Know Your 'Rafale'

BON PLAN

-*-
Contributor
Joined
Dec 24, 2015
Messages
6,494
Likes
7,197
Country flag
French which are trying to promote an accident to their own advantage to push the sales of 3rd Gen scrap called Mirage 2000
1) In the other side, if a F16 was shooting down a M2000, what a story you have made....
2) The M2000 is so scap that You, indians, have decided to upgrade it so as to keep this scrap some more years. Amusing you are, aren't you?
 

Tactical Frog

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 31, 2016
Messages
1,542
Likes
2,279
Country flag
Do not quote such obscure source. Tomorrow you may quote @BON PLAN 's posts as source material. Fact is, the 2 non-descript planes - Ouragan and Mystere were used just once, for minor roles, during capture of Portuguese administered Goa. Indian Authority encountered very little resistance. The 3 real wars India fought against Pak were with the help of Folland Gnat (later upgraded as Ajeet), Hunter, Vampire - all British and SU-7 and Mig-21. Out of these Gnat and Mig-21 stood out. I am sure nobody heard about Ouragan & Mystere including Trappier..that is why, Dassault Chief (wrongly) mentioned only Mirage. Kargil was not a full-fledged war, it was a border skirmish. IAF bombed India's own territory to flush out Pakis. Neither Army nor Air Force crossed LoC.
http://indianairforce.nic.in/show_page.php?pg_id=98

I hope this will be accepted as a source ;) it says that the Mystere Iv performed honourably during the 1965 war , though not in the lead role as Gnats and Hunters.
 
Last edited:

sasum

Atheist but not Communists.
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2016
Messages
1,435
Likes
761
To my mind Mirage 2000's FBW Avionics was a tipping point in favour of Indian pilots. Flight control switches on HOTAS make controlling the aircraft easier. Sturdier, older hydraulic-mechanical controls required considerable hand-feet coordination. Novice Indian pilots found maneuvering legacy aircrafts like Mig-21, overwhelming. No wonder most of the crashes happened due to pilot-error than hardware failure. Another aspect that Dassult harped on is Mirage's suitability to be jury-rigged to carry nuclear bombs. This was a clever psychological ploy. In early 80s, India mastered the atom bomb, but not missile technology owing to MTCR. Thus both IAF & MoD were suitably impressed by this facility.
Take away these two factors, and Mirage looks pretty ordinary when pitted against Mig-29.
 

manutdfan

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2015
Messages
108
Likes
106
1) In the other side, if a F16 was shooting down a M2000, what a story you have made....
2) The M2000 is so scap that You, indians, have decided to upgrade it so as to keep this scrap some more years. Amusing you are, aren't you?
No hard feelings against the Mirage 2000 dude. It has been the pride of the IAF for the past 3 decades. It single-handedly turned the tide in the '99 Kargil war. It's just that in a dogfight it can't stand up to the MiG-29. Compare the often cited comparison parameters- climb/acceleration, thrust/weight ratio, roll performance, instantaneous/sustained turn rate the MiG-29 beats the Mirage 2000.

As mentioned by the previous post #3946 its modern avionics, radar, BVR capability though limited was much still better than earlier Fulcrum models, range, payload and nuclear capability were what primarily appealed to the IAF in the 1980s.

On the contrary the earlier MiG-29 A/B variants which IAF operates to date sported avionics which were at best only an average improvement over the MiG-21 and had poor range due to its terrible fuel capacity. They were point defense fighters at best. Basically the IAF had a 2 pronged strategy to counter the PAF F-16 in 80's till mid 90's- Mirage 2000 at BVR whereas MiG-29 for WVR and the merge.

But IAF's MiG-29 fleet has been undergoing incremental upgrades since the mid 90's and the present day MiG-29UPG is probably among the best A2A platform in the Asia if not the world. One also cannot ignore the fact that MiG-29 are much cheaper to maintain and operate than the Mirage 2000. If I'm not wrong even Su-30MKI has lower lifecycle cost.

If you look at the way IAF's squadrons are based you'll get a better idea. MiG-29 squadrons are based along the Indo-Pak border in Punjab & Gujarat, whereas all the Mirage 2000 are based at Gwalior, MP in Central India. So the idea is that MiG-29 are our front-line fighters for countering PAF F-16 whereas Mirage 2000 are the primary precision strike platform with a secondary air superiority role.

It's not that Mirage 2000 are pathetic at A2A roles. In the high altitude high speed flight regime it's a very potent interceptor but at the medium and lower altitudes; where most of the air engagements take place after the opening salvos have been fired; it usually tends to devolve into close-in turnfights where the MiG-29 has a clear cut edge.
How it performs against the F-16 is not an easy question to answer and I don't think anybody is qualified enough to answer that question. Most probably it would be depend upon the pilot skills, tactics, the force's strategy and the prevailing conditions on that particular day. Although the F-16 does have significant edge in agility and maneuverability.

BTW why is everyone calling the Mirage 2000 3rd gen? It's predecessor the Mirage F1 was the one that belonged to the 3rd gen. Some experts are clearly getting their facts wrong.
 
Last edited:

gadeshi

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2013
Messages
9,223
Likes
6,636
No hard feelings against the Mirage 2000 dude. It has been the pride of the IAF for the past 3 decades. It single-handedly turned the tide in the '99 Kargil war. It's just that in a dogfight it can't stand up to the MiG-29. Compare the often cited comparison parameters- climb/acceleration, thrust/weight ratio, roll performance, instantaneous/sustained turn rate the MiG-29 beats the Mirage 2000.

As mentioned by the previous post #3946 its modern avionics, radar, BVR capability though limited was much still better than earlier Fulcrum models, range, payload and nuclear capability were what primarily appealed to the IAF in the 1980s.

On the contrary the earlier MiG-29 A/B variants which IAF operates to date sported avionics which were at best only an average improvement over the MiG-21 and had poor range due to its terrible fuel capacity. They were point defense fighters at best. Basically the IAF had a 2 pronged strategy to counter the PAF F-16 in 80's till mid 90's- Mirage 2000 at BVR whereas MiG-29 for WVR and the merge.

But IAF's MiG-29 fleet has been undergoing incremental upgrades since the mid 90's and the present day MiG-29UPG is probably among the best A2A platform in the Asia if not the world. One also cannot ignore the fact that MiG-29 are much cheaper to maintain and operate than the Mirage 2000. If I'm not wrong even Su-30MKI has lower lifecycle cost.

If you look at the way IAF's squadrons are based you'll get a better idea. MiG-29 squadrons are based along the Indo-Pak border in Punjab & Gujarat, whereas all the Mirage 2000 are based at Gwalior, MP in Central India. So the idea is that MiG-29 are our front-line fighters for countering PAF F-16 whereas Mirage 2000 are the primary precision strike platform with a secondary air superiority role.

It's not that Mirage 2000 are pathetic at A2A roles. In the high altitude high speed flight regime it's a very potent interceptor but at the medium and lower altitudes; where most of the air engagements take place after the opening salvos have been fired; it usually tends to devolve into close-in turnfights where the MiG-29 has a clear cut edge.
How it performs against the F-16 is not an easy question to answer and I don't think anybody is qualified enough to answer that question. Most probably it would be depend upon the pilot skills, tactics, the force's strategy and the prevailing conditions on that particular day. Although the F-16 does have significant edge in agility and maneuverability.

BTW why is everyone calling the Mirage 2000 3rd gen? It's predecessor the Mirage F1 was the one that belonged to the 3rd gen. Some experts are clearly getting their facts wrong.
MiG-29 was concieved as a front line fighter from the Day 1 in Soviet AF. So using it now in this way is sane.
However, UPG has much better BVR capabilities with Zhuk-M radar, OLS-UEM IRST and newer missiles - R-77E and (probably) R-77E-1. Also it can use R-27E (Energetic) missiles with extended range (up to 130 km), the same as MKI. So Mirage 2000 will be definetly cast out to precision strike only.

As for F-16, it has full-scale vortex aerodynamics which gives it high AOA capabilities better than Mirage-2000.
And of course better TTW ratio with new 14000kgs engines (Blk. 50/52) should be considered also.

Отправлено с моего XT1080 через Tapatalk
 

BON PLAN

-*-
Contributor
Joined
Dec 24, 2015
Messages
6,494
Likes
7,197
Country flag
No hard feelings against the Mirage 2000 dude. It has been the pride of the IAF for the past 3 decades. It single-handedly turned the tide in the '99 Kargil war. It's just that in a dogfight it can't stand up to the MiG-29. Compare the often cited comparison parameters- climb/acceleration, thrust/weight ratio, roll performance, instantaneous/sustained turn rate the MiG-29 beats the Mirage 2000.

As mentioned by the previous post #3946 its modern avionics, radar, BVR capability though limited was much still better than earlier Fulcrum models, range, payload and nuclear capability were what primarily appealed to the IAF in the 1980s.

On the contrary the earlier MiG-29 A/B variants which IAF operates to date sported avionics which were at best only an average improvement over the MiG-21 and had poor range due to its terrible fuel capacity. They were point defense fighters at best. Basically the IAF had a 2 pronged strategy to counter the PAF F-16 in 80's till mid 90's- Mirage 2000 at BVR whereas MiG-29 for WVR and the merge.

But IAF's MiG-29 fleet has been undergoing incremental upgrades since the mid 90's and the present day MiG-29UPG is probably among the best A2A platform in the Asia if not the world. One also cannot ignore the fact that MiG-29 are much cheaper to maintain and operate than the Mirage 2000. If I'm not wrong even Su-30MKI has lower lifecycle cost.

If you look at the way IAF's squadrons are based you'll get a better idea. MiG-29 squadrons are based along the Indo-Pak border in Punjab & Gujarat, whereas all the Mirage 2000 are based at Gwalior, MP in Central India. So the idea is that MiG-29 are our front-line fighters for countering PAF F-16 whereas Mirage 2000 are the primary precision strike platform with a secondary air superiority role.

It's not that Mirage 2000 are pathetic at A2A roles. In the high altitude high speed flight regime it's a very potent interceptor but at the medium and lower altitudes; where most of the air engagements take place after the opening salvos have been fired; it usually tends to devolve into close-in turnfights where the MiG-29 has a clear cut edge.
How it performs against the F-16 is not an easy question to answer and I don't think anybody is qualified enough to answer that question. Most probably it would be depend upon the pilot skills, tactics, the force's strategy and the prevailing conditions on that particular day. Although the F-16 does have significant edge in agility and maneuverability.

BTW why is everyone calling the Mirage 2000 3rd gen? It's predecessor the Mirage F1 was the one that belonged to the 3rd gen. Some experts are clearly getting their facts wrong.
My answer was based on F16 vs M2000. Not Mig29 vs M2000.
Mirage 2000 is very potent in high and medium altitude. lesser in low altitude.
Mig29 has a better T/W ratio, but I've read it is limited to 8G.... I think M2000 vs Mig29 is same history than M2000 vs F16 : the first one (or two ?) virage is in favor of M2000, because it can move its nose hardly. After it lacks too much energy and opponent take the lead. And we are only speaking of the plane, not of the effect of a helmet pretty used on Mig 29 and very usefull it seems.
 

gadeshi

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2013
Messages
9,223
Likes
6,636
My answer was based on F16 vs M2000. Not Mig29 vs M2000.
Mirage 2000 is very potent in high and medium altitude. lesser in low altitude.
Mig29 has a better T/W ratio, but I've read it is limited to 8G.... I think M2000 vs Mig29 is same history than M2000 vs F16 : the first one (or two ?) virage is in favor of M2000, because it can move its nose hardly. After it lacks too much energy and opponent take the lead. And we are only speaking of the plane, not of the effect of a helmet pretty used on Mig 29 and very usefull it seems.
MiG-29 is limited to 9G usual and 11G rare pulling.
Also MiG-29 and F-16 have full scale vortex aerodynamics which prevents airflow breaks on the wings and makes plane controllable and high lifting on high AOA. And also both F-16 and MiG-29 (especially UPG) have better TWR. Both F-16 and MiG-29 have lower turn radius than M 2000 because of this.
Mirage has inferior maneurability due to this factors.
 

sasum

Atheist but not Communists.
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2016
Messages
1,435
Likes
761
http://indianairforce.nic.in/show_page.php?pg_id=98

I hope this will be accepted as a source ;) it says that the Mystere Iv performed honourably during the 1965 war , though not in the lead role as Gnats and Hunters.
Procurement of french warplanes and armaments were a misfired political maneuver by Nehru. Since, India has been a colony of both Britain & France, Nehru wanted to forge a strategic alliance with Britain, France & Canada and develope nuclear technology with their help to checkmate China which was on the verge of becoming a nuclear power. France was, however, only interested in Indian beryllium and thorium for her own atomic programne. Nehru, tried unsuccessfully to seduce France with US$ 794 million purchase of Ouragan, Mystere, Alizee aircrafts and 150 Armor 13 tanks. Now, in the words of eminent defence analyst, Late Bharat Verma:
Historians usually consider the period between 1947 and 1962 as the first phase of the Indo-French relations. Year 1962 was for France the year it constitutionally departed from the subcontinent and for India, it marked the end of the dream of a Hindi-Chini bhai-bhai relationship.Though the relations were not too cordial between France and India, as early as January 1947, the French Government asked for a ten-year extension of the 1945 agreement permitting military air ferries to fly across India. Nehru, the Interim Prime Minister noted: “Public opinion in India is very much against the use of force by the French Government against the people of Indochina and anything which we do to facilitate the use of this force is bound to be resented and vigorously criticised.“ On July 16, 1947 an Agreement on Air Services between India and France was nevertheless signed.By the end of year, an interesting development occurred. Nehru was “anxious to help in every way in developing atomic energy in India.” He decided to unofficially send Dr. Homi J. Bhabha to France to enquire about the possibility of collaboration for the peaceful use atomic energy: “In view of the fact that India possesses very large resources of minerals suitable for the generation of atomic power, India is destined to play an important part in research on atomic energy in cooperation with other countries. We would like to welcome this cooperation, more specially in Great Britain, Canada and France.” Homi Bhabha had extremely cordial contacts with Frédéric Joliot-Curie and Raoul Dautry, the first heads of the French Atomic Energy Commission (CEA), founded by de Gaulle in 1945. At that time, Joliot-Curie was interested by two materials: beryllium and thorium. Nehru, interested in the program ‘Atoms for Peace’, saw the nuclear collaboration as discriminatory. Why countries with colonial territories should use raw material looted from these colonies for their research, he thought.
‘Discrimination’ will remain at the core of the Indian position in the decades to come .
The French armament sales during this first phase were relatively large despite the factors mentioned above. Though the Indian Air Force did not directly take part in the conflict with China, 49 Ouragan fighter planes (produced by Dassault Aviation), 110 Mystère and 12 Alizée (of Bréguet Aviation) were in service in 1962. Further, 150 AMX 13 light tanks were sold to India after an agreement signed in 1957. The total arms sales from France between 1950 and 1962 amounted to $ 794 millions according to SIPRI database , which made it the second most important after UK ($ 4,612 millions) and before USSR ($ 612 millions) and the US ($ 248 millions)
On September 22, 1962, General de Gaulle received Nehru in Paris. Nehru first congratulated him for the settlement of the Algerian crisis as well as the ratification of the cession of the French Establishments in India. De Gaulle replied that he was happy to see that India had dealt successfully with some of the issues on which the West had doubts at the time of independence. At the end of the meeting, Nehru pointed out at the danger coming from China “which spent most of its resources for preparing the bomb. …It is for them a question of prestige” explained a worried Indian Minister who however did not request the French President for armaments.
On October 27, 1962 Nehru called French Ambassador Jean-Paul Garnier to tell him that it is “an invasion (by China) pure and simple”. The French President had written to Nehru a few days earlier: “We can not approve that border claims are settled by military actions which is in any case disproportionate with the proclaimed objectives [of the Chinese]”.
During this encounter with the Indian Ambassador, the General conveyed to him what would be the core of the French position for several decades. He told (Indian Ambassador) Jung: “France is the friend of India, not its ally and therefore will not provide any [military] support.” Paris was prepared to provide some military supplies to Delhi (and this in consultation with the US), but was not ready to intervene.

Those poor supplies of Ouragan, Alizee & Mystere found their way to India this way. As for their role in 1965, better read this account of Ajay Shukla to get the true picture. India suffered massive loss of aircrafts including Hunter, Vampire & Mystere. All were found wanting against superior Paki Sabre and Starfighter. Ouragan & Alizee were not mentioned.
http://m.rediff.com/news/column/def...his-self-congratulatory-nonsense/20140902.htm
 
Last edited:

su35

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2015
Messages
243
Likes
184
Country flag
MiG-29 was concieved as a front line fighter from the Day 1 in Soviet AF. So using it now in this way is sane.
However, UPG has much better BVR capabilities with Zhuk-M radar, OLS-UEM IRST and newer missiles - R-77E and (probably) R-77E-1. Also it can use R-27E (Energetic) missiles with extended range (up to 130 km), the same as MKI. So Mirage 2000 will be definetly cast out to precision strike only.
If I am not wrong Mig 29 UPG is better then Mig 29SMT and is comparable to Mig 35
 

gadeshi

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2013
Messages
9,223
Likes
6,636
If I am not wrong Mig 29 UPG is better then Mig 29SMT and is comparable to Mig 35
No, MiG-29UPG (9-19I) is Indian variant of MiG-29SMT (9-19R).

Отправлено с моего XT1080 через Tapatalk
 

su35

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2015
Messages
243
Likes
184
Country flag
No, MiG-29UPG (9-19I) is Indian variant of MiG-29SMT (9-19R).

Отправлено с моего XT1080 через Tapatalk
As it devloped latter Then it must have some advantage. What are the key differences between UPG and SMT?
 

gadeshi

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2013
Messages
9,223
Likes
6,636
As it devloped latter Then it must have some advantage. What are the key differences between UPG and SMT?
There are two SMT versions - old 9-17 and new 9-19. It also called 9-19R. It came to scene in 2013, the same time as UPG.

Отправлено с моего XT1080 через Tapatalk
 

su35

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2015
Messages
243
Likes
184
Country flag
There are two SMT versions - old 9-17 and new 9-19. It also called 9-19R. It came to scene in 2013, the same time as UPG.

Отправлено с моего XT1080 через Tapatalk
Yes but is there any difference between this version and upg?
 

gadeshi

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2013
Messages
9,223
Likes
6,636
As it devloped latter Then it must have some advantage. What are the key differences between UPG and SMT?
The key difference is that 9-19I is Indian (letter I shows this), but 9-19R is Russian - with no import hardware and better, non-export Zhuk-M radar.

Отправлено с моего XT1080 через Tapatalk
 

BON PLAN

-*-
Contributor
Joined
Dec 24, 2015
Messages
6,494
Likes
7,197
Country flag
MiG-29 is limited to 9G usual and 11G rare pulling.
Also MiG-29 and F-16 have full scale vortex aerodynamics which prevents airflow breaks on the wings and makes plane controllable and high lifting on high AOA. And also both F-16 and MiG-29 (especially UPG) have better TWR. Both F-16 and MiG-29 have lower turn radius than M 2000 because of this.
Mirage has inferior maneurability due to this factors.
After the collapse of USSR, and the first trials of ex east germany, west pilots said :
The helmet used to fire short range missile was too nice.
The T/W ratio is effective,
The engines smoke too much (visualy non discreet)
The plane is limited to 8G (it was the main weakness of a very impressiv aircraft)

Maybe newer Mig 29 are more agile ?
 

smestarz

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2012
Messages
1,929
Likes
1,056
Country flag
Either you are born stupid or just a nut
Those two planes nor countries were in combat, They were what we call "mock combat" where the planes get into positions and simulate firing and winning (Remember the Rafale photo of F-22 in its gun sight?)
No one fires missiles during these combats.

We are not very much in favour of Americans, but if there is accident involving a combat gone wrong, we feel bad abt it specially pilot losing his life WHEN NOT IN COMBAT.

That is the difference between Indian and French. Do keep that in mind.

Mirage 2000 were upgraded for the kickbacks ... did you not read how expensive they are? and what capability? AESA? No, anything excellent that it can actually take out PAF F-16 Block 52 NO
Its just upgrade for kickbacks

1) In the other side, if a F16 was shooting down a M2000, what a story you have made....
2) The M2000 is so scap that You, indians, have decided to upgrade it so as to keep this scrap some more years. Amusing you are, aren't you?
 

Tactical Frog

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 31, 2016
Messages
1,542
Likes
2,279
Country flag
Procurement of french warplanes and armaments were a misfired political maneuver by Nehru. Since, India has been a colony of both Britain & France, Nehru wanted to forge a strategic alliance with Britain, France & Canada and develope nuclear technology with their help to checkmate China which was on the verge of becoming a nuclear power. France was, however, only interested in Indian beryllium and thorium for her own atomic programne. Nehru, tried unsuccessfully to seduce France with US$ 794 million purchase of Ouragan, Mystere, Alizee aircrafts and 150 Armor 13 tanks. Now, in the words of eminent defence analyst, Late Bharat Verma:
Historians usually consider the period between 1947 and 1962 as the first phase of the Indo-French relations. Year 1962 was for France the year it constitutionally departed from the subcontinent and for India, it marked the end of the dream of a Hindi-Chini bhai-bhai relationship.Though the relations were not too cordial between France and India, as early as January 1947, the French Government asked for a ten-year extension of the 1945 agreement permitting military air ferries to fly across India. Nehru, the Interim Prime Minister noted: “Public opinion in India is very much against the use of force by the French Government against the people of Indochina and anything which we do to facilitate the use of this force is bound to be resented and vigorously criticised.“ On July 16, 1947 an Agreement on Air Services between India and France was nevertheless signed.By the end of year, an interesting development occurred. Nehru was “anxious to help in every way in developing atomic energy in India.” He decided to unofficially send Dr. Homi J. Bhabha to France to enquire about the possibility of collaboration for the peaceful use atomic energy: “In view of the fact that India possesses very large resources of minerals suitable for the generation of atomic power, India is destined to play an important part in research on atomic energy in cooperation with other countries. We would like to welcome this cooperation, more specially in Great Britain, Canada and France.” Homi Bhabha had extremely cordial contacts with Frédéric Joliot-Curie and Raoul Dautry, the first heads of the French Atomic Energy Commission (CEA), founded by de Gaulle in 1945. At that time, Joliot-Curie was interested by two materials: beryllium and thorium. Nehru, interested in the program ‘Atoms for Peace’, saw the nuclear collaboration as discriminatory. Why countries with colonial territories should use raw material looted from these colonies for their research, he thought.
‘Discrimination’ will remain at the core of the Indian position in the decades to come .
The French armament sales during this first phase were relatively large despite the factors mentioned above. Though the Indian Air Force did not directly take part in the conflict with China, 49 Ouragan fighter planes (produced by Dassault Aviation), 110 Mystère and 12 Alizée (of Bréguet Aviation) were in service in 1962. Further, 150 AMX 13 light tanks were sold to India after an agreement signed in 1957. The total arms sales from France between 1950 and 1962 amounted to $ 794 millions according to SIPRI database , which made it the second most important after UK ($ 4,612 millions) and before USSR ($ 612 millions) and the US ($ 248 millions)
On September 22, 1962, General de Gaulle received Nehru in Paris. Nehru first congratulated him for the settlement of the Algerian crisis as well as the ratification of the cession of the French Establishments in India. De Gaulle replied that he was happy to see that India had dealt successfully with some of the issues on which the West had doubts at the time of independence. At the end of the meeting, Nehru pointed out at the danger coming from China “which spent most of its resources for preparing the bomb. …It is for them a question of prestige” explained a worried Indian Minister who however did not request the French President for armaments.
On October 27, 1962 Nehru called French Ambassador Jean-Paul Garnier to tell him that it is “an invasion (by China) pure and simple”. The French President had written to Nehru a few days earlier: “We can not approve that border claims are settled by military actions which is in any case disproportionate with the proclaimed objectives [of the Chinese]”.
During this encounter with the Indian Ambassador, the General conveyed to him what would be the core of the French position for several decades. He told (Indian Ambassador) Jung: “France is the friend of India, not its ally and therefore will not provide any [military] support.” Paris was prepared to provide some military supplies to Delhi (and this in consultation with the US), but was not ready to intervene.

Those poor supplies of Ouragan, Alizee & Mystere found their way to India this way. As for their role in 1965, better read this account of Ajay Shukla to get the true picture. India suffered massive loss of aircrafts including Hunter, Vampire & Mystere. All were found wanting against superior Paki Sabre and Starfighter. Ouragan & Alizee were not mentioned.
http://m.rediff.com/news/column/def...his-self-congratulatory-nonsense/20140902.htm
Thanks for sharing that interesting piece about early Indo-French relations, a good read for me. I see that atom and nuclear energy is still at the core of the relationship !
The Ajai Shukla piece is good too !
 
Last edited:

gadeshi

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2013
Messages
9,223
Likes
6,636
After the collapse of USSR, and the first trials of ex east germany, west pilots said :
The helmet used to fire short range missile was too nice.
The T/W ratio is effective,
The engines smoke too much (visualy non discreet)
The plane is limited to 8G (it was the main weakness of a very impressiv aircraft)

Maybe newer Mig 29 are more agile ?
Maybe Western pilots flown with 8G limit?
MiG-29 was 9G capable from Day 1 (9-12 and 9-12A for close allies).

Отправлено с моего XT1080 через Tapatalk
 

Rushil51

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 13, 2014
Messages
471
Likes
314
Country flag
http://wap.business-standard.com/ar...fit-taal-says-company-ceo-116060301177_1.html

Indo-French aircraft deal may benefit TAAL, says company CEO

Taneja Aerospace Aviation Ltd (TAAL) expects to benefit if India and France strike the proposed deal to bring in Dassault Rafale aircraft to the country, as the company has been successfully evaluated by the aircraft manufacturer, a senior management official of TAAL said.

Speaking to reporters on the sidelines of a conference on defence manufacturing technologies, organised by the Tamil Nadu Technology Development & Promotion Centre of CII, Sudhir Kumar, CEO, TAAL said, "If the French aircraft Dassault Rafale comes we are likely to get some business because Dassault Aviation may give some work. They have already evaluated us and they have finding that we can work for them."

According to reports, both the countries are in talks for a proposed $8.9 billion contract for purchase of fourth-generation Dassault Rafale fighter jets for the Indian Air Force.

At present, TAAL is indirectly handling some works for Rafale, through an Israel-based armament company, under which it supplies certain structural assemblies and pressurised containers to the company in Israel.

TAAL, started with manufacturing of aircraft and the structural assemblies for Vikram Sarabhai Space Centre (VSSC) and Indian Space Research Organisation (Isro) for its space launch vehicles, also works projects for Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd and Defence Research and Development Organization (DRDO).

It is also associated with Rustom-2, an unmanned combat air vehicle developed by DRDO, which is likely to fly shortly. It has been working in two Base Repair Depots (BRDs) of Indian Air Force, where the overhauling of aircraft takes place. Currently, it is working in two such Depots -- in Kanpur and Nasik.

Last year, the company posted a turnover of around Rs 56-57 crore. He said that the company see opportunity in offset activities by overseas firms in India and continuously engage with the foreign players for such activities.
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top