MMRCA 2.0 - Updates and Discussions

What is your favorite for MMRCA 2.0 ?

  • F-35 Blk 4

    Votes: 44 16.4%
  • Rafale F4

    Votes: 205 76.5%
  • Eurofighter Typhoon T3

    Votes: 5 1.9%
  • Gripen E/F

    Votes: 5 1.9%
  • F-16 B70

    Votes: 1 0.4%
  • F-18 SH

    Votes: 10 3.7%
  • F-15EX

    Votes: 11 4.1%
  • Mig-35

    Votes: 2 0.7%

  • Total voters
    268
  • Poll closed .
Not today, but down the lane in next 20 25 years you will need them for better DSP and AI processing.
Uhhh... Likely .... never. Why? Because of EM interference. shorter feature size act as an antenna plus thermal budgets. There are always ways to implement AI using even 90 nm node. There is a reason why NASA flies mostly 100+ nm chips.

Sure, in future if some tech comes up that makes smaller feature sizes viable, it will be taken up. But likely, even then, it will not be consumer level foundry. It will be costly single purpose foundry. Space / Aerospace chips are designed and fabricated very differently.
 
We should start receiving them in 3-4 years of deal signing.
Fot the first built in France, Yes.
The other may take some more time, but less with any other supplier has Dassault, Thales, Safran already have some industrial bases in india, and some indian partner to deal with fastly.
Let's say 5 years for the first indian assembled one.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sathya
India has so many jets to replace.... There remain deep spaces for Tejas, AMCA....

And you will be far stronger in engine technology.
Its not the plane that I am worried about. Its how late this was done. This step should have been taken in 2009-10 itself. Like UAE decied on Rafale after 10 years of dilly dallying. IAF needed new jets since 2001 and we getting them now.

Plus this time lost means we will be integrting our weapons into Rafale in long future. As such ... so much potential of this deal was wasted in worthless negotiations by India. A straight forward acquisition of 176 jets in 2001 for IAF/IN would have been better.
 
What only 30% indigenous content and no source code? Are we gone insane?
The source code is a red line for all time and all suppliers.
But I'm quite sure some black doors willbe openend in the software to ease the future integration of your own weapons, in full independance.
You may add some soft to work with Windows, even if the code of Windows is hidden (for a noobie like me).
 
India has so many jets to replace.... There remain deep spaces for Tejas, AMCA....

And you will be far stronger in engine technology.

In the Era of Long Range AESA Radar and Long Range AAMs ,.Our MiG 29 , Mirage 2000 and Jaguars have become the Second Line of Defence

It means that They have to be Replaced as soon as possible

Currently Only the
Rafale and Su 30 with its powerful Radars and Jammers can go head to head with The Enemy

Tejas MK 1A is just starting to get inducted

That is why we are relying heavily on Missile Strikes

In 10 years MiG 29 and Mirage 2000 have to be Replaced , no matter what
 
The source code is a red line for all time and all suppliers.
But I'm quite sure some black doors willbe openend in the software to ease the future integration of your own weapons, in full independance.
You may add some soft to work with Windows, even if the code of Windows is hidden (for a noobie like me).
We received access in MKI deal, that too when we are big zero in Radar tech. Today, we are on par with EU when cimes to radar tech. I don't know why u guys adamant about source code sharing.
 
Firstly, the Rafale F5 is clearly no longer just a standard, but a complete, coherent combat system that is already very advanced in terms of its industrial structure. We are a long way from an ‘intermediate before the SCAF’. In reality, this text describes a strategic pivot: Dassault is transforming the Rafale into a central platform for collaborative combat, while gradually absorbing the building blocks that were supposed to justify the SCAF's existence as a breakthrough.

The connectivity aspect is revealing. The F5 is presented as ‘second generation connected’, interoperable with GCAP, Gripen and even F-35. In other words, the Rafale is becoming a hub, not a satellite. This is exactly in line with what you have been emphasising for months: the value is no longer in the ‘isolated aircraft’, but in mastery of the architecture, the combat cloud and the decision-making tempo. And this mastery is French, via Dassault–Thales, not outsourced.

The on-board AI is described as a ‘digital co-pilot’, which is a politically correct formulation. In practice, what is described (massive fusion, threat prioritisation, drone control) already corresponds to what many elsewhere call on-board tactical command and control. The pilot remains the decision-maker, but the aircraft sorts, anticipates and makes suggestions. This is exactly the opposite of Airbus DS's discourse on ‘distributed’ AI, which has never been demonstrated.

The drone derived from nEUROn is, in my opinion, the real heart of the F5. Its size (Mirage 2000), its M88 engine, its role ‘ahead of the Rafale’ and its partial autonomy clearly indicate that Dassault has opted for a robust, industrialisable and pilotable UCAS, not a disposable loyal wingman. Here again, we see French industrial continuity, not an artificial break.

On the sensors, the text is almost too talkative to be innocuous. The RBE2 XG, the fully digitised Spectra, the OSF Silent Killer at over 100 km: all this indicates that the F5 is regaining and exceeding SEAD/DEAD capabilities that some thought were lost. Above all, the emphasis on massive data processing (1 TB/s) confirms that the bottleneck is no longer the sensor, but the software architecture — exactly where Dassault is making rapid progress.

The M88 T-REX engine is presented as an evolution, but in reality it is a change of thermal category. 2100 K, new turbines, optimised nozzle: this engine is clearly designed to power heavy drones, UCAS and post-Rafale developments, not just the F5. Safran is preparing a family, not a single engine, and this ties in perfectly with the M15/M30/M50 announcements that you have already linked together.

The conformal fuel tanks are another very strong indicator. They reflect a doctrinal choice: to extend the range without relying on tankers, in a high-intensity context. It is an implicit admission that certain ‘all-stealth, all-tanker’ scenarios are no longer viable.

Finally, the armament section shows that the F5 is designed to last until the end of the 2040s. ASN4G, Smart Cruiser swarm, AASM XLR: this is not a simple modernisation, it is a projection of sovereignty in depth. Few Western aircraft will have this nuclear + conventional + collaborative continuity.
 
Uhhh... Likely .... never. Why? Because of EM interference. shorter feature size act as an antenna plus thermal budgets. There are always ways to implement AI using even 90 nm node. There is a reason why NASA flies mostly 100+ nm chips

Today they are flying 100nm-500nm chips because they are radiation hardened. They are already testing 20nm chips for space application. AMD is also testing their 20nm Kintix for this purpose.

“The typical size for [transistor dimensions on] chips devoted to spacecraft applications is about 500 nanometers,” says Choi. “If you can replace 500-nm feature sizes with 20-nm feature sizes, the chip size and weight can be reduced.” Costs fall too

Today, efforts at NASA and KAIST are focusing on the elimination of the second gate contact for heating. This contact is not ideal because it modifies chip design and demands the creation of a new transistor library, which escalates production costs. Those at KAIST are investigating the capability of a different design, called a junctionless nanowire transistor, which heats the channel during normal operation. Separately, at NASA, researchers are developing on-chip embedded microheaters that are compatible with standard circuits.

Cutting the costs of self-healing tech will play a key role in determining its future in chip-scale spacecraft, which will require many more years of investment before they can get off the ground.

 
  • Like
Reactions: _Anonymous_
The source code is a red line for all time and all suppliers.
But I'm quite sure some black doors willbe openend in the software to ease the future integration of your own weapons, in full independance.
You may add some soft to work with Windows, even if the code of Windows is hidden (for a noobie like me).

How come SAAB gave ToT with source code for the Gripen E/F to Brazil? Apparently, the source code was on offer to India as well.

The obvious reason is Gripen is desperate for orders while Rafale is already a best-seller. We missed the bus in 2014.

Let me ask you a hypothetical question. What do you think would have been the markup in cost had Dassault agreed to transfer the Rafale source code to India as part of the MRFA deal?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Shan and spice
At this price, the orange man will personally deliver F-35 to you,

36$ billion dollars for 114 jets
Comes with 30% IC
Only the later variants comes with F5 variants,

36$ billion for 4.5th gen jets,
And nobody has issues with it,
How are they going to fund AMCA, MK2, cats warrior, Ghatak
As always, we don't know what this price covers, and even if it is the right bill....
multi years support ? Weapons ? tools and benchs for manufacturing ?

India is aware of jets price. Rafale won over EF2000, over SH18 : the full price was on the table, and unlikely the Swiss F-35, the price was not renogociated later...

about F5 : all the brend new F5 will be "easily" upgradable to F5. Not necessarily so easy for earlier models.
Its insane if we aren't getting source code, and stupid if the content is nere 30%.
Op sindoor is a success only because we able to mate MKI & Jaguar with the eeaoon of our choice. I don't think frenc will allow lora or rampage on Rafale.
Maybe at the end, for 1€, you will have the Rafale french assembly line :LOL:

Something you missed with M2000....
 
Last edited:
I don't know why u guys adamant about source code sharing.

You have to replace all the radars on Rafale with Indian made radar( Virupaksha) and then you can integrate whatever you want. But I believe you still require source code to integrate other sensors onboard with this radar of your choice.
 
We received access in MKI deal, that too when we are big zero in Radar tech. Today, we are on par with EU when cimes to radar tech. I don't know why u guys adamant about source code sharing.
You have received access to ONE russian export code with MKI.
The perf of the russian jets in Ukraine show that even the pure russian jets are not on par with the west ones.
radar tech.... UTTAM remains so far a lab product, when RBE2 AESA is operationnal since nearly 15 years.
 
You have to replace all the radars on Rafale with Indian made radar( Virupaksha) and then you can integrate whatever you want. But I believe you still require source code to integrate other sensors onboard with this radar of your choice.
more than that. A weapon system is not only a radar.
In the Rafale case you have to link together a radar, Spectra, OSF, data links (as L16), laser pod.... and made a data fusion of all. Not a simple task.
 
  • Like
Reactions: screambowl
The Franco-Indian duo

The duo will not win everywhere, but it will win where:
  • sovereignty matters
  • duration matters
  • military credibility is sought after
China is beginning to cause concern: yes, the Franco-Indian duo will be in direct competition with China in the South:

Not on price, not on volume, but on sovereignty, credibility and strategic autonomy.

It is asymmetrical competition, and that is precisely why it is dangerous for Beijing.

The drone is no longer a weapon: it is a grammar. For 20 years, the West has seen the drone as a sensor, precision munition, an appendage to manned aviation. The war in Ukraine has shown something else: drones have become a syntax of combat: reconnaissance, strikes, saturation, deception, electronic warfare, industrial attrition.

It is no longer a system, it is a language. The moment when everything changes: Ukraine 2022–2025. Three truths have emerged. Mass beats perfection:

A €3,000 drone that destroys a €3 million system changes the economic logic of war. Russia, Ukraine, and then all observers understood that victory depends on the ability to produce, lose, and replace quickly.

The decision-making cycle collapses: drones shorten the detection => decision => strike cycle from minutes to seconds. Combat becomes tactical, decentralised and algorithmic.

The sky becomes saturated; there is no longer ‘air superiority’ but rather the management of a permanently hostile environment.

Three models of drone power

China:
industrial saturation: mass production, standardisation, civil-military integration, export without political constraints

China does not sell ‘drones’; it sells aerial submersion capability, ideal for authoritarian or fragile states.

United States: drones as multipliers of existing systems: Loyal Wingman, advanced ISR, integration into network-centric combat, heavy software dependency, high performance, expensive, dependent, not easily exportable outside the immediate circle.

Emerging model: drones as tactical autonomy

The Franco-Indian model (in development) has not yet been formalised, but it already exists in practice.

Key principle:

Drones must be simple, modular, locally producible and consumable.

India contributes: volume, frugal engineering, acceptance of loss, experience of hybrid conflict

France brings: sensors, electronic warfare, system integration, multi-environment doctrine.

Result:

Consumable tactical drones, loitering munitions, rugged ISR drones, sober C2 systems.

This appeals to the Global South because drones avoid dependence on Western aircraft, circumvent embargoes, do not require a heavy aeronautical elite, and can be produced locally.

For a country in the Global South, drones provide immediate access to tactical deterrence.

The real shock for Western armies
  • Drones have highlighted an uncomfortable truth:
  • Western stocks are insufficient
  • industrial production is too slow
  • doctrine is still ‘platform-centric’
  • warfare is becoming industrial before it is technological
The war in Ukraine reveals a brutal fact: a modern army does not lose because it is technologically inferior, it loses because it cannot replace what it consumes.

Rafale + drones: not an opposition, a hierarchy

The common mistake is to think that drones will replace aircraft. The reality is that the aircraft becomes the conductor, the drone becomes the mass, and the missile becomes the punctuation.

A Rafale without drones is vulnerable. Drones without Rafale are blind at high intensity.

And tomorrow:
  • semi-autonomous swarms
  • expendable drones
  • local embedded AI
  • decentralised production
  • ‘acceptable loss’ doctrine
Superiority will no longer come from the best platform but from the ability to lose without collapsing.

Conclusion: China has understood mass, the United States has mastered the system, and the Franco-Indian duo could master the balance. Not domination, but resilience.

And in the world to come, resilience will beat perfection.

If Ukraine ‘enters’ a Franco-Indian axis through the door of drones, with Western support of the Rafale/Caesar type, the implications are major. The Rafale/Caesar exchange for drones is Rafale = brain, drones = mass, artillery = hammer

For Ukraine: a shift from survival to industrial sovereignty; for France: a power multiplier at an acceptable cost; for India: a huge opportunity... but maximum caution. Indeed, India does not want to be perceived as an anti-Russian co-belligerent. India could accept a France-Ukraine-India triangle on drones, but in a discreet, modular, non-ideological mode.
We don't want to import shit expensive French drones allow us to integrate our own CCA.
 
  • Like
Reactions: spice
You have to replace all the radars on Rafale with Indian made radar( Virupaksha) and then you can integrate whatever you want. But I believe you still require source code to integrate other sensors onboard with this radar of your choice.
You already said why we cannot put our radar inside Rafale.
 
  • Like
Reactions: screambowl