Know Your 'Rafale'

[smestarz]

Well I cannot answer for the French stupidity, I guess you are more than qualified to know that
ITs true that F-35B is natural successor to AV-8B Harrier, but then how does ordering F-35A by air force replace the AV-8B of the navy? I guess thats French logic maybe it makes French sense.

It you notice the trend in case of Spain, they want to have some 5th Gen planes, The French will be soon out of the market and hence they are saying that ".. oh 5th Gen is LM mumbo jumbo ... " and yet many countries are prefering the LM mumbo jumbo ..

BTW It would be stupid to ask the French to replace Mirage 2000 wth Typhoons, the saner choice would be to replace Rafales with Typhoons.

Because Spain is part because of Typhoon consortium, and because F-35 B is a natural successor of AV 8 B Harrier in the Spanish Navy , so ordering F-35 A for Spanish airforce makes sense.

That is as stupid as asking why France would not consider Typhoon for replacing its last Mirage 2000.

 

[smestarz]

Dont be too confident, IAF does not always get what its crying for, Does it?

No chance, India will never buy an American fighter.

And F18 and Rafale cost about the same but Rafale has substantially more capabilities, with the enormous investment India has already made in Rafale it makes no economic sense to go for a new MMRCA type.

Make no mistake, Rafale is the only MMRCA IAF will operate everything else is just hot air.

 

[smestarz]

So the French were not sure that Qatar would pay? hahahahaha
WOW

You are not aware of these things.
A deal is formaly effective only when the first advance payment is made. It was not in dec 2017, but in march 2018.

 

[abingdonboy]

Dont be too confident, IAF does not always get what its crying for, Does it?

It’s not about IAF’s wishes but logic.

You think GoI can just buy 100 fighters without passing basic criteria? IF there is a TE MMRCA completion F-18 will have to pass selection (T1) and be declared L1, as it stands there is NO WAY this is possible.

If govt ignores this process they WILL be found out and they will be removed from office.

Beyond this there are the obvious insurmountable hurdles that need to be overcome; CISMOA, BECA etc haven’t been signed (maybe in 5 years?), US won’t sanction their fighters to deliver nuclear payloads and this is a basic requirement of IAF.

Simply isn’t going to happen.

 

[smestarz]

Some Facts for you before you burst your bugle
a) The Turkish F-16 was a twin engine plane, and was on training mission and did cross into Greek air space
b) The Greek M2000 engaged and shot down the Turkish plane.
So how does it make it an "even combat"

The link is here for you to follow,

https://forum.keypublishing.com/showthread.php?23087-Greek-Mirage-2000-vs-Turkish-F-16

French really sound desperate sometimes.

Let's see, Turkey F-16 violated Greek airspace in 1996, Greek M2000 intercepted and began dogfight, M2000 won dogfight as usual the only difference from the other 100 intercepts was he shot it down. The Greeks admit nothing and no apology was ever given. The Greek pilot has an arrest warrant in Turkey so I highly doubt he went to Turkey.

Don't forget to mention no SEM was lost for 8 years until it retired.

 

[smestarz]

IT is about logic which unfortunately you are not able to see

Your whole argument starts with an IF.

F/A-18 had participated before and Boeing will now be more than prepared to handle such competition.
Further like you said it all depends on a big IF.
Did we have a competition for C-130J or C-17 or P-8I ?I dont think we did, If the Govt decides to go for G2G deal then the whole RFP thingy goes out. does it not?

CISMOA is now called COMCASA, and it can be negotiated as per the value of the country for relationships with USA.

F/A-18 does not deliver nuclear weapons, at least none of the countries that use F/A-18 E/F uses it for nuclear weapons.For nuclear delivery there are the 40 Su-30 MKI that would be put under SFC, Why would we need all our planes to be nuclear delivery capable? Are all the aircraft in say French airforce capable of nuclear delivery? Are the Rafale that we are ordering wired for nuclear delivery? Try not to "guess" the answer.

So its not a hard and fast rule that we need new IAF planes for nuclear delivery, if yes, do give the link to it, where it says all the planes that IAF wants to order should be capable of nuclear delivery.

Also a point to add is that EF-18 Growler is one of the worlds best EW plane, much better than Rafale, But that is because Americans prefer specialised EW planes, this is matter of doctrine.

BTW F/A-18 does not have to WIN the competition (if there is one) but mainly has to convince the GoI that it offers a better and complete package (plane, support, weapons compatibility and industrial advantages ) that deems it to be selected.

It’s not about IAF’s wishes but logic.

You think GoI can just buy 100 fighters without passing basic criteria? IF there is a TE MMRCA completion F-18 will have to pass selection (T1) and be declared L1, as it stands there is NO WAY this is possible.

If govt ignores this process they WILL be found out and they will be removed from office.

Beyond this there are the obvious insurmountable hurdles that need to be overcome; CISMOA, BECA etc haven’t been signed (maybe in 5 years?), US won’t sanction their fighters to deliver nuclear payloads and this is a basic requirement of IAF.

Simply isn’t going to happen.

 

[Armand2REP]

Some Facts for you before you burst your bugle
a) The Turkish F-16 was a twin engine plane, and was on training mission and did cross into Greek air space
b) The Greek M2000 engaged and shot down the Turkish plane.
So how does it make it an "even combat"

The link is here for you to follow,

https://forum.keypublishing.com/showthread.php?23087-Greek-Mirage-2000-vs-Turkish-F-16

French really sound desperate sometimes.

a) F-16 is a single engine plane in all configurations, not twin engine.
b) no one is denying the M2000 shot down the F-16.
c) who said combat was ever even?

 

[smestarz]

Not really.
If that was true then maybe then the time when Rafale was introduced most of the Mirage 2000 would be on the way out. And the French would not have the need to upgrade the Mirage 2000. When was the Mirage 2000 line closed? 2007 when was Rafale produced and operational? A long way before that..
The french Mirage IV was the nulcear delivery plane and that was becoming obsolete but then the French had Mirage 2000N for that role did it not? For carrier you had super etendard which was also accident prone (its safety records state that)

When the Mig-29 and Su-27 came into pictures thats when the Europeans realised that they were outclassed, The Americans had F-15 which was capable to take down MiG-25 foxbat but which air force in Europe operated F-15 ? Thus they had to either build a twin engine plane or to undermine their national security, Thus came the Twin engine projects. Sweden traditionally being a defensive country did not opt for twin engine..

Nearly ten years spent between the M2000 selection by French president Giscard d'Estaing (1976) and the lunch of Rafale programm (1987 by President Chirac). You don't change in ten years? You not.

M4000 was nearly 2 times heavier than M2000. It's unit price nearly double also. It was not choose because of that, because the price of a fighter is a question of weight.

French air force dreamed of a twin engined plase since years. The choice of a twin Rafale was made because it was going to become the vector of deterrence (and replace another twin plane : Mirage 4) and to be safer for carrier operation.
The Mig29/SU27 was just there to give the performance enveloppe. A single engined plane, with a sole heavy engine would have been enough.

 

[smestarz]

I wanted to say Twin seater C/D version and not twin engine,
When one plane is on traning mission and not armed for combat, and the other plane shoots it down, is it really termed as combat or accident? And if you French consider that a victory of M2000 then perhaps that shows how desperate France is to sell its wares.
Even Libya , Syria is same there was no credible air force and yet the French are raving how wonderful Rafale is,
But when the Russians came with their Su-30 SM the French started to keep 100 kms away from the border as the Russians will shoot first and ask questions afterwards. Also shows how "capable" Rafale is against Su-30 hahaha

a) F-16 is a single engine plane in all configurations, not twin engine.
b) no one is denying the M2000 shot down the F-16.
c) who said combat was ever even?

 

[smestarz]

So in your defence Mirage 2000 is not an MRCA and does not have A2A missiles to protect its ass? What about the wingtip stations? No??
Perhaps IAF did not order any A2A along with Mirages...

Kargil does indicate that Mirage 2000 are not considered by India to be capable enough to face PAF F-16
Or maybe IAF did not get memo from Dassault or French air force that Mirage 2000 is an MRCA..

Clearly you understand little of warcraft. Mirage 2000s were on a bombing mission with heavy ass LGBs and as such I am not sure if they carried air to air weapons. Mig 29s were armed with BVR and that's why they accompanied Mirage 2000s. You do not leave combat jets on a bombing missions with no support.

Kargil incident does in no way indicate which among F16 or Mirage was better.

But what DID happen was that our Mig 29s locked onto the Napaki F-16s and forced them to turned tail.

Now you tell me what does that tell of superiority.

 

[Armand2REP]

I wanted to say Twin seater C/D version and not twin engine,
When one plane is on traning mission and not armed for combat, and the other plane shoots it down, is it really termed as combat or accident? And if you French consider that a victory of M2000 then perhaps that shows how desperate France is to sell its wares.
Even Libya , Syria is same there was no credible air force and yet the French are raving how wonderful Rafale is,
But when the Russians came with their Su-30 SM the French started to keep 100 kms away from the border as the Russians will shoot first and ask questions afterwards. Also shows how "capable" Rafale is against Su-30 hahaha

You wanted to say one thing but said something else which makes no sense. When one plane enters foreign airspace and is told to turn around and doesn't, should it not expect to be shot down? When it engages in a dog fight trying to get missile lock and gets shot down by the other aircraft is that not a combat kill? idk you tell me.

The Rafale served in Libya and did quite well, it even shot down its first enemy aircraft. Syria is full of Su-30s and recently Su-57s. It doesn't stop Rafale from conducting air strikes. It doesn't stop French soldiers from occupying Syrian territory either despite what Russia and Turkey have to say about it.

 

[BON PLAN]

Well I cannot answer for the French stupidity, I guess you are more than qualified to know that
ITs true that F-35B is natural successor to AV-8B Harrier, but then how does ordering F-35A by air force replace the AV-8B of the navy? I guess thats French logic maybe it makes French sense.

It you notice the trend in case of Spain, they want to have some 5th Gen planes, The French will be soon out of the market and hence they are saying that ".. oh 5th Gen is LM mumbo jumbo ... " and yet many countries are prefering the LM mumbo jumbo ..

BTW It would be stupid to ask the French to replace Mirage 2000 wth Typhoons, the saner choice would be to replace Rafales with Typhoons.

 

[BON PLAN]

So the French were not sure that Qatar would pay? hahahahaha
WOW

Just are just laughing to your stupidity.

 

[BON PLAN]

Some Facts for you before you burst your bugle
a) The Turkish F-16 was a twin engine plane, and was on training mission and did cross into Greek air space
b) The Greek M2000 engaged and shot down the Turkish plane.
So how does it make it an "even combat"

The link is here for you to follow,

https://forum.keypublishing.com/showthread.php?23087-Greek-Mirage-2000-vs-Turkish-F-16

French really sound desperate sometimes.

To be a twin seat fighter made it a trainer only one?
So for you a F15E is a trainer?

 

[BON PLAN]

Not really.
If that was true then maybe then the time when Rafale was introduced most of the Mirage 2000 would be on the way out. And the French would not have the need to upgrade the Mirage 2000. When was the Mirage 2000 line closed? 2007 when was Rafale produced and operational? A long way before that..
The french Mirage IV was the nulcear delivery plane and that was becoming obsolete but then the French had Mirage 2000N for that role did it not? For carrier you had super etendard which was also accident prone (its safety records state that)

When the Mig-29 and Su-27 came into pictures thats when the Europeans realised that they were outclassed, The Americans had F-15 which was capable to take down MiG-25 foxbat but which air force in Europe operated F-15 ? Thus they had to either build a twin engine plane or to undermine their national security, Thus came the Twin engine projects. Sweden traditionally being a defensive country did not opt for twin engine..

You forget the collapse of the iron wall.... then all was slow downed, in all europe.
Rafale program was a huge one. The politics decided to postponed the entry to reduce the defense burden. So they added the 80 Mirage 2000 D and modified 37 Mirage 2000C in "-5" as a stop gap.

Mirage 2000N has less range than Mirage4 !
same can be said of SUper etendard. A very light plane.

Some things change between the first arrival of Mig25 and now : greater range AAM ! so no more need to fly mach2.5 (and AIM7) to shoot a Mig25/31 (with AMRAAM or MICA or ex active skyflash).
But you probably ignore that.

 

[BON PLAN]

I wanted to say Twin seater C/D version and not twin engine,
When one plane is on traning mission and not armed for combat, and the other plane shoots it down, is it really termed as combat or accident? And if you French consider that a victory of M2000 then perhaps that shows how desperate France is to sell its wares.
Even Libya , Syria is same there was no credible air force and yet the French are raving how wonderful Rafale is,
But when the Russians came with their Su-30 SM the French started to keep 100 kms away from the border as the Russians will shoot first and ask questions afterwards. Also shows how "capable" Rafale is against Su-30 hahaha

OK.
So if the F16 fired the M2000 it's a clear victory, and when the M2000 killed a F16 in a combat it's lucky, or because the poor F16 was lost in the greek air space, (these 2 country are in peace and no radio in the F16.... so sad). It's that?

Remember the beginning : you said that no french plane had a air to air victory since WW2. I proved you you were wrong.
To recognize it would grow you. If it's still possible.

 

[BON PLAN]

So in your defence Mirage 2000 is not an MRCA and does not have A2A missiles to protect its ass? What about the wingtip stations? No??
Perhaps IAF did not order any A2A along with Mirages...

Kargil does indicate that Mirage 2000 are not considered by India to be capable enough to face PAF F-16
Or maybe IAF did not get memo from Dassault or French air force that Mirage 2000 is an MRCA..

Indian Mirage 2000 were pure fighter ("C" model). They were used as air to ground laser bomber because NO OTHER DEDICATED PLANE CAN DO IT AT THIS ALTUTUDE.
Now these M2000 are upgraded (very slowly... 7/year. Congrats HAL) to a "-5" model and can cary simultaneously MICA and a SCALP, or 2 laser bombs or 4 iron bombs.

First F16 can only carry Sidewinder (no AMRAAM) and no laser bombs. don't forget it.

 

[Tactical Frog]

But when the Russians came with their Su-30 SM the French started to keep 100 kms away from the border as the Russians will shoot first and ask questions afterwards. Also shows how "capable" Rafale is against Su-30 hahaha

Coalition planes including Rafale fly over Syria on a daily basis. We have so called “deconfliction “ mechanisms with Russians. Please stop the BS for once.

 

[mayfair]

So in your defence Mirage 2000 is not an MRCA and does not have A2A missiles to protect its ass? What about the wingtip stations? No??
Perhaps IAF did not order any A2A along with Mirages...

Kargil does indicate that Mirage 2000 are not considered by India to be capable enough to face PAF F-16
Or maybe IAF did not get memo from Dassault or French air force that Mirage 2000 is an MRCA..

Nope read again.

During that mission Mirage 2000s were EXCLUSIVELY charged with taking out Paki fortifications and logistic nodes on mountain tops and the reverse slopes.

MiG 29s were air escorts so that Mirages could fully focus on their prime objectives, WITHOUT distractions.

Now how could you draw conclusions that "Kargil does indicate that Mirage 2000 are not considered by India to be capable enough to face PAF F-16" is beyond me.

Do recall that post-Kargil M2000-5 was the prime contender for the air force and the government had given the go ahead for purchasing 126 of them for the IAF. This was supposed to be follow on order for the initial purchase we had done in 1980S.

But then the MoD babus got involved and he process got convoluted enough to be reborn as MMRCA and then MRCA.

 

[BON PLAN]

For @smestarz