fights and also reduce landing speed to 213 km/h, thereby allowing for the aircraft's operation from small runways – an important advantage in times of war.

The superior airframe is made up of composite materials (70%) thereby ensuring higher tensile strength, besides leading to a 40% increase in the max take-off weight to empty weight ratio compared with traditional airframes built of aluminium and titanium.

Although the Rafale doesn't boast of a full-aspect stealth capability but comes very close owing to its segregated patterns on the trailing edges of the wings and canards.

The Flight Control System (FCS) of the Rafale is an advanced digital "Fly-by-Wire" system which provides for longitudinal stability. In Fly-by-Wire system, there is no mechanical control between the flight control and the pilot control system.

Rafale's FCS has four back-ups (three digital channels and one separately designed analog channel), with no mechanical back-up to ensure that the common flow remains flawless - Dassault Aviation is considered a master in Fly-by-Wire technology with one million flight hours without a single accident caused by the FCS.

Radar and Sensors

The Rafale is outfitted with the Thales RBE2 passive multi-mode radar. The system is designed to ensure very high levels of situational awareness through the earlier detection and tracking of multiple targets in, or out of, the search domain, bringing the ultimate advantage in air combat.

The Rafale is immune to Radar jamming and comes loaded with 3D capability which helps it zero-down on land as well as targets in sea.

Moreover, the front-sector electro-optical system is completely integrated to ensure operation both in the visible and infrared wavelengths.

More importantly, Rafale comes with an electronic survival system named "SPECTRA", which protects the aircraft against airborne and ground threats.


The Armoury

The Rafale can carry following weapons:

1. MICA air-to-air 'beyond visual range' (BVR) missiles

2. AASM modular, rocket-boosted air-to-ground precision guided weapon series with guidance kit

3. SCALP long-range stand-off missile

4. AM39 EXOCET anti-ship missile

5. Laser-guided bombs

6. Unguided bombs

7. NEXTER 30M791 30 mm cannon that fires 2500 rounds/min

8. Upcoming - METEOR long-range air-to-air missile

Decoding 'Rafale' – the beast India bet upon

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Beyond the Rafale deal

India's decision to select Dassault Aviation of France to supply 126 Rafale multi-role fighters caps a process that began in 2007 to replace the Indian Air Force's ageing MiG-21s and augment its fleet of Sukhoi 30MKIs. Given the size of the contract — which, at upwards of $10 billion, is the largest defence deal struck by India — the acquisition of the Medium Multi-Role Combat Aircraft (MMRCA) was viewed in many quarters as a purchase in which political and strategic considerations would, or even should, play a role. Such a view was bolstered by the fact that each of the six competing aircraft originally short-listed had a lot to offer, the differences between them lying more along the perimeter than in the core. That technical and commercial factors prevailed over extra-contractual considerations became evident when the competition, following a slew of technical tests, was narrowed to two — the Rafale and the Typhoon, produced by a consortium of four European countries. Clearly, the selection process was uninfluenced by the United States administration, which had lobbied hard in favour of Boeing's F/A-18 and Lockheed Martin's F-16, suggesting that the acquisition of either was an important element in forging a closer strategic relationship. The rejection of the U.S.-manufactured aircraft underlined that we had, as one commentator wryly but wrongly noted, "settled for a plane, not a relationship."

At the same time, it would be naïve to assume that arms purchases, particularly big ticket ones by a large nation such as India, are free from strategic implications or considerations. Indeed, for India, the Rafale acquisition widens its strategic options in a world where multi-polarity is a fact of life. At a more immediate level, the decision to buy the fighters, which has been greeted with unabashed glee in Paris, could provide the leverage for India to hold France to its promise of increasing cooperation across a whole range of areas, but especially in the nuclear and defence fields, including the greater sharing of technology and expertise. Of particular interest to New Delhi, is the question of enrichment and reprocessing (ENR) equipment transfers. The Nuclear Suppliers Group reneged on its 2008 bargain with India last year by banning the sale of ENR items but France — a key member of the nuclear cartel — has said it will not be bound by the new restrictions. The French must now be held to their word. As for the IAF, the acquisition of the Rafales may stem, in the near- or medium-term, the problem of the reducing number of squadrons. However, the IAF's long-term combat aircraft requirements will need to be met by developing the promised fifth-generation fighter in cooperation with Russia and overcoming the problems that have delayed the induction of the Tejas Light Combat Aircraft.

The Hindu : Opinion / Editorial : Beyond the Rafale deal

 

[JayATL]

Precisely, US does not share latest adds on while France does. US exports 24 Super Boogers while France exports 200 Rafale... see what you get.

Firstly calling a hornet as a supe booger is childish , immature and stupid. Secondly, claiming from what I read as your claim above, that having an inferior product with TOT vs. having a superior product w/o TOT, that can blow your inferior product to smithereens is better - is assanine. And for your information the sum total of hornet sales is 10x of your Rafael. Lastly, I defy any intelligent person that would say that, other than Mig 35, any aircraft in India's tender was not going to give them the edge in your region vs. an old block, restricted heavily F16 or that tin cup, nobody has a clue about, Old Mig copies J10, J17 .

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Tom Clancy's HAWX Introduction

 

[Kunal Biswas]

I'm happy with their unhappiness with India's decision. It in a way is proving India's comeback.

DISGUSTING TO SAY THE LEAST:


We give India £1bn in aid, THEY snub the UK and give France a £13bn jet contract.

India has snubbed British industry and awarded a £13billion deal to supply fighter jets to France.

The contract was lost despite Government claims that the UK's £1billion aid package to India would help secure the order.

Yesterday's decision also handed a propaganda coup to French President Nicolas Sarkozy, who sneeringly claimed on Monday that Britain 'has no industry'.

International Development Secretary Andrew Mitchell said in December that Britain's controversial foreign aid programme was partly designed to win the bid.

Britain is sending £280million to India for each of the next four years, even though the country has more billionaires than Britain and has its own space programme.

The aid package is 15 times larger than the £18million France sent to India in 2009.

Asked to justify Indian aid last year, Mr Mitchell said: 'It's a very important relationship. The focus is also about seeking to sell Typhoon.'

The decision is also a setback for David Cameron, who visited India in 2010 with six Cabinet ministers and around 60 businessmen to try to establish Britain as the 'partner of choice' for India.

Today during Prime Minister's Questions in the House of Commons, Mr Cameron said he was 'disappointed' by the decision.

He said: 'We don't expect any job losses stemming from this decision and it does not rule out the Typhoon for India.'

He insisted BAE Systems was still in the hunt for the contract, despite losing the first round of bidding.

Yesterday, Indian officials said Dassault emerged in front because the Rafale jet was 'much cheaper unit-wise' than the Eurofighter.

It was reported today that Dassault slashed its price demands to ensure the deal was done.

One Indian defence ministry source said: 'The Indian air force, which is well-equipped with French fighters, is favouring the French.' The Rafale jets will replace India's ageing fleet of Russian MiGs.

The French company will now enter exclusive talks with the Indians to finalise the deal, which is expected to be signed in March. The Typhoon is built by BAE Systems and a consortium of German and Spanish branches of European aerospace giant EADS and Italy's Finmeccanica.

Last night Tory MP Peter Bone questioned the purpose of sending British aid to India at a time when cuts are being made at home. 'It just goes to show that it's a myth that by Britain becoming an aid superpower and doling billions of pounds out to countries like this exerts any influence whatsoever on the decisions made by those governments when purchasing equipment.

'We need to slash the international development money and invest the billions saved to help hard-pressed British families.'

The Unite union last night expressed fears that the loss of the deal could threaten 4,500 jobs at BAE Systems' Samlesbury base in Lancashire, where key components of the Typhoon are made, and Warton Aerodrome near Preston, where the aircraft is assembled.

Government officials and BAE Systems insisted that they were not completely eliminated from the process and could still land the deal if India's talks with Dassault collapse.

A spokesman for UK Trade and Investments, the branch of the Government that promotes trade deals overseas, said: 'This does not rule out Typhoon for India.

Read more: France swoops to rob UK of £13bn Indian jet contract | Mail Online




All these reactions are not good for EF-2000 in India, Even for next 80 fighters..

 

[KS]

.... Secondly, claiming from what I read as your claim above, that having an inferior product with TOT vs. having a superior product w/o TOT, that can blow your inferior product to smithereens is better - is asinine. ........

....... Lastly, I defy any intelligent person that would say that, other than Mig 35, any aircraft in India's tender was going to give them the edge in your region vs. an old block, .

Your second point contradicts your last point,

As you yourselves have agreed any fighter other than the Mig would give us the edge in the region. So tell me why would we go for a fighter without ToT,one that is sanction prone and various strings attached when even the other fighter can give us the edge along with coming with ToT and no strings attached.

I think you are too confused to argue coherently,

 

[JayATL]

DISGUSTING TO SAY THE LEAST:


We give India £1bn in aid, THEY snub the UK and give France a £13bn jet contract.



Read more: France swoops to rob UK of £13bn Indian jet contract | Mail Online




All these reactions are not good for EF-2000 in India, Even for next 80 fighters..

Question: if India sent its taxpayer money as aid to Sri lanka or any country that the LCA was a contender, would you not be pissed too if you lost? if they are indeed giving India 1 billion in aid spread over 4 years, why can't you understand why they are pissed?

 

[nitesh]

Question: if India sent its taxpayer money as aid to Sri lanka or any country that the LCA was a contender, would you not be pissed too if you lost? if they are indeed giving India 1 billion in aid spread over 4 years, why can't you understand why they are pissed?

Boss you don't give aid to some country for winning business, this is simple logic.

 

[KS]

Question: if India sent its taxpayer money as aid to Sri lanka or any country that the LCA was a contender, would you not be pissed too if you lost? if they are indeed giving India 1 billion in aid spread over 4 years, why can't you understand why they are pissed?

We would not be if we had looted Lanka bone dry for 200 years and was in a way responsible for the poverty.

 

[JayATL]

Your second point contradicts your last point,

As you yourselves have agreed any fighter other than the Mig would give us the edge in the region. So tell me why would we go for a fighter without ToT,one that is sanction prone and various strings attached when even the other fighter can give us the edge along with coming with ToT and no strings attached.

I think you are too confused to argue coherently,

I'm too smart for you grasshopper . If any aircraft would give the edge as I have claimed then WHY Pay 2 x to get Tot per aircraft is the question. 1 x is way above price and stupid to pay out let alone 2x. If your contract is 20 billion dollars, you just spent 10 billon dollars more to get TOT on a 4 th gen aircraft that would be near obsolute in slightly over a decade. Your FGFA gives you the TOT you want already.

You know what the Funny part of it is? American congress debated and agreed that we would have given more TOT had we been down selected.

Lastly, prone to what sanction? Not onebloody poster including you has answered me with one single example , I have challenged you and others to several times, to show me one scenario where India maybe sanctioned.

This prone to sanction is hogwash BS. Only way one will be sanctioned is within 3 scenarios I have stated several times here. None of which applies to India.

 

[JayATL]

We would not be if we had looted Lanka bone dry for 200 years and was in a way responsible for the poverty.

You mean vs. funding the LTTE.

 

[Indianboy]

All these reactions are not good for EF-2000 in India, Even for next 80 fighters..[/QUOTE]

Do you wish to see EFT in India???

I don't know but I feel India should take advantage of this importance it is being given. In long term if not now

 

[JayATL]

Boss you don't give aid to some country for winning business, this is simple logic.

No you don't - you are absolutely right. But are you willing for your tax dollars to go to help Pakistan, if it's ISI is sending over terrorist ( an extreme example but point made hopefully the same). They are pissed just like I am about sending my tax dollars to Pakistan .

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Question: if India sent its taxpayer money as aid to Sri lanka or any country that the LCA was a contender, would you not be pissed too if you lost? if they are indeed giving India 1 billion in aid spread over 4 years, why can't you understand why they are pissed?

Certainly No..
Humanetrain aid for poor and infrastructural development, The aid have nothing to do with Military deals, And if so they did for this purpose its lame..

 

[SpArK]

the brasil guy is coming........... to ask y u Rafale???


Brazil minister heads India to improve defence ties - Brahmand.com

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Do you wish to see EFT in India???

I don't know but I feel India should take advantage of this importance it is being given. In long term if not now

What i said, EF is going to participate in next rounds for 80 fighters, This kind of reaction only downs EF image in India..

If they did not succeed, Look at what they lack in and try to improve that rather being a cry baby

 

[JayATL]

Certainly No..
Humanetrain aid for poor and infrastructural development, The aid have nothing to do with Military deals, And if so they did for this purpose its lame..

I'll remember your post next time I see you biatch about Sri lanka getting close to the Chinese when India is giving them so much of aid dollars. I'll remember your post the next time if India gets sidestepped by afghans to side with the Pakistanis after its 2 billion plus aid.

 

[nitesh]

No you don't - you are absolutely right. But are you willing for your tax dollars to go to help Pakistan, if it's ISI is sending over terrorist ( an extreme example but point made hopefully the same). They are pissed just like I am about sending my tax dollars to Pakistan .

Jay, you are arguing unnecessarily, there is no relation between aid and military deals. If people are trying to find a relation between the two, they are more then welcome to cancel all the aids.

If I bring the logic that we have already sent lot of aid to UK, as we saved the Corus and JLR from bankrutcy, then what will be the reaction?