Know Your 'Rafale'

[sasum]

I also support the idea of having MIg 29 or MIg 35 aircraft yet the decision rest on hands of govt. I some how feel that NDA govt is more inclined toward USA then Russia

Modi and Putin do not hit off well. Once Putin wondered, "How can a yoga enthusiast have 56" tummy !" Modi didn't take it sportingly.

 

[sasum]

Flankers & Fulcrums have inferior sensors and avionics than westetn jets; they have also poorer engines, but Russians always ready to offer custom-made versions as per client requirement. They are also cheaper. Russians also don't choke supply of spares on political grounds unlike NATO countries.

 

[gadeshi]

Flankers & Fulcrums have inferior sensors and avionics than westetn jets; they have also poorer engines, but Russians always ready to offer custom-made versions as per client requirement. They are also cheaper. Russians also don't choke supply of spares on political grounds unlike NATO countries.

It depends on what version are we talking about.
117S is superior to ANY western engine of its class by any parameter chosen.
This is also true for Russian radars and sensors of the last decade.

Отправлено с моего XT1080 через Tapatalk

 

[manutdfan]

Flankers & Fulcrums have inferior sensors and avionics than westetn jets; they have also poorer engines, but Russians always ready to offer custom-made versions as per client requirement. They are also cheaper. Russians also don't choke supply of spares on political grounds unlike NATO countries.

hence they're half the price and everybody thinks they are economical. but they are also built like a tank and can endure rough conditions for decades.

 

[BON PLAN]

You are pulling the leg..
We have discussed your this particular shit about T-72 many times.
Iraq was attacked by all the NATO forces many to one. It's very hard to withstand such a numbers advantage even with the most recent tech.
But Iraq had T-72A (old, even without ERA), without targetting systems and ordnance that has came with T-72B (not speaking about T-72B3 which are in fact a new tanks on the old platform).
The same is for MiG-29. MiG-29 has arrived too late to participate in fightings on Middle east. But its predecessor MiG-23MLD has scored 4 F-15 and 2 F-4 in Lebanon war (officially confirmed by MD/Boeing) without loss from their side. Half of those victories were scored with R-24R/T MRAAMs.
As for MiG-29 in Yugoslavia, the same numbers advantage of NATO, yugoslavian AF are crippled with sanctions and internal corruption, Yugoslavs are outnumbered and outgunned. They are blind in NATO ECM field while NATO forces have AWACS behind them.

If you will imagine France in the same conditions... All your country have sustained 28 days against Hitler having the same military power. It is much less than only one house in Stalingrad - a House of Pavlov.
If France would be outnumbered and outgunned like Yugoslavs, it will surrender in no time.



Отправлено с моего XT1080 через Tapatalk

What F15 (israelis? USAF? SA?) shoot down by Mig23 ? Never read or heard such history.

This is what I found in Wikipedia : "En 2011, aucun F-15 n'avait été perdu en combat aérien contre un adversaire, et les exemplaires produits avaient abattu entre 101 et 103 avions ennemis. Deux furent abattus par la DCA Irakienne durant la guerre du Golfe de 1991, un troisième le fut en Irak en 2003, plusieurs furent perdus accidentellement en opérations en Afghanistan, et un F-15E fut perdu en Libye en 2011."
"In 2011, no F-15 had been lost in air combat against an opponent, and they had killed between 101 and 103 enemy aircraft. Two were shot down by Iraqi flak during the Gulf War of 1991, a third was in Iraq in 2003 , many were accidentally lost in operations in Afghanistan, and an F-15E was lost in Libya in 2011."

 

[BON PLAN]

If you will imagine France in the same conditions... All your country have sustained 28 days against Hitler having the same military power. It is much less than only one house in Stalingrad - a House of Pavlov.
If France would be outnumbered and outgunned like Yugoslavs, it will surrender in no time.

Fortunately for You, and for US, German begun Barbarossa with 3 to 4 weeks late due to the help they send to Italy troops in Greece. These 3 to 4 weeks lack at the end, just before winter, to take Moscow. And at those time, who take Moscow take Russia, because it was the great nood of train rails.

You were lucky.

But once again thanks for the help to beat 3rd Reich.

 

[gadeshi]

What F15 (israelis? USAF? SA?) shoot down by Mig23 ? Never read or heard such history.

This is what I found in Wikipedia : "En 2011, aucun F-15 n'avait été perdu en combat aérien contre un adversaire, et les exemplaires produits avaient abattu entre 101 et 103 avions ennemis. Deux furent abattus par la DCA Irakienne durant la guerre du Golfe de 1991, un troisième le fut en Irak en 2003, plusieurs furent perdus accidentellement en opérations en Afghanistan, et un F-15E fut perdu en Libye en 2011."
"In 2011, no F-15 had been lost in air combat against an opponent, and they had killed between 101 and 103 enemy aircraft. Two were shot down by Iraqi flak during the Gulf War of 1991, a third was in Iraq in 2003 , many were accidentally lost in operations in Afghanistan, and an F-15E was lost in Libya in 2011."

As I've sayd many times about you, you'd better read than write
MiG-23MLs have shot down 4 Israeli F-15A and 2 F-4E which was confirmed by MD.

 

[BON PLAN]

Soviet people fought for each meter of their land

And it they don't want to fought, politic officiers were behind to shoot them in the back.

 

[gadeshi]

Fortunately for You, and for US, German begun Barbarossa with 3 to 4 weeks late due to the help they send to Italy troops in Greece. These 3 to 4 weeks lack at the end, just before winter, to take Moscow. And at those time, who take Moscow take Russia, because it was the great nood of train rails.
You were lucky.
But once again thanks for the help to beat 3rd Reich.

As I've said many times - you know nothing and should learn alot.
Grece and Italy were 1/100 by the scale from Barbarossa. If Germans would never go there and concentrate on USSR instead, itd changed nothing.

 

[BON PLAN]

@ Bon Plan if you want to bring a discussion, please come with a proper source. If you don't know the whole story, better don't post it.

What are you speaking about? what story? ask and I will answer.

 

[gadeshi]

And it they don't want to fought, politic officiers were behind to shoot them in the back.

This is western myth as well.
Those interdiction squads were "supporting" detention (disciplinary) battalions only.

 

[BON PLAN]

Just 4 bytes? And you got away with it!!
I have checked Bayren-Chemie's website. From Meteor description, it seems to be a regular turbojet mounted inside a Ramjet
View attachment 8805
much like SR-71. No where the range is mentioned. The pdf files said to contain data-sheet have .null ext and invalid. But if combusting turbo-jet and ramjet together, with Ramjet as after-burner [fig. (b)] enhances range, is claimed, it will be misleading.

Totally BS. The Meteor stato is a powder one. No fuel injection, no turbo jet inside (do you imagine ttere is enough space in a Meteor to put inside a stato a turbo jet ???).

http://www.bayern-chemie.com/ramjet.htm

 

[BON PLAN]

117S is superior to ANY western engine of its class by any parameter chosen.

Just one problem : it runs for only 50 hours.... LOL.

 

[gadeshi]

Just one problem : it runs for only 50 hours.... LOL.

It runs 4000 hours with 1000 hours inter-repair (before overhaul) according to UAC website.
You are too easy with telling unconfirmed and totally stupid shit.
Are you a mazochist?
Do you really like other people to point your nose into your own shit time by time? :biggrin2:

 

[gadeshi]

Totally BS. The Meteor stato is a powder one. No fuel injection, no turbo jet inside (do you imagine ttere is enough space in a Meteor to put inside a stato a turbo jet ???).
http://www.bayern-chemie.com/ramjet.htm

This is a rare case in which I agree with you.

 

[Bahamut]

Flankers & Fulcrums have inferior sensors and avionics than westetn jets; they have also poorer engines, but Russians always ready to offer custom-made versions as per client requirement. They are also cheaper. Russians also don't choke supply of spares on political grounds unlike NATO countries.

Most are open platform,we can add avionic and sensor of foreign origin but now the gap is more or less closed

 

[Flame Thrower]

What are you speaking about? what story? ask and I will answer.

Go read my post #3820 page 191, read it again. I replied back because of your rants....

And then advised #3822. Tagged you in both the posts. I know you've read both posts didn't you???? but you choose to reply to second post.......

If you are able to counter any argument with trust worthy sources, please do argue in the forum. But don't post baseless statements ex. your post #3802

 

[sasum]

Totally BS. The Meteor stato is a powder one. No fuel injection, no turbo jet inside (do you imagine ttere is enough space in a Meteor to put inside a stato a turbo jet ???).

http://www.bayern-chemie.com/ramjet.htm

Well, even if it has pyrolant combustor, the fact remains its exhaust gas is used as ram air in the ramjet. How can it triple the range? Ramjet will stop working once the pyrolant burns out. Of course there is small air inlet duct, but that cannot sustain ram propulsion.

 

[smestarz]

Well, if you look at Operation Barbarossa first weeks , Red Army has not done much better than French Army. Terrible losses, hundred of thousands of prisoners. What saved you is the same thing that saved you in 1812 : distances, weather, mud , impossibility to sustain the logistic chain.

It depends how you want to believe in history. When WW2 started, France had the best tank, with excellent armour and fire power, its name was Char B1 BIS I think. It was much superior to the tanks Germans had fielded, the best one being Panzer III with 50 mm gun.
Where France lost was tactically. The Germans fooled the French. The French depended on the Maginot line to protect themselves from the Germans, the Germans simply got behind these defences when they took over the Fort Ebem Emael with less than 100 Fallschrimjaegers (Parachutists) Thus the entire fort works of maginot line was undermined by just one German move into Belgium. Second point where France was lost is them not knowing how to use tanks. The french diluted their tank forces by putting them merely as Infantry support weapons, where the tanks are supposed to go with the infantry as in Second world war and to take down enemy strong points. The Germans massed their armour and used it as Steel Spearhead to drive through French forces, The German Tank tactics were much superior. The French were simply out thought. Thirdly France was still in that WW1 mindset where they build Trenches and the Germans will automatically keep fighting against the forces in these trenches. The Germans simply by passed these trenches and attacked the weaker rear positions. The Trenches and bunkers were left to the likes of Stukas and heavy field guns to take down over period of time. Once the forces in the trenches were without supplies or Command, they would surrender,

Against Russia the Germans used the same tactics successfully, but where germans failed was that the Russians were retreating more faster than Germans were advancing, This created a big problem of supplies which had to be brought from rear and hence the supplies became vulnerable. Further another mistake Germans made was divide their foces, they had two targets which they could take on, Caucus oil fields in south and Moscow in the north. Germans could take one at the time. but then German leadership thought that they could take both. This stretched the german forces very thin, all the Russians did was attack these thinned German forces with massed tanks. Here the Germans had better tanks, but the Russians took them down using numbers. Do remember this example if you talk about 36 Rafales vs say 100 Tejas, even numbers is a quality.

This whole GlobalSecurityOrg link is just gross estimates . It is unverifiable. There is nothing to debate ! What is GlobalSecurityOrg anyway ?!
Not my fault if Dassault has not released a figure for RCS. But I am not going to accept figures from some guys based in Washington DC claiming Rafale RCS higher than Typhoon.

If you cannot accept the numbers, thats fine, as I said those can be debated, but then Rafale fanboys coming up with BS numbers without any actual source to back up.. dont expect my sympathies. And I wont be able to take the statement of the ex-Dassault VP at its face value.

 

[smestarz]

Hello fellow utd fan, Mourinho appointed, no new player yet, where do we see ourselves next season?
I think the squad is good but needs together more.
Dont worry, Mata would be staying, He had to take down Mata to put in the likes of Hazard, Oscar and Willian into the mix.

Do give me time to reply to your post, and I shall be replying in parts if its ok, But nice to see a big post

Hey @smestarz finally got the time to reply to your post. let's get on with it.


weight defines range, payload, endurance etc. so depending upon the budget and operational requirements the force has to decide what optimum mixture to field isn't it? of course it's not the Olympics. it's always a hi-lo mix not only due to budget constraints but also to maintain an element of surprise. what if we fielded an entire fleet of Su-30MKIs; only to discover too late that the enemy has discovered a fatal flaw in the jet or our tactics and it's too late to change? and that's why we have dissimilar air combat training, duh?
conventionally medium weight should refer to single engine fighters such as F-16/ Mirage 2000/ Gripen/ Chengdu J-10/ JF-17 in the purest sense but with twin engine jets like F-18/ MiG-29/ Rafale/ Eurofighter the definition gets blurred. twin engine jets regardless of their weight class are inherently more expensive & comparatively difficult to operate and maintain. hence the need for a lightweight fighter vis-a-vis Tejas that fulfills the specified roles without burning a hole in the pocket.


I had floated a proposal on another thread regarding this issue some time back. my proposal is a bit more radical. there are 500 MiG-29 in storage around the world. 300 in Russia alone. besides India possesses extensive MiG-29 exclusive repair & overhaul (RoH) facilities not mention that we possess the licence too for producing the Klimov RD-33 series 3 engines domestically. so why not procure these 2nd hand MiG-29 fighters on the cheap and upgrade them by ourselves? it would be an inexpensive solution in the shortest possible time frame to plug the gaps.
before the Su-30MKI, the MiG-29 was IAF's frontline fighter to counter the PAF F-16. after the collapse of the Soviet Union the IAF managed to keep it's MiG-29 fleet's readiness rate at 77-79% by itself inspite of a massive shortage of spares and maintenance personnel which had severely hampered our MiG-21 fleet and look what it turned them into- flying coffins!
here's a link to my post where i've explained in quite some detail-
http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/...-medium-combat-jets.69156/page-4#post-1081252


LoL! Very well put and it is this statement of yours that convinced me to drop the idea of dreaming about the Rafale besides the possible corruption angle. Earlier it was 50-50. this made it 55-45.


i agree that if we were to go up against China Su-30s would be the only platform to give us an offensive edge. Rafale would be a defensive weapon at best with precision strike capability at medium ranges. in BVR Su-30 smashes the Rafale. In WVR it's more of a 50/50 scenario. coz it ultimately boils down to pilot skill and tactics. Su-30 is a pure kinetic fighter and exceptional at close-in turn battles too. Rafale is in itself a nimble dogfighter and much better than its predecessor Mirage 2000 at it. so i'll call it a draw in WVR.

however your understanding of Russia's air combat philosophy and the reasons behind the development of the Su-30 are somewhat misplaced.
the Su-30 was an export variant of the Su-27 trainer version derived from the base Su-27 fighter which was itself a reactionary counter to the American F-15 & F-14 programs. Funny thing is the F-15 was itself a reactionary development to the MiG-25 which was later replaced by the MiG-31.
i would not discuss Russian air combat philosophy now as it doesn't seem relevant.

you've raised a very valid point of strike vs air superiority. my take is very similar to yours. you can turn a dogfighter into a strike aircraft but the reverse is impossible. hence my immense dislike for the F-35.


Very well put. you have now increased the ratio to 60-40 in Su-30MKI's favour.


please check your facts dear almighty armchair general before making such a bold statement and embarking on another flawed history lesson.
do you seriously think that our country which prides itself on its non-violent principles and was the founder of the non-aligned movement would ever have the guts to escalate matters with its neighbors by inducting weapons of leading edge tech? well history proves that our divine leaders never had the balls to do so. since independence our defense doctrine has always been a sorry, confused mixture of defensive offensive posturing. and that reflects in our weapons procurement policy. the IAF and the Army have always lagged behind Pakistan technologically till the 1990s and behind China from 1990s onwards. It's only in the late 90's that we started exercising our increasing financial muscle post the 1991 economic liberalisation.
Examples-
1) PAF inducted the F-104 Starfighter in 1961. IAF got it's equivalent the MiG-21 in 1964.
2) USA agreed to export F-16s to Pakistan in 1980 with deliveries commencing in 1982 till 1987. India which was baffled by the introduction of such an advanced aircraft in the sub-continent responded by procuring not one but 3 fighters- MiG-23MF in 1981-82, Mirage 2000 in 1985-86 and MiG-29 from 1987-90. so if that's not reactionary then it's definitely not pioneering.
3) China negotiated the acquisition of Su-27SK in 1991 with deliveries starting from 1992 and continuing till 1997. In 1995 it negotiated an agreement for the licensed production of 200+ fighters. Production of the clone Shenyang J-11 commenced in 1997 and has continued ever since. Moreover the deal for Su-30MKK was negotiated from 1996-98 with deliveries commencing in 2000.
meanwhile our divine leaders woke up to the challenge possessed by the new look PLAAF only in 1994 with the deal for 50 Su-30MK (base variant) signed in 1996 and deliveries commencing in 1998. the final configuration for the Su-30MKI was locked in only by late Dec 2000 with deliveries commencing from 2004.
if you are paying close attention to the timeline by the time IAF received its first Su-30MKI in 2004 the PLAAF already had in its inventory some 200+ odd mixture of Su-27, Su-30MKK & J-11s.
So how could you possibly even say that the Su-30MKI was not a reactionary purchase? definitely well planned & thought out but certainly not the first one to do so.
4) and here's the simplest and most obvious of them all- China became a nuclear power in 1964 and India in 1974. and that too because of the humiliating ass kicking that the Chinese gave us in 1962 which was still fresh in our memories back then.
I think I have illustrated enough as to why the Indian leadership has a reactionary mentality and not the visionary/pioneering one.

i would like to take up the Rafale cost benefit analysis in another post as this one's getting too lengthy.
Cheers @smestarz