Maybe with your research you know if with NETCOR, will give it a similar capability as PL15 and Chinese datalink combination?
Firstly, the PAF’s Link-17 is not a superior data link system. On the contrary, the Indian Air Force’s Integrated Air Command and Control System (IACCS) is significantly more advanced—arguably light-years ahead in terms of capability and architecture. A detailed explanation is available here about Link-17:
If such a link between awacs and fighter doesn't exist on Rafale, you can be sure it will be on the agenda !
What's your take on this:I am somewhat frustrated by the Indian reactions to the Rafale: there is a kind of discouragement and rampant underestimation of the aircraft that greatly saddens me. In my opinion, the aircraft has not failed, and even if one Rafale was hit, without causing the death of the pilot, that does not mean that the system does not work. There was an engagement involving around a hundred aircraft, and it is normal in war for there to be losses. One aircraft is not significant enough to say that performance targets have not been met.
Furthermore, the aircraft continued to be used without further losses, and in my opinion, we owe it the feat described here:
This type of attack must be carried out with a diving trajectory and with sufficient precision to hit a target measuring 45 cm.
The Scalp has the following attack profile:
This terminal attack is often at an angle of 60 to 75 degrees, i.e. almost vertical.
- Low-altitude cruise flight (terrain following) using altimetric radar.
- Arrival in the target zone with a moderate climb
- Terminal dive on the target, with a very steep dive attack, precisely to strike the roofs of bunkers or underground installations (one of the most vulnerable areas).
The Bramhos has the following attack profile:
In terms of accuracy, the SCALP uses a DSMAC (Digital Scene Matching Area Correlation) terminal system, which compares infrared images of the target with an on-board footprint in real time and is capable of recognising specific shapes (e.g. hatches, air vents, building roofs, etc.), and can strike a known structural weak point, such as an air vent, if it is visually identifiable (in IR) and included in the mission plan.
- Supersonic cruise flight (Mach 2.8 to Mach 3), typically at an altitude of 15 m to 500 m for the anti-ship profile, up to 14–15 km for an anti-ground profile.
- As it approaches the target, it climbs back up to altitude (pop-up manoeuvre).
- It then performs a terminal dive at 75–80° towards the target.
The Brahmos has active radar terminal guidance in most versions (not optical), which is very effective against visible structures, vehicles or buildings, but less accurate for striking such a small target without external designation or very precise data. Block III has mountainous terrain navigation and dive attack capabilities, but is not designed for DSMAC or surgical precision infrared imaging.
If a 45 cm ventilation shaft was deliberately targeted to neutralise an underground command centre (C4), then the SCALP is the most plausible option, provided that this shaft had been visually mapped (IR imaging or satellite reconnaissance) and integrated into the missile's software. This would require meticulous advance planning, possibly involving human intelligence or SIGINT confirming the exact location of the weak point.
It's a series of malicious lies.What's your take on this:
Conversation
Arpit Kanodia
@arpitkanodia30
Follow
What do you make of the above tweet?
Logically speaking a singular engagement accompanied by a claimed loss does not warrant the pitchforks.
When it comes to integrating weapons, for example, people think it's a matter of calculators and software access, but the main problem is the transition to the anechoic chamber to test configurations with the new weapon in order to measure the aircraft's signature with the weapon mounted, given that there is a combination of all operational configurations where there are mixed payloads where this weapon is present, including configurations where weapons have been fired or tanks dropped, all of which is necessary in order to update Spectra.
I am somewhat frustrated by the Indian reactions to the Rafale: there is a kind of discouragement and rampant underestimation of the aircraft that greatly saddens me. In my opinion, the aircraft has not failed, and even if one Rafale was hit, without causing the death of the pilot, that does not mean that the system does not work. There was an engagement involving around a hundred aircraft, and it is normal in war for there to be losses. One aircraft is not significant enough to say that performance targets have not been met.
Furthermore, the aircraft continued to be used without further losses, and in my opinion, we owe it the feat described here:
This type of attack must be carried out with a diving trajectory and with sufficient precision to hit a target measuring 45 cm.
The Scalp has the following attack profile:
This terminal attack is often at an angle of 60 to 75 degrees, i.e. almost vertical.
- Low-altitude cruise flight (terrain following) using altimetric radar.
- Arrival in the target zone with a moderate climb
- Terminal dive on the target, with a very steep dive attack, precisely to strike the roofs of bunkers or underground installations (one of the most vulnerable areas).
The Bramhos has the following attack profile:
In terms of accuracy, the SCALP uses a DSMAC (Digital Scene Matching Area Correlation) terminal system, which compares infrared images of the target with an on-board footprint in real time and is capable of recognising specific shapes (e.g. hatches, air vents, building roofs, etc.), and can strike a known structural weak point, such as an air vent, if it is visually identifiable (in IR) and included in the mission plan.
- Supersonic cruise flight (Mach 2.8 to Mach 3), typically at an altitude of 15 m to 500 m for the anti-ship profile, up to 14–15 km for an anti-ground profile.
- As it approaches the target, it climbs back up to altitude (pop-up manoeuvre).
- It then performs a terminal dive at 75–80° towards the target.
The Brahmos has active radar terminal guidance in most versions (not optical), which is very effective against visible structures, vehicles or buildings, but less accurate for striking such a small target without external designation or very precise data. Block III has mountainous terrain navigation and dive attack capabilities, but is not designed for DSMAC or surgical precision infrared imaging.
If a 45 cm ventilation shaft was deliberately targeted to neutralise an underground command centre (C4), then the SCALP is the most plausible option, provided that this shaft had been visually mapped (IR imaging or satellite reconnaissance) and integrated into the missile's software. This would require meticulous advance planning, possibly involving human intelligence or SIGINT confirming the exact location of the weak point.
What's your take on this:
Quoting the full tweet:
"
See new posts
Conversation
Arpit Kanodia
@arpitkanodia30
Follow
Concerns Regarding Meteor Missile Integration and Rafale’s Future in IAFDespite the ongoing three-day conflict, there has been no confirmed usage or debris found of the Meteor Beyond Visual Range Air-to-Air Missile (BVRAAM) from the Indian Air Force (IAF)’s Rafale fleet. This raises important questions about its operational readiness. It appears the Meteor may not yet be fully integrated with the IAF Rafales attached with Golden Arrows and Falcons. One likely reason is the unresolved integration of the Meteor’s two-way datalink with IAF’s B-NET Software Defined Radio (SDR) systems—an issue reportedly still being addressed by Dassault Aviation.Considering the Rafale acquisition was finalized in 2016, the delay in achieving full integration, particularly of critical combat systems, is a cause for serious concern. Dassault’s responsiveness to customization requests appears to lag behind expectations, and this trend is visible in other areas as well. While global aerospace leaders are progressing toward GaN-based (Gallium Nitride) technologies, Dassault has only recently initiated work on next-generation radar systems. The SPECTRA Electronic Warfare (EW) suite, though robust, is also beginning to show its age.Modern warfare increasingly demands seamless integration between radar systems and EW suites operating in active modes. Competing platforms such as the F-16 with the Viper Shield suite already demonstrate this capability. By contrast, the Rafale (like the Tejas Mk1A) still depends on passive radar-EW integration, limiting its potential in modern electronic battlespaces. Where active modes of EW system are only compatible with passive modes of radar. Even the Meteor missile itself, once considered a cutting-edge BVRAAM, now faces obsolescence pressure from newer systems like India’s Astra Mk2 and Mk3, which are expected to incorporate AESA-based seekers—surpassing the Meteor’s traditional seeker technology.That said, the Rafale remains a high-performance fighter, particularly lauded for its reliability and operational availability. In high-tempo operations, it can perform 5–6 sorties per day, significantly outpacing platforms like the Su-30MKI, which typically manage 2–3.However, as the Indian Air Force evaluates contenders for the upcoming 114 Multi-Role Fighter Aircraft (MRFA) procurement, the Rafale must meet certain critical conditions to justify its selection:Mission Computer Customization: Dassault must permit the installation of an indigenous mission computer. This would enable seamless integration of Indian-developed sensors and weapons, many of which (e.g., Virupaksha AESA radar, Astra Mk3 BVRAAM, GaN-based EW suites) are potentially more advanced than current French systems.Databus Modernization: The Rafale’s architecture should be upgraded to support a high-speed, deterministic, time-triggered databus—preferably based on Ethernet interfaces. This is essential for future sensor fusion capabilities and to enable the Rafale to serve as a command platform within the HAL CATS (Combat Air Teaming System) ecosystem.Cockpit Revamp: The current Rafale cockpit design is rapidly aging. A modernization initiative should introduce a single large-area display, minimize reliance on physical switches and circuit breakers, and increase automation and situational awareness.Airframe Engineering Package Access: Full access to the Rafale airframe's engineering and design package is imperative. This will empower Indian agencies to independently integrate future indigenous or third-party systems without recurring dependencies on Dassault.In conclusion, unless Dassault Aviation agrees to these essential terms—essentially "MKIze" the Rafale—it risks becoming a high-cost, low-flexibility platform. If these conditions are met, the Rafale can remain a relevant and potent asset for the IAF; otherwise, its acquisition may turn into a strategic and financial liability.
"
@vstol Jockey, @randomradio
What do you make of the above tweet?
Yes, but @vstol Jockey complains that the weapon is very expensive, but there are still trade-offs.
As per @vstol Jockey Rafale had to go nearest the border because of Hammer's short range and Su-30MKIs had to go and bail them out of trouble. What you're saying now makes plenty of sense. Anyways, IAF and Dassault need to work together to overcome these issues. Rafale, as it exists, is an absolute great platform.
The issue at hand is not one of range, or did the Rafale entered contested airspace.
This is a serious issue. One of the reasons I'm against F-35s acquisition is exactly this. If any exotic jet can't be synced into our system then it's nothing but a flying white elephant. Dassault and IAF seriously need to resolve this by the former providing all source codes for their jets especially if we are going to order over 100 of these via Make-in-India/MRFA.
