MMRCA 2.0: News & Discussions

vampyrbladez

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2018
Messages
5,027
Likes
10,787
Country flag
Mwf will have almost same range as rafale.

Mwf will carry 3300kg fuel internally for single f414.
While rafale caries 4500kg internally for two m88 .
( 2200kg for each m88 to burn).

Adjusted for other factors both should have same range. Rafale has more payload than mwf but most strike mission carry one or two bombs ( lgb ) and 4-6 aam. Mwf can easily carry them and much more with drop tanks too.
To get an idea of the MWF, compare the Rafale to the Gripen E/F. That will clarify your doubts.
 

IndianHawk

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2016
Messages
4,783
Likes
12,023
Country flag
To get an idea of the MWF, compare the Rafale to the Gripen E/F. That will clarify your doubts.
Gripen E/F can perform 80% of rafale missions with meteor. Rafale can still lift more load and Spectra is in different league than any other ew suite . Yet not all mission require that level of capabilities.

Mwf can too do most of the jobs of rafale just as efficiently. Rafale will Trump it in heavy ew environment but Pakistan doesn't have those capabilities.
 

vampyrbladez

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2018
Messages
5,027
Likes
10,787
Country flag
Gripen E/F can perform 80% of rafale missions with meteor. Rafale can still lift more load and Spectra is in different league than any other ew suite . Yet not all mission require that level of capabilities.

Mwf can too do most of the jobs of rafale just as efficiently. Rafale will Trump it in heavy ew environment but Pakistan doesn't have those capabilities.
We need to replace Mig 21BiS and Mirage 2000H squadrons in large numbers. That's where the MWF is needed in large numbers.

Ironically that is where the F 21 (F 16Blk72+) and the Gripen E/F come into play regarding the MMRCA 2.0 v1 (2016-17).

This time in the document, which is precursor to Request for Proposal, it has been specified that IAF requires a single-engine fighter. It differs from an earlier tender, issued in 2007, for 126 medium, multi-role combat aircraft (MMRCA).
https://www.defenseworld.net/news/1...t_to_Make_Single_Engine_Fighters#.Xsackh7hU0M

Restricted expressions of interests were sent through Indian embassies to "some overseas participants" to take part in the program in October last year to elicit responses to produce single-engine fighter aircraft in India. Lockheed Martin offered to shift the assembly line of its F-16 Block 70, and Sweden offered to build the Gripen-E aircraft in India with technology transfer.
https://www.defensenews.com/air/201...ink-a-single-engine-fighter-deal-before-2019/
 

piKacHHu

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 5, 2015
Messages
158
Likes
403
Country flag
Kid, any modern radar can't tell the difference between the radar signal of F-16 and JF-17 by itself. The radar on the fighter jet can only detect the signal, not even know it is enemy or friend. With support of AWACS or ground command centre, it can know which is Pakistan's jet and which is India's own jet. Then, with further information analysis (sill done by AWACS or command center), such as taking off airport, speed, size, they may be able to tell what kind of jet it is.
In the same vain, any fighter aircraft having modern RADAR also carries ECM/ESM systems that could identify the threat based on EM signatures emitted by the enemy fighter. In strict sense, it's true that the RADAR can only give you position & vector of the airborne target, but in the context of BVR scenario/Post Balakot skirmish, one has to see it as modern aircraft like MKI & F-16 pitching against each other with all the counter measures deployed which also includes ESM/RWRs.
Ever heard of term "Threat Library" ; Your assertion is quite primitive in a way that you are discounting sophisticated ESM systems that maintains and update a full feature library of EM signature of airborne & ground based radars. Combined with the information from RADAR & IR Signature, it could identify the potential threat. It doesn't need to get nod from AWACS every time for the identification of the threat. For MKIs, AFAIK it does have RWS-50/ or indigenous EW system which could identify F-16 at the time of engagement of AMRAAMs.

Now, if you are asserting this outdated knowledge based on unverified or speculated theories floating around Operation Swift retort & counter-action from IAF side or just proving your point that IAF fighters operated without ECM/ESMs didn't get a clue of any airborne threat till they saw AMRAAMs chasing them down , I would suggest to exercise caution as the realty might be very different from our imagination.
 

aditya10r

Mera Bharat mahan
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2016
Messages
5,615
Likes
11,036
Country flag
Adjusted for other factors both should have same range. Rafale has more payload than mwf but most strike mission carry one or two bombs ( lgb ) and 4-6 aam. Mwf can easily carry them and much more with drop tanks too.
I've been saying this for quite some time now.
All Tejas needs is a dual ejector rack and it is a kick ass all round fighter.Mk2 MWF will be even better(hope it gets those triple ejector rack like F-21/Rafale).

It'll be able to perform missions better than mirage 2000 and mig-29 hands down.

Assuming it has to go on a long range strike mission it can carry 1 centreline fuel tank with with 1 towed EW and 1 Rafael litening pod under the fuselage.On wings it can carry 2 more fuel tanks and 4 LGB(mk82/83 category bombs) 2 BVR AAM and 2 WVR AAM.

That's a really good loadout.
 

ashdoc

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 21, 2010
Messages
2,808
Likes
3,167
Country flag
I've been saying this for quite some time now.
All Tejas needs is a dual ejector rack and it is a kick ass all round fighter.Mk2 MWF will be even better(hope it gets those triple ejector rack like F-21/Rafale).

It'll be able to perform missions better than mirage 2000 and mig-29 hands down.

Assuming it has to go on a long range strike mission it can carry 1 centreline fuel tank with with 1 towed EW and 1 Rafael litening pod under the fuselage.On wings it can carry 2 more fuel tanks and 4 LGB(mk82/83 category bombs) 2 BVR AAM and 2 WVR AAM.

That's a really good loadout.
That will be a total of 13 different things carried on a platform that has a carrying capacity of 4000 kg . I don't think mk1a can carry that much.
 

aditya10r

Mera Bharat mahan
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2016
Messages
5,615
Likes
11,036
Country flag
That will be a total of 13 different things carried on a platform that has a carrying capacity of 4000 kg . I don't think mk1a can carry that much.
Mk1a can carry little over 4 tonnes but will have to sacrifice on its internal fuel.Its limited by it's wing design and fuselage length.It sacrifices a lot of things.Mainly smaller fuselage and smaller wings.That negate any space for any meaningful loadout that can be hung below it.The wings also are short so it sacrifices wingtip mounts.

That's why dual ejector racks are needed for it to perform it's missions.
On a CAP mission it can carry 2 fuel tanks 4bvraam(mounted on dual ejector racks) and 2 wvraam.
On the fuselage it can carry the towed EW.

Thats a good loadout, it'll be able to spend longer in the air and have a nice loadout of 6 missiles.


MK2 however will be able to carry over 6 tonnes.
 

no smoking

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
4,103
Likes
816
Country flag
In the same vain, any fighter aircraft having modern RADAR also carries ECM/ESM systems that could identify the threat based on EM signatures emitted by the enemy fighter. In strict sense, it's true that the RADAR can only give you position & vector of the airborne target, but in the context of BVR scenario/Post …...
IAF side or just proving your point that IAF fighters operated without ECM/ESMs didn't get a clue of any airborne threat till they saw AMRAAMs chasing them down , I would suggest to exercise caution as the realty might be very different from our imagination.
I guess you didn't even read my discussion with other members.
If you did, you should what we are talking about: I am not discussing how good or bad that IAF was. I simply don't agree with the claim made by other that India's Su-30 has no good communication system to do its job.

He tried to argue that Russian radar was too bad to identify F-16 until it shoot out BVR, I just point out that every radar has the same limitation by itself.

So, please read carefully before jumping in.
 

WolfPack86

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2015
Messages
6,920
Likes
8,400
Country flag
Indian Air Force restructures $17 billion fighter jet program
NEW DELHI — The Indian Air Force is overhauling its plan to induct 114 medium-weight multirole fighters, with a senior service official saying the aircraft will be built in India with significant foreign technology transfer and no foreign procurement.

The effort will cost about $17 billion under the Make in India economic policy.

The Air Force official said the project is very much alive, but that the “final nitty-gritties have yet to be worked out, and that will take time because it will require manufacturing capability building in the country.”

Daljit Singh, a retired Indian Air Force air marshal and current defense analyst, agreed that India must move quickly to create the capability to manufacture high-tech systems at home.

“The main aim should be to extract the maximum [transfer of technology] from the OEM [original equipment manufacturer] and start manufacturing subcomponents through Indian companies," Singh said.

Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman announced Saturday that the government will create a separate budget for domestic procurement of weapons and equipment to help reduce the imports bill.

A Ministry of Defence official said a formal budget allocation of about $17 billion for the multirole fighters project will be granted sometime next year, and will be launched under the Strategic Partners procurement policy.

Under that policy, the multirole fighters will be manufactured by domestic private defense companies with one of the original equipment manufacturers approved by the government. The process for selecting contractors is yet to begin, but the MoD official said the businesses will be selected within three years.

No private defense company in India has made fighter jets before, but several have expressed interest in participating in the program, including Tata Advanced Systems, Adani Defence, Reliance Defence, Mahindra Defence and Bharat Forge Limited.

Reliance Defence has created a joint venture with France’s Dassault Aviation, which currently manufactures components for Rafale fighters.

Meanwhile, Tata Advanced Systems has teamed with Lockheed Martin, an American company that produces the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. Adani Defence has announced a teaming arrangement Sweden’s Saab AB, which makes the Gripen jet.

Another Indian Air Force official said a request for information was sent in June 2018 to foreign original equipment manufacturers for the multirole fighters. Among those who have responded to the RFI are: Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Dassault Aviation, Saab AB, Airbus Defence and Space, Russian Aircraft Corporation, and Sukhoi Company.

The Indian Air Force plans to induct all 114 multirole fighters within 12 years after the contract is awarded.

The official added that the RFI included the requirement for transfer of technology, including the transfer of design, development, manufacturing and repair expertise. It also included the requirement for the unilateral capability to integrate weapons, systems and sensors. The capability to upgrade the aircraft and a provision on exporting the aircraft is also part of the program. India is also seeking transfer of technology for stealth technology, active electronically scanned array radars, avionics, electronic warfare systems and engines.

“The advantage of making a fighter aircraft in India is that the customer can select the types of sensors, EW equipment, avionics and weapons, as per operational requirements. Subsequently, the customer is assured of full logistic and upgrade support without any restriction. However, it is important to embed most of these systems in the aircraft design itself to ensure low observability and systems compatibility,” he said.

However, Singh, the defense analyst, said any transfer of technology agreement would need to make business sense to the OEM. “Propriety Items could still be under the control of the OEM,” he said.
 

WolfPack86

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2015
Messages
6,920
Likes
8,400
Country flag
The need for a war plan
No general would GO into battle without a map or war plan. Campaigns have been lost for want of these. This is exactly what befell the government’s Make in India vision for the defence sector. When unveiled six years ago, Make in India was meant to turn the country from a net importer of armaments to self-sufficiency in weapons production. But the idea had no roadmap, no time-bound plan with deliverables and no generals to steer its course. The result was a foregone conclusion.

India has consistently maintained its place as the world’s second-largest arms importer, buying military hardware worth over $100 billion (Rs 7.5 lakh crore) from the US, France, Russia and Israel between 2013 and 2019. Over 60 per cent of India’s military hardware is imported. Every year, the armed forces pay over $10 billion for importing defence hardware. The government aims to change that. Finance minister Nirmala Sitharaman’s May 16 announcement of a bold new reforms package aims to create a robust defence industrial base. Defence is crucial for a self-reliant India, but without action on the ground, Make in India 2.0 stands a very real risk of floundering like its earlier avatar.

THE REFORMS

The key drivers announced by Sitharaman include creating a negative list of defence equipment imports and a lowing foreign companies to own 74 per cent stake in defence joint ventures (up from 49 per cent).

Forty-one ordnance factories will be corporatised and a special budgetary provision will be made for domestic procurement in defence.

Several of these measures were outlined by the Lt Gen. D.B. Shekatkar committee’s report on reforms in the armed forces, submitted to the ministry of defence (MoD) in 2016.

THE RATIONALE

The government has aimed what it believes is a silver bullet at the problem of defence imports. Indian manufacturers say they get unrealistic weapons requirements, and the armed forces then import these weapons systems.

The government now says that the armed forces have been asked to make ‘realistic requirements’ for weapons systems, a point raised by Chief of Defence Staff General Bipin Rawat recently. The negative list closes the door on easy imports and compels a hunt for indigenous options.

The hike in the FDI cap in defence is aimed at attracting foreign OEMs (original equipment manufacturers). Defence MNCs were unwilling to invest in India or part with technology until now as they lacked control. Raising the FDI cap gives them majority control. India’s defence FDI figures have been woeful. Between 2000 and 2018, the total FDI in the sector was just $7.26 million.

THE SCOPE

The negative list is among the most radical concepts and will need to be drawn up by Gen. Rawat’s Department of Military Affairs. It will have items banned from imports because there are indigenous capabilities. This is not going to be an easy task. Gen. Rawat recently announced that the Indian Air Force (IAF) was not buying 114 imported fighter aircraft (to be built locally), only to have Air Chief Marshal R.K.S. Bhadauria publicly contradict him three days later, saying the acquisition plan was on.

Two proposed imports, 1,400 howitzers from Israel for the army and two Phalcon Airborne Warning and Control Systems aircraft for the IAF, could now be axed as Indian companies have produced similar systems.

The government proposes to prioritise items and components within India for military platforms. The proposed corporatisation of the 41 ordnance factories, which make arms, ammunition and clothing worth over Rs 12,000 crore for the defence forces, is another radical step. The move was announced by the MoD last August, but postponed after Ordnance Factory Board (OFB) trade unions went on an indefinite strike. The OFB is an attached department of the MoD. Corporatisation will turn the OFB into a defence PSU, like the Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL), with its own board of directors and far greater autonomy in decision-making and the freedom to forge joint ventures.

THE GAP

The armed forces have an Annual Acquisition Plan and a 15-year Long Term Integrated Perspective Plan. These define their acquisition priorities. There is, however, no long term indigenisation plan that would define the MoD’s indigenisation priorities.

A rigorously monitored indigenisation roadmap, for instance, would lay down targets for the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO), ordnance factories and the defence PSUs to indigenise critical components. It would help enormously if ‘exploded views’ of imported defence hardware were provided, which would identify components needed to be indigenised urgently based on how often they needed to be replaced.

If the MoD were to draft a plan wherein limited numbers of indigenous products were brought into service and improved upon, it would enormously help the industry.
 

Assassin 2.0

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2019
Messages
3,992
Likes
18,711
Country flag
MMRCA 2.0 is big step towards make in india if we implement it correctly.
If we build 112 aircrafts in india with joint venture of foreign companies + Indian private industry it will further help us to create indigenous jets.
For now other than HAL we don't have any competitor which is a big issue.
India also needs to have at least two indigenous aircraft manufacturers.
 

MIDKNIGHT FENERIR-00

VICTORIOUM AUT MORS
Banned
Joined
Oct 27, 2019
Messages
1,699
Likes
4,748
Country flag
Signing of MMRCA in 2011 Can made Same Impact For F-16 blk 60 Whixh was AESA Equipped With Aim-120 C8
We Might had 100 + buy now

Same goes To artillery I don't know why-were Sleeping And Not checking on dragon


That Oli would have same fate of Nepal royal family
Or India could buy the New Generation F-15 Multirole/Air superiority-Fighters which can carry even more Ordnance and Missiles than the F-16 and which can out fight any Chinese Fighter including there So called Stealth Fighters that is operational today in PLAAF. F-15 has even more range than F-16 and slightly less than Su-30MKI. F-15 can also be upgraded rapidly with the assistance and cooperation of Indian Allies such as Israel, Japan and South Korea.
 
Last edited:

Assassin 2.0

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2019
Messages
3,992
Likes
18,711
Country flag
Or India could buy the New Generation F-15 Multirole/Air superiority-Fighters which can carry even more Ordnance and Missiles than the F-16 and which can out fight any Chinese Fighter including there So called Stealth Fighters that is operational today in PLAAF. F-15 has even more range than F-16 and slightly less than Su-30MKI. F-15 can also be upgraded rapidly with the assistance and cooperation of Indian Allies such as Israel, Japan and South Korea.
No only rafale will come.
Competition is of Medium Weight Fighter aircraft.
F-15 lies in Su-30MKI category.

F-16 was rejected by IAF after trials. (dunno why people like that oldie so much rafale with meteor can always defeat that F-16.)

Nibbers don't get excited there is no point of buying F-16 we ain't gonna get it for free like porkis. So it's better to go with much more advanced platform.
 
Last edited:

WARREN SS

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 12, 2013
Messages
2,272
Likes
6,041
Country flag
F-16 was rejected by IAF after trials. (dunno why people like that oldie so much rafale with meteor can always defeat that F-16.)

Nibbers don't get excited there is no point of buying F-16 we ain't gonna get it for free like porkis. So it's better to go with much more advanced platform.
MMRCA commenced on 2007
In 2011 Neither Rafale had AESA nor meteor
only jet To To posses Such tech was F-16 blk 60 Coming With Large weapon Package And AMRAAM

The Rafale in first MMRCA tender was Rafale L1

So I pointed Out 2011 was best time to buy F-16 Not Now
Today Rafale has AESA and Long range BVR And we Paid alll training And logistical cost in F3R deal
 

Assassin 2.0

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2019
Messages
3,992
Likes
18,711
Country flag
MMRCA commenced on 2007
In 2011 Neither Rafale AESA nor meteor
only jet To To posses Such tech was F-16 blk 60 Coming With Large weapon Package

The Rafale in first MMRCA tender was Rafale L1

So I pointed Out 2011 was best time to buy F-16 Not Now
Today Rafale has AESA and Long range BVR And we Paid alll training And logistical cost in F3R deal
The contest featured six fighter aircraft: Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, Dassault Rafale, Eurofighter Typhoon, Lockheed Martin F-16 Fighting Falcon, Mikoyan MiG-35, and Saab JAS 39 Gripen. On 27 April 2011, after an intensive and detailed technical evaluation by the IAF, it reduced the bidders to two fighters—Eurofighter Typhoon and Dassault Rafale. On 31 January 2012 it was announced that Dassault Rafale had won the competition due to its lower life-cycle cost. The deal had been reported to cost US$28–30 billion in 2014.

Even in 2011 F-16 was rejected. Off course IAF did it's own assessments rafale comes with some unique features. For example it can be armed with nuclear weapons.

F-16 declared winner only one time when it was single engine focused MMRCA in which there were only 2 jeta saab grippin and F-16 but thanks to Manohar parikar that deal was rejected.
Bro.
 

WARREN SS

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 12, 2013
Messages
2,272
Likes
6,041
Country flag
On 31 January 2012 it was announced that Dassault Rafale had won the competition due to its lower life-cycle cost. The deal had been reported to cost US$28–30 billion in 2014.
Still it was Inferior It has RBE Pesa radar And Meteor was not operational

The Rafale in this MMRCA Deal was Rafale F1

RBE2 AESA Became operation With F3R
So Basically It Was 1 gen behind From current F3R

Euro-fighters are Still Struggling With AESA It Will be operationally available from 2020 or 21
 

Assassin 2.0

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2019
Messages
3,992
Likes
18,711
Country flag
Still it was Inferior It has RBE Pesa radar And Meteor was not operational

The Rafale in this MMRCA Deal was Rafale F1

RBE2 AESA Became operation With F3R
So Basically It Was 1 gen behind From current F3R

Euro-fighters are Still Struggling With AESA It Will be operationally available from 2020 or 21
I believe IAF knows what is best for the country!!
Rafale have greater range then F-16 had better payload capacity F-16 till date doesn't have answers to scalp missile.
Overall IAF doesn't focus only on missile the performance of the platform also matters.
Tomorrow tejas with Asea and Meteor will not become a much better platform than rafale or Euro-fighter.
Anyway let's stick to the topic
 

IndianHawk

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2016
Messages
4,783
Likes
12,023
Country flag
Still it was Inferior It has RBE Pesa radar And Meteor was not operational

The Rafale in this MMRCA Deal was Rafale F1

RBE2 AESA Became operation With F3R
So Basically It Was 1 gen behind From current F3R

Euro-fighters are Still Struggling With AESA It Will be operationally available from 2020 or 21
French offered the f3r version as it was already in development and french were confident that both aesa and meteor would be ready before delivery.

The question is what version of rafale was evaluated and what was it equipped with?
 

WARREN SS

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 12, 2013
Messages
2,272
Likes
6,041
Country flag
French offered the f3r version as it was already in development and french were confident that both aesa and meteor would be ready before delivery.

The question is what version of rafale was evaluated and what was it equipped with?
you can go in rafale thread these things are discussed during rafale court Trials
And cost comparison
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top