Dassault Rafale - Updates and Discussion

[calutronking]

Can India afford to purchase a 100+ Rafales? The French Armee' del Air purchased 42 aircraft in Jan 2024 for 5.5 billion USD, yielding a cost per unit of $130 million USD. This is absolutely the floor as far as cost is concerned because the French and is EXTREMELY unrealistic price for India considering that we will need pay a great deal for maintenance, infrastructure, insurances, weapons packages, and India specific upgrades... also inflation.

I suspect the price to be closer to what the navy paid of $280 million per unit, but even if we split the the difference halfway and say the order will be around 220 million USD per unit the total will come to be over $22 billion dollars. Will the Air Force budget be able to afford that? Considering all the other spending priorities that they have?

 

[Optimist]

If India is buying what's available on the open market, On an economical basis, The F-35 and Super hornet/Growler is cheaper and better, However Indian procurement is a funny thing, It has already rejected the Super hornet twice, I also understand that procurement is to meet mission and political needs, not necessarily the best available

 

[RationalGuy]

I feel that IAF wants to get rid of MIG 29 , Mirage 2000 and Jaguar within 10 years

All non AESA planes have become liabilities or burdens in the Era of Long Range Air to Air Missiles

France is Testing the Rafale F4.3

Preparing for the future of the Rafale, France conducted a test campaign to assess the current state of the F4.3 standard ahead of its final definition.

theaviationist.com

Tejas Mk2 will replace those in 10 years.

 

[jmaxwell_]

The IAF "42 squadron" requirement dates back ~1962 when India had no rockets for deep penetration and deterrence. How is it that in 2025 with all the advancements through IGMDP this is still the requirement?

In light of Op. Sindoor when 7 out of 9 targets were taken out by SSMs and all 6 air kills came from SAMs, should there not be more discussion about what's the right force mix instead of just repeating "but 42 squadrons"?

How about going back after the Qatari and Helenic pre-owned Mirage 2000s, and maybe pull in funding and schedules for SuperSukhoi (and build more if Russia can supply the CKDs) while waiting for the Tejas Mk1A to ramp up in numbers instead of going in for more Rafales?

 

[vstol Jockey]

You should send them all the HAL employees.

well that will ruin Russia.

 

[Rajput Lion]

French have realised that in a very heavily contested airspace Rafale has limited weapon options. They are now open to many of the things IAF/IN wanted. Seems better sense has prevailed on DA. SPECTRA requires every config to be retuned and that takes time to ensure electronic stealth. What I foresee is that we may get another 60 odd Su-35s with I777s engine and another 40 modified SU-57 with complete transfer of tech based on how India supported Russia in this useless war with Ukraine which was actually all about destroying Europe. How Stupid? For your information, Russia is looking for Indian manpower thru G2G deal to make up for lost manpower in this war and the number is nearly a million Indian Hindus. They dont want Muslims.

We should avoid Su-35M. 177S should definitely be pursued for MKI UPG though. AFAIK, MRFA has been scrapped and 114 MRFA order will be split into direct gov-to-gov orders of one 4.5 gen(read Rafale) and one 5th gen(read Su-57MKI). Both should be around 3 squdrons(54/60). @randomradio

 

[vstol Jockey]

We should avoid Su-35M. 177S should definitely be pursued for MKI UPG though. AFAIK, MRFA has been scrapped and 114 MRFA order will be split into direct gov-to-gov orders of one 4.5 gen(read Rafale) and one 5th gen(read Su-57MKI). Both should be around 3 squdrons(54/60). @randomradio

Some of our SU-30MKI which are very old, will not be upgraded and the newer ones have been made capable of carrying Brahmos-A. These Su-35s will be to make up for additional Brahmos capable heavy hitting aircraft and also to carry Zircom hypersonic missiles which are being offered with SU-57 and will also be manufactured in India to be fitted to Su-30MKIs as well. As I had stated in my earlier posts, Su-30MKI has convinced IAF to have more such heavy fighters in its fleet. Su-30MKI proved much more usefull than Rafale in Op Sindoor.

 

[Rajput Lion]

Some of our SU-30MKI which are very old, will not be upgraded and the newer ones have been made capable of carrying Brahmos-A. These Su-35s will be to make up for additional Brahmos capable heavy hitting aircraft and also to carry Zircom hypersonic missiles which are being offered with SU-57 and will also be manufactured in India to be fitted to Su-30MKIs as well. As I had stated in my earlier posts, Su-30MKI has convinced IAF to have more such heavy fighters in its fleet. Su-30MKI proved much more usefull than Rafale in Op Sindoor.

We need to restart production of MKI (in UPG configuration) and order over 100 of these rather than meagre 12 that we've planned. I am still not convinced regarding Su-35M. Yes, it will have 177S engines with radar-blocker and same RAM as Su-57S along with maybe even a Byelka derived AESA radar. But I would rather like to see IAF order more Rafale than invest in another heavy-weight type.

Su-57MKI is absolutely imperative though for our future air-dominance.

 

[Speedster1]

Imo, Su-35M provides no operational advantages over the in-service MKI. Not sure about combat radius but it has the same payload capacity at 8T. Afaik, Su-35 is just a proposal (unsolicited?) from the Russkies atm. Su-57 is a better buy under the present circumstances.

More Rafale are in the pipeline as per recent reports. But until AMCA comes online, the lion's share of funding should go into GBAD (additional S-400 and eventually Kusha), imo.

 

[babablacksheep]

Imo, Su-35M provides no operational advantages over the in-service MKI. Not sure about combat radius but it has the same payload capacity at 8T. Afaik, Su-35 is just a proposal (unsolicited?) from the Russkies atm. Su-57 is a better buy under the present circumstances.

More Rafale are in the pipeline as per recent reports. But until AMCA comes online, the lion's share of funding should go into GBAD (additional S-400 and eventually Kusha), imo.

Su35 has modern composite airframe.
Which means.
Lighter weight, better fatigue resistance, higher availibility rate, higher airframe life, lower rcs( Russians had a rcs reduction program for su35, including ram treatment inside air-ducts).

Along with its modern engine, especially if we get 177s engine, it will further help in higher availibility rate, along with "super cruise" with lighter payload.

Pair all this with internals of super sukhoi/su30 mlu program.
And you get a very formidable non stealth heavy fighter.

A supersukhoi based on su35's airframe will provide better availibility rate and lower rcs than a super sukhoi based on su30mki airframe.
Also its not hard to increase payload of su35's airframe.

It's better to use su35's airframe( plus potential 177s engine ) with super sukhoi avionics/internals Instead of all this rafale, mrfa jhumla, and even if a jet is selected the deliveries will not start before 2030, first super sukhoi will start being delivered after modification in early 2030s.

And the amount of tech transfer, source code control etc, you would get with su35 will be miles ahead of what frenchies will ever willing to offer.
100% sure ruskies will give 100% know how and know why of a "more optimised" version of su35's airframe.
The only thing we will depend on ruskies will be hot section of engines.
And can guarantee all this will be cheaper than rafale.


The choice between rafale f5 vs super sukhoi based on su35m.


The only thing that makes me a little uncertain is al51 hasn't entered full scale production yet, though according to reports development is done and full scale production line is being set up, will debut with newer su57m variant.
Once it goes into full production, Russians can be considered on par of "in service" military jet engine tech of USA, and ahead of "in service" military jet engine tech of rest of Europe.

 

[Speedster1]

Su35 has modern composite airframe.
Which means.
Lighter weight, better fatigue resistance, higher availibility rate, higher airframe life, lower rcs( Russians had a rcs reduction program for su35, including ram treatment inside air-ducts).

Along with its modern engine, especially if we get 177s engine, it will further help in higher availibility rate, along with "super cruise" with lighter payload.

Pair all this with internals of super sukhoi/su30 mlu program.
And you get a very formidable non stealth heavy fighter.

A supersukhoi based on su35's airframe will provide better availibility rate and lower rcs than a super sukhoi based on su30mki airframe.
Also its not hard to increase payload of su35's airframe.

It's better to use su35's airframe( plus potential 177s engine ) with super sukhoi avionics/internals Instead of all this rafale, mrfa jhumla, and even if a jet is selected the deliveries will not start before 2030, first super sukhoi will start being delivered after modification in early 2030s.

And the amount of tech transfer, source code control etc, you would get with su35 will be miles ahead of what frenchies will ever willing to offer.
100% sure ruskies will give 100% know how and know why of a "more optimised" version of su35's airframe.
The only thing we will depend on ruskies will be hot section of engines.
And can guarantee all this will be cheaper than rafale.


The choice between rafale f5 vs super sukhoi based on su35m.


The only thing that makes me a little uncertain is al51 hasn't entered full scale production yet, though according to reports development is done and full scale production line is being set up, will debut with newer su57m variant.
Once it goes into full production, Russians can be considered on par of "in service" military jet engine tech of USA, and ahead of "in service" military jet engine tech of rest of Europe.

There is a reason why the IAF capped MKI at 272 - high opex and serviceability issues. This is despite the fact that the type's uptime has improved considerably over the past 20+ years through predictive maintenance (via HUMS) and better logistics (IMMOLS).

Even since Op Sindoor, there is no word on MKI new-build orders going beyond 12. The 2nd reason is that the IAFs current force structure is top-heavy. They need a light, cheap MRCA to bring up the tail end. That is LCA Mk1A/Mk2 territory. Does the IAF see a slot for the 35t Su-35 in that segment? I don't think so.

In any case, Su-35 was meant to be the ultimate evolution of the Su-27/30 family. As such, the airframe composites, improved avionics and particularly better EW features were par for the course.

In the past, the Russians had offered us a roadmap to bring the MKI to the same standard as the Su-35 (largely radar+ avionics). Now that India is moving ahead with its own UPG program, they're pitching it all over again. It should be recalled that the IAF had rejected Su-35 for MMRCA in the early 2000s and didn't even shortlist it for MRFA.

So, it's just another Russian sales pitch at the moment.

 

[babablacksheep]

There is a reason why the IAF capped MKI at 272 - high opex and serviceability issues. This is despite the fact that the type's uptime has improved considerably over the past 20+ years through predictive maintenance (via HUMS) and better logistics (IMMOLS).

Even since Op Sindoor, there is no word on MKI new-build orders going beyond 12. The 2nd reason is that the IAFs current force structure is top-heavy. They need a light, cheap MR jet to bring up the tail end. That is LCA Mk1A/Mk2 territory. Does the IAF see a slot for the 35t Su-35 in that segment? I don't think so.

In any case, Su-35 was meant to be the ultimate evolution of the Su-27/30 family. As such, the airframe composites, improved avionics and particularly better EW features were par for the course.

In the past, the Russians had offered us a roadmap to bring the MKI to the same standard as the Su-35 (largely radar+ avionics). Now that India is moving ahead with its own UPG program, they're pitching it all over again. It should be recalled that the IAF had rejected Su-35 for MMRCA in the early 2000s and didn't even shortlist it for MRFA.

So, it's just another Russian sales pitch at the moment.

Yeah but, rafale is not a cheap/affordable fighter for tail end

A super su35( su35's airframe + supersukhoi subsystems) with 177s engines, i would actually consider superior to rafale f5, while having complete control over the jet and its modifications, at a much cheaper rate than france will ever offer.

 

[Ashwin]

There is a reason why the IAF capped MKI at 272 - high opex and serviceability issues. This is despite the fact that the type's uptime has improved considerably over the past 20+ years through predictive maintenance (via HUMS) and better logistics (IMMOLS).

Even since Op Sindoor, there is no word on MKI new-build orders going beyond 12. The 2nd reason is that the IAFs current force structure is top-heavy. They need a light, cheap MRCA to bring up the tail end. That is LCA Mk1A/Mk2 territory. Does the IAF see a slot for the 35t Su-35 in that segment? I don't think so.

Newer generation defense enthusiasts need to understand this (So much noise on twitter). Air forces have specific force structures defined based on threats they perceive.

A heavy fighter comes with many downsides. You can't replace a MiG-21 with an Su-30 in forward areas. Fighters like F-15 or Su-35 are just out of question. There may be a chance for upgraded MKI in the future because the airforce is desperate.

IAF has already extended the production line by ordering 40 more aircraft and raising an additional two squadrons from their initial estimation of around 230 MKIs.

 

[vstol Jockey]

Newer generation defense enthusiasts need to understand this (So much noise on twitter). Air forces have specific force structures defined based on threats they perceive.

A heavy fighter comes with many downsides. You can't replace a MiG-21 with an Su-30 in forward areas. Fighters like F-15 or Su-35 are just out of question. There may be a chance for upgraded MKI in the future because the airforce is desperate.

IAF has already extended the production line by ordering 40 more aircraft and raising an additional two squadrons from their initial estimation of around 230 MKIs.

The concept of forward airbases is now nearly redundant due to long range tube arty.

 

[Rajput Lion]

Yeah but, rafale is not a cheap/affordable fighter for tail end

A super su35( su35's airframe + supersukhoi subsystems) with 177s engines, i would actually consider superior to rafale f5, while having complete control over the jet and its modifications, at a much cheaper rate than france will ever offer.

Can't put all our eggs in one basket(Russia). Thus Rafale is required in 100+ numbers. We can always order more MKI UPGs as far as heavy-weight option is concerned. MKI UPG. is going to be better than Su-35M is all parameters, so Su-35 is not needed at all.

The concept of forward airbases is now nearly redundant due to long range tube arty.

Absolutely. Not only that, but our enemy like China has 700+ Flankers and 250+ J-20s. That is as top-heavy as it gets. Even RuAF has more Flankers than Fulcrums.

Now it is all about fire-power where no other jet beats Su-30MKI except Strategic Bombers which we should procure as well.

 

[Speedster1]

Yeah but, rafale is not a cheap/affordable fighter for tail end

Unlike Western AFs that only fly light and heavy combat ac types (exemplified by F-16C/D + F-15E), the IAF is structured around 3 categories - light, medium and heavy.

There is a lot of overlap between 4.5G gen jets of the latter two classes though. For example, Rafale can haul 9.5t (full-load, bomb truck mode) vs MKIs 8t, despite being 8-10t lighter in terms of MTOW.

But MKI is in a class of own with untapped potential. For example, it can fly LR missions without drop tanks vs Rafale's wing+centerline config. So it can pack more firepower than Rafale (on all hardpoints). There's no indication the IAF wants to add plumbing for fuel tanks as part of MKI UPG either.

Su-35M would only provide an incremental capability upgrade over MKI. Not worth the price tag, imo.

 

[babablacksheep]

Unlike Western AFs that only fly light and heavy combat ac types (exemplified by F-16C/D + F-15E), the IAF is structured around 3 categories - light, medium and heavy.

There is a lot of overlap between 4.5G gen jets of the latter two classes though. For example, Rafale can haul 9.5t (full-load, bomb truck mode) vs MKIs 8t, despite being 8-10t lighter in terms of MTOW.

But MKI is in a class of own with untapped potential. For example, it can fly LR missions without drop tanks vs Rafale's wing+centerline config. So it can pack more firepower than Rafale (on all hardpoints). There's no indication the IAF wants to add plumbing for fuel tanks as part of MKI UPG either.

Su-35M would only provide an incremental capability upgrade over MKI. Not worth the price tag, imo.

These weight categories are primary for "cost reason".

Rafale as far as cost go is in top end category.

Can't put all our eggs in one basket(Russia). Thus Rafale is required in 100+ numbers.

We're not.
Buying su35's airframe and creating a super su35 would be more balancing act as we have gone more western heavy as far aviation systems goes in recent times.

Plus French basket is quite expensive, and does not provide as much control and freedom.

 

[Ashwin]

The concept of forward airbases is now nearly redundant due to long range tube arty.

That doesn't mean you stop deploying fighters there. It means more hardened shelters and defensive systems.

Absolutely. Not only that, but our enemy like China has 700+ Flankers and 250+ J-20s. That is as top-heavy as it gets. Even RuAF has more Flankers than Fulcrums.

PLAN preferring big, long-range fighters is a function of their geography and economy. There is a huge landmass and ocean to defend.

The opposite is Pakistan. They don't have any heavy fighters, let alone twin-engined ones, because of their geographical and financial limitations.

 

[Bon Plan]

The Rafale fighter jet didn't get the same appreciation as the S-400 from the air chief. As he said, the S400 was successful in shooting down all the aircraft; that explains why the Rafale is not an air dominance fighter. It may be good for SEAD and DEAD operations, but I think IAF needs to work with Dassault on this platform to make it more lethal for air-to-air BVR engagement.

It is more and more clear that Rafale was used in air to ground config during the first day, as India didn't expect such a pak trap.

Strangely PAF was very stealthy during 2nd phase of air operations..... Or because they were short on air to air missiles (because most of them used night 1 against Rafale) ? or Rafale were then carrying Meteor ?

Buying su35's airframe and creating a super su35 would be more balancing act as we have gone more western heavy as far aviation systems goes in recent times.

Su-35 didn't seem very potent in the ukraine sky.... and not an export success.
Once you have Su30 in numbers, the best (in heavy fighter) is to overall them.

 

[babablacksheep]

It is more and more clear that Rafale was used in air to ground config during the first day, as India didn't expect such a pak trap.

Strangely PAF was very stealthy during 2nd phase of air operations..... Or because they were short on air to air missiles (because most of them used night 1 against Rafale) ? or Rafale were then carrying Meteor ?

They were active, but after that first night, their activity radically decreased, and effectively ceased by day 4 or 5.

Their airbases were getting hammered without any challange.

An active airbase would be targeted more.
According to reports (dozen+) of their fighters were destroyed on ground.
An awacs on bholori airbase on ground got destroyed.
2 c130 destroyed, 1 c130's nose got damaged.


Basically PAF is not capable of contesting a fully active IAF, they can only contest for short periods and in localised battles.


Also some report states, some american personal on grounds were also harmed in the strikes.