Know Your 'Rafale'

[WolfPack86]

Qatar brought 36 Rafales for 7 billion dollar and F-15 fighter is third cheapest.

 

[Kshithij]

Qatar fighters prices.

Qatar has purchased 72 F15 for 12 billion dollars in June 2017. In addition, it purchased support package of 1.1 billion dollars for the same in November 2017. It is incorrct to say that it is a deal for 6.2 billion for 36 fighters. The additional packages that comes with F15 are not included here
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/...fighter-jet-support-deal-171102091243710.html

Qatar had purchased 24 Typhoons for 6.7 billion dollars and another 1.3 billion dollars of brimstone and meteor missiles and Guided bombs in a total of 8 billion dollars 3 wees back.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/wor...ter-jets-8b-deal-uk-company-article-1.3689643

Qatar had purchased 24 Rafale for 6.3 billion Euros and another 12 for 1.1 billion Euros., not dollars.

The information is pretty bad in the above tweet

 

[Tactical Frog]

And more BJP questions that questions the own government:


http://wap.business-standard.com/ar...-worsen-during-nda-s-term-117122800053_1.html

Single-engine deal seems stuck in limbos now
Was an official RFI sent ? I bet not.

https://www.livefistdefence.com/2017/11/indian-contest-all-set-f-16-fights-sunset-status.html

No mention of an official RFI there !

 

[Tactical Frog]

Translated

http://m.standaard.be/cnt/dmf20171227_03269109//

Wow, are all these “Standard” newspapers working together against France ?

French gov decided not to play by the book this time. We have enough support from Wallony region to potentially break down the fragile Belgian gov on the Rafale issue. Belgium might never buy Rafale but probably won’t get F-35 either

 

[Sancho]

Single-engine deal seems stuck in limbos now
Was an official RFI sent ? I bet not.

https://www.livefistdefence.com/2017/11/indian-contest-all-set-f-16-fights-sunset-status.html

No mention of an official RFI there !

RFI is stuck at government level, but some movement was reported recently, but it got downplayed from the LCA RFP reports.

 

[Sancho]

​

Wow, are all these “Standard” newspapers working together against France ?

French gov decided not to play by the book this time. We have enough support from Wallony region to potentially break down the fragile Belgian gov on the Rafale issue. Belgium might never buy Rafale but probably won’t get F-35 either

Well, when Dassault can't follow the rules, you can't blame the tender countries. But at least Airbus got a new A330 MRTT order.

 

[pmaitra]

This is a follow up to my earlier post [LINK]:

Rafale canards are a problem, and will escalate total lifetime programme costs by billions of Euros
Posted on December 10, 2017 by Bharat Karnad

(Rafale)

Commentary: First paragraph truncated.

Because IAF has been so critical about all the things ostensibly wrong with the Tejas, may be we should put the inordinately expensive Rafale combat aircraft, that makes no cost-benefit sense whatsoever, under similar scrutiny, and see all the things structurally and otherwise wrong with this French item.

Let’s focus in this post on the canards on the Rafale. Canards are the rear horizontal wings in normal planes that are moved forward to near the nose for better aircraft control and hence featured in some combat aircraft like this French plane. It can contribute to lift, replacing the horizontal stabilizer and, therefore, reducing overall drag.

Commentary: The horizontal stabilizer can also contribute to lift. This is what happens with the F-16, where the Centre of Mass is between the two lifting surfaces: (1) the wings, and (2) the horizontal stabilizers placed at the aft of the aircraft. Moreover, canards do not reduce drag. How Mr. Karnad comes to this conclusion is unclear.

So, what’s the problem? Unlike the Su-30MKI — IAF’s front line advanced air dominance/air superiority fighter, which also sports canards, but uses its 2-D thrust vectoring nozzle for braking operations, the Rafale uses its canards. Using the canards thus generates enormous stress and strain on that part of the aircraft frame and can lead to stress fracture in the canards and result in cracks. Not sure if the IAF flew the Rafale, during the MMRCA test trials, in a sustained fashion over months in summer to see how the aircraft stacked up against the competition. Had they done so, they’d have witnessed the canards starting to fall apart. Combat aircraft experts give it 2-3 months of regular takeoff and landings in the hot tropical conditions of the subcontinent, for this problem to become apparent. Then what?

Commentary: Many sources will say that the Sukhoi-30 has 3D thrust vectoring and the F-22 has 2-D thrust vectoring. Whether to call them xD or (x-1)D is a matter of interpretation. Let us assume a robotic manipulator, such as the Universal Joint. It has 2 degrees of freedom, i.e., one arm can rotate about one axis which is tied to its base while the base itself is an arm that can rotate about one axis which is tied to the base of reference.

Spoiler: Robotic Manipulators with 2 Degrees of Freedom

Source: J. Lenarˇ ciˇc et al.,Robot Mechanisms, Intelligent Systems, Control and Automation: Science and Engineering 60, DOI 10.1007/978-94-007-4522-3_2, © Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

So, if we assume the aircraft fuselage as the main base or base of reference, the F-22 can turn its thrust vectoring which can be measured as rotation about one axis. Similarly, the Sukhoi-30 can turn its thrust vectoring which can be measured as rotations about two axes. This makes them 1D and 2D respectively. However, if one were to add a third parameter, i.e., the thrust itself, then F-22 and Sukhoi-30 have 2D and 3D thrust vectoring, respectively.

So, Mr. Karnad referring to Sukhoi-30’s thrust vectoring as 2D isn’t entirely wrong if we treat the nozzles as manipulators.

The problem is elsewhere. The thrust vectoring in the Sukhoi-30 is not used for braking per se, but again, Mr. Karnad gets the leeway considering the thrust vectoring can be used to increase the pitch of the aircraft upon landing, and thus achieve aerodynamic braking by virtue of low speed and a high angle-of-attack.

Replacing fractured and disabled canards is not an easy thing and when the entire fleet is so afflicted, as it will be, the IAF will have more of the Rafale down, resting in their airconditioned hangars than pulling duty in the skies. Soon, because it cannot be used too intensively or extensively, it will be reduced to another grand and expensive piece of hardware that, in terms of actual ready use, cannot reasonably be counted in the air order-of-battle. So much for the Rafale’s low down-time and quick-turnaround capability!!!

IAF doesn’t see this awful problem heading its way — and that’s par for the course. But the plane’s producer, Dassault, must be licking its chops in anticipation, because every canard repair and refit will require the aircraft to be ferried to the company’s production line in France. One can safely assess the additional costs of this major structural flaw over the aircraft’s lifetime for the 36 Rafales to be in billions of Euros. As Government of India is clueless, it will do what — grin and bear it?

Commentary: Not enough or reliable information could be obtained whether this is true or not. Canards are a niche technology, and used rarely outside Europe. The technology regarding the mechanics is not significantly difficult, however, considering they lie ahead of the Centre of Mass, they are likely to endure more stress compared to traditional aft-mounted horizontal stabilizers. It is quite possible that canard repairs might have to be carried out in France, as much as it is possible that HAL might be able to use its expertise with the canards of the Sukhoi-30 to carry out necessary repairs on the Rafales.

Won’t the IAF then complain about a degraded fighter force and about not enough fighter aircraft in the air? Of course, it will but only to pitch in for more Rafales in the belief that one horrible mistake deserves a cascade of the same mistake!

Incidentally, thanks to the intervention by the IAF in the design stage of the LCA and insistence on a canard on the Tejas — a movement headed by an ex-test pilot Air Marshal M. Matheswaran, who retired as Deputy Chief at HQ Integrated Defence Staff, the entire project was delayed by several years. The insertion of the canard in the original design required a major reworking of it, and the ultimate decision by its designers, who knew better but tried to humour its customer, to do away with it, cost the project time and hurt the LCA delivery schedule. These delays were then used by the IAF and Matheswaran in particular, and an ignorant/illiterate press and media, in general, to slam the Tejas.

Commentary: Canards appear to be more of an afterthought. Traditionally, the pitch control of an aircraft is done by the control surfaces on the trailing edge of the wings and the control surfaces on the trailing edge of the horizontal stabilizers. The Concorde used dynamic ballast to achieve pitch control. The Tupolev-144 used retractable canards for pitch control.

The control surfaces on the trailing edge of the delta wings do not perform as well as those on the trailing edge of straight wings or swept wings. This is because, at higher angles of attack, the airflow reaching the control surfaces may be insufficient due to the wing-wake or what one might call a large space of slow moving air — slow moving with respect to the aircraft. A vague resemblance could be drawn with the air molecules within the boundary layer.

Now, given that there are no aft-mounted horizontal stabilizers, how does one compensate for the loss in manoeuverability? The solution appears to be to install fore-mounted horizontal stabilizers — which canards are, and more.

Spoiler: Airflow over Delta Wing of Mirage-2000

Source:

Spoiler: YouTube Video

Wouldn’t it have been better, then, to go back to the design of the MiG-21 or the F-16?

This same Matheswaran after retirement was recruited by HAL as “adviser” for the LCA programme — why is not clear. He since jumped ship to something lots more lucrative — a sinecure with Anil Ambani’s Reliance Defence that has signed up with Dassault for offsets to produce some knick-knacks that will go into the IAF Rafales to be manufactured — minus any transfer of technology — wholly in France. Neat!

Commentary: Many people upon retirement from the military seek jobs with private companies. Many become pilots with civil airliners. Some join think tanks. This is yet another profession. If one were to hold an office of profit with any organization, would it not be logical for him to have his loyalties towards those that are running his payroll? How many people actually are freelancers? Mr. Karnad himself is a media person. Unless he is freelancing, is he not susceptible to the same charge? This is true for paid journalists on both sides of the debate.

[Addendum: A Reliance Defence rep got in touch with me Dec 11, 2017, morning to say that Matheswaran, in fact, departed the company a year back, and that he had thereafter joined SAAB India, which he no doubt reckoned stands a good chance — if IAF can help it — in its “single engine” aircraft race. This only proves my point. The Reliance rep also informed that other than some Rafale components, his company is into mainly producing with Dassault, a Falcon exec jet, as news reports have previously reported.]

Commentary: There is not much to be said about this except speculate. In any event, as long as any person holds an office of profit with an organization or company that can rival the LCA, he could be seen as an advocate of that organization or company. Only a person who advocates for a cause without any apparent benefit from that cause can be called an apathetic commentator. Others, may truly be apathetic, but being in an office of profit does not guarantee that they are apathetic.

 

[BON PLAN]

You should do your homework before talking about things:
http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/threads/eurofighter-ef-2000-typhoon.76395/page-4#post-1386627


Finally! Size matters, experience or radar modes can't counter that.



Lol, there was no L1 or L2 in the deal for 36 fighters, because it was a single vendor deal. So you just pointed out the problem, that makes the deal looks shady, unless the PM comes up with a proper explanation.

1) Show me evidence of 1400 T/R. I can't find it on your links.
2) Finally : if all is equal..... and the 15-20 years of skill of Thales willn't be caught.
3) Fact is that India dealed in a GtoG contract with the L1 plane of MMRCA. They could have choiced the L2, in case of compromission or over price charge... probably because there were no such charge my dear.

 

[BON PLAN]

That's why Rafales radar range didn't made a major impression in any evaluation/tender it was fielded

It was the case of the PESA one. (a french pilot said at the beginning it was a little bit myopic)
But the swiss evaluated this radar and found it suitable (they tested the PESA, but were given datas about the AESA on trial)

And you want to compare it with what other plane? European planes are not AESA equipped. F16/SH18/F35/F22 : no evaluation made since the swiss eval. so your argument fall.

 

[BON PLAN]

Yes, except for Kaveri consultancy, Rafale is a bad deal. Kaveri is what makes Rafale deal one of the best deals.

MKI is both air superiority as well as ground attack plane. It has fuel storage of 9 tons and 11 ton payload. It can travel all the way to Iran and come back with internal fuel and hence doesn't consume hardpoints for fuel tanks. The Super Su upgrade is not necessary. Even without that, it still is a fantastic plane.

The maintenance for Su30 is cheaper as it is a cheaper plane. Its parts are also cheap and mostly made in India. Only fuel cost is high.

- RCS of a SU30 is the same as a truck one.
- sustainability of Su30, a well known plane in the indian arsenal now, is not nice.
- Please stop comparing a medium plane (MMRCA : M for Medium) and a heavy one. Rafale is used to replace Mig23/27 mainly.
- maintenance costs? Just wait the first Rafale come in the indian fleet before saying such BS.

 

[WolfPack86]

- RCS of a SU30 is the same as a truck one.
- sustainability of Su30, a well known plane in the indian arsenal now, is not nice.
- Please stop comparing a medium plane (MMRCA : M for Medium) and a heavy one. Rafale is used to replace Mig23/27 mainly.
- maintenance costs? Just wait the first Rafale come in the indian fleet before saying such BS.

Now is 2018 did France started building Rafale fighter for India or not. When will first Rafale fighter will reach India.

 

[Rahul Prakash]

Now is 2018 did France started building Rafale fighter for India or not. When will first Rafale fighter will reach India.

They did reveal first rafale will come in 2019 and end in 2022

 

[Sancho]

1) Show me evidence of 1400 T/R. I can't find it on your links.

Lol, I knew you would fall back to your usual denial and wouldn't even bother to read, although I even zoomed in for you as well.

 

[Sancho]

Now is 2018 did France started building Rafale fighter for India or not. When will first Rafale fighter will reach India.

Yes they are in production, it takes around 3 years for 1 to be produced and the first delivery as @Rahul Prakash correctly said, will be in 2019.

 

[BON PLAN]

Lol, I knew you would fall back to your usual denial and wouldn't even bother to read, although I even zoomed in for you as well.

So zoom it another time, I can't show it.

 

[BON PLAN]

Now is 2018 did France started building Rafale fighter for India or not. When will first Rafale fighter will reach India.

A nice surprise is not impossible.... A early first delivery, saying near march/april 2019....

And some french Rafale will be deployed in india soon to train the first pilots and ground technicians.
(French air force is not happy. They have to train Qatari pilots, divert 12/14 Rafale against islamic terrorist, and now send some Rafale in India. but it's a secret....)

 

[Sancho]

So zoom it another time, I can't show it.

You could have downloaded the article as well, but as said, you just deny it for the sake of denying.

 

[undeadmyrmidon]

You could have downloaded the article as well, but as said, you just deny it for the sake of denying.

The Rafale too has a similar class AESA radar. The one shown at the airshow was a dummy with 850+ nodes.

OEM Eurofighters are unlikely to use the AESA radar and thus future upgrades are doubtful.

 

[Sancho]

OEM Eurofighters are unlikely to use the AESA radar and thus future upgrades are doubtful.

Yeah right, because they will never upgrade their radar.
They just don't have to rush it, because the Captor M was and still is a very good radar, contrary to the RBE 2 PESA.
Kuwait is already planned for the early Captor E by 2019/20 and while the partners have to decide how capable they want their version of the AESA? UK seems to aim on Electronic Attack capability in combination with Spear 3 missiles for SEAD. Rafale will get similar capabilities only from 2025 onwards, if the necessary funds are cleared.

 

[undeadmyrmidon]

Yeah right, because they will never upgrade their radar.
They just don't have to rush it, because the Captor M was and still is a very good radar, contrary to the RBE 2 PESA.
Kuwait is already planned for the early Captor E by 2019/20 and while the partners have to decide how capable they want their version of the AESA? UK seems to aim on Electronic Attack capability in combination with Spear 3 missiles for SEAD. Rafale will get similar capabilities only from 2025 onwards, if the necessary funds are cleared.

India is paying for those upgrades due to the possibility of it using the naval version as well. Captor E export is not as good as Captor M. That much is expected.