Rafale RB of Indian Air Force : News and Discussions

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
8,126
5,506
India
Yes that is why we need escort AWACS.
What's interesting is by 2035, most of the USAF will have F-22s, F-35s and PCAs, with only some 300 odd aircraft continuing to be the F-15EX and F-16V. So around the time the E-3s are phased out, AWACS function will likely fall on drones and the fighter jets. And what's even more interesting is the transition is going to be extremely quick and this will become part of their propaganda in the future, where they are going to make it seem like they have achieved the impossible.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vstol Jockey

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
8,126
5,506
India
By incorporating stealthy design. Russia is already building a stealthy transport plane. Other types of support aircraft would follow soon. You simply couldn't negate the advantages of the sheer size of these aircrafts. Once they will get stealth with modern radar tech, they would be able to provide a coverage of 1000 Kms something not possible with a fighter size jet.
Let me ask you a question. So if there's an enemy jet coming in hot by using the Himalayas as cover, a future stealth AWACS will detect the aircraft at 1000Km?
 

Aurora

Active member
May 18, 2020
268
144
India
Let me ask you a question. So if there's an enemy jet coming in hot by using the Himalayas as cover, a future stealth AWACS will detect the aircraft at 1000Km?
If it is flying at a significant height then yes. Furthermore Himalayas are not everywhere to provide cover.
In any case, it would detect enemy much before than those so called fighter AWACS.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bali78 and Hydra

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
8,126
5,506
India
If it is flying at a significant height then yes. Furthermore Himalayas are not everywhere to provide cover.
In any case, it would detect enemy much before than those so called fighter AWACS.
No, I'm specifically talking about using the Himalayas for cover. Doesn't matter if it's here or there.
 

Aurora

Active member
May 18, 2020
268
144
India
No, I'm specifically talking about using the Himalayas for cover. Doesn't matter if it's here or there.
Answer is already given.
Btw do you realise that your question has nothing to do with your core argument for phasing out AWACS i.e their low chance of survival in highly contested airspace??
The problems those modern AWACS will face due to Himalayan cover is also being faced by our present AWACS. But still they are in service and our Airforce is demanding for more. I don't think you would find much support if you ask the brass to phase out AWACS as they are useless against Himalayan cover.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hydra

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
8,126
5,506
India
Answer is already given.
No, you didn't. All I asked for a simple question with just a yes or no answer.

Btw do you realise that your question has nothing to do with your core argument for phasing out AWACS i.e their low chance of survival in highly contested airspace??
The problems those modern AWACS will face due to Himalayan cover is also being faced by our present AWACS. But still they are in service and our Airforce is demanding for more. I don't think you would find much support if you ask the brass to phase out AWACS as they are useless against Himalayan cover.
I already did, but you don't know the subject, so you wouldn't understand.

I'll be happy if you give me an answer, then I can get out of your hair. All I asked is if this new fangled stealth AWACS will be able to detect a fighter jet weaving through the Himalayas at 1000Km.
 

Aurora

Active member
May 18, 2020
268
144
India
I already did, but you don't know the subject, so you wouldn't understand.
I know that I don't know. But I only ventured my opinion on your core argument that since AWACS have very low chance of survival in modern highly contested airspace hence they should be discontinued. I gave an alternative solution, that's all.

I'll be happy if you give me an answer, then I can get out of your hair. All I asked is if this new fangled stealth AWACS will be able to detect a fighter jet weaving through the Himalayas at 1000Km.
Okay tell me that when we say that an AWACS has so and so detection range, does it apply for every situation??
 

Aurora

Active member
May 18, 2020
268
144
India
What's interesting is by 2035, most of the USAF will have F-22s, F-35s and PCAs, with only some 300 odd aircraft continuing to be the F-15EX and F-16V. So around the time the E-3s are phased out, AWACS function will likely fall on drones and the fighter jets. And what's even more interesting is the transition is going to be extremely quick and this will become part of their propaganda in the future, where they are going to make it seem like they have achieved the impossible.
Lol!!! They only have 189 F22s. PCA no where in sight and F35s far from getting rid of all it's teething issues let alone getting mature. There is a reason why USAF is spending so much on F15ex or planning to retain its whole fleet of F16s till 2060.
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
8,126
5,506
India
Okay tell me that when we say that an AWACS has so and so detection range, does it apply for every situation??
You tell me.

Lol!!! They only have 189 F22s. PCA no where in sight and F35s far from getting rid of all it's teething issues let alone getting mature. There is a reason why USAF is spending so much on F15ex or planning to retain its whole fleet of F16s till 2060.
Why don't you put up the numbers of each of the jets you named that are expected to be operated by 2035 and then let's see if your "lol" applies?
 

Girish

Member
Dec 11, 2017
41
28
Delhi
What's interesting is by 2035, most of the USAF will have F-22s, F-35s and PCAs, with only some 300 odd aircraft continuing to be the F-15EX and F-16V. So around the time the E-3s are phased out, AWACS function will likely fall on drones and the fighter jets. And what's even more interesting is the transition is going to be extremely quick and this will become part of their propaganda in the future, where they are going to make it seem like they have achieved the impossible.
Some questions I have on this:
1. How does the escort fighter in awacs role maintain stealth when it is emitting?
2. What are the specific upgrades in Rafale 4.2 that enable this role?
3. Are there any comparable Indian programs?
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
8,126
5,506
India
Some questions I have on this:
1. How does the escort fighter in awacs role maintain stealth when it is emitting?
That's simple. If you're referring to Vstol's MSA, it will just turn off its radar and run away and another aircraft elsewhere will take over the job, thereby defeating the defences and still maintaining operational control.

Anyway, if attacked, the aircraft can also fight back. Remember, it's first and foremost a fighter jet, so it's automatically considered highly survivable. It can even get into a dog fight if necessary. The Rafale capability I am referring to is by using its standard operational radar. The MSA Vstol's talking about follows a different philosophy and has been deliberately modified to carry many more AWACS-equivalent sensors, so it's specialised, like the Growler.

When it comes to the Rafale, one aircraft will be emitting, another will be radio silent. So, in case of an attack, it will act as a normal sensor-shooter combination that's in practice the world over today.

2. What are the specific upgrades in Rafale 4.2 that enable this role?
360 degree radar. The radar capability may not be uniform, but it's gonna be more than enough.

So that includes Conformal Array radars. In layman’s language Sensors of current RBE2 will be installed all over the body including wings for 360-degree coverage.

An AWACS must be able to pick up a fighter jet from 350-450Km through ground clutter to be useful, so the actual useful range is 250-350Km. But for a fighter jet that's performing the same role, if it has to equal an AWACS in radar performance, then it needs to be able to do the same from 250-350Km.

One more thing, it doesn't matter if the AWACS is upgraded to 1000Km or beyond, it will become totally irrelevant if it gets pushed back by anything more than 250Km from the battlespace, 'cause then the useful range will become 0-100Km. Vstol's AWACS-MSA's goal will be to reduce that to 250Km or more range to virtually nothing. The same with the Rafale F4.2.

The J-20 should also come with 360 degree radar capability. Perhaps it's already operational, although it's unclear to what extent.

3. Are there any comparable Indian programs?
AMCA Mk1.

Although not Indian, there's the upgraded MKI, to a certain extent. Since it has a repositioner, it can function in the same way as Netra on its own. With 2 aircraft flying in a cooperative formation, watching each other's blindspots, it will be able to deliver the same level of performance as an AWACS. Plus we'll get 4 pilots that can act as controllers, with a dedicated drone acting as a communications node.
 

maint1234

Member
Jul 17, 2020
51
60
Delhi
Was reading the f35 vs rafale thread on f16net yesterday . Interesting reading with lots of fanboyism but real life experiences of french rafale pilots thrown in.
My understanding was , that this is a excellent tool but using it effectively is upto the users.

Also , AWACS will be required as they can see the complete battlefield and direct individual planes, rafale or any other make , to their targets. Like 50 enemy planes get airborne at the same time from different airfields, the AWACS will be directing interception for different areas . Not get overwhelmed like last year when 20 planes came at us at the same time. This role cant be performed by fighter planes.
 

AbRaj

Well-Known member
Dec 6, 2017
663
516
Republic of Wadiya
Was reading the f35 vs rafale thread on f16net yesterday . Interesting reading with lots of fanboyism but real life experiences of french rafale pilots thrown in.
My understanding was , that this is a excellent tool but using it effectively is upto the users.

Also , AWACS will be required as they can see the complete battlefield and direct individual planes, rafale or any other make , to their targets. Like 50 enemy planes get airborne at the same time from different airfields, the AWACS will be directing interception for different areas . Not get overwhelmed like last year when 20 planes came at us at the same time. This role cant be performed by fighter planes.
Ate is ex-rafale flight instructor

 

Aurora

Active member
May 18, 2020
268
144
India
You tell me.
No it doesn't. But it is completely irrelevant to your core argument. It doesn't matter if AWACS are equally or more helpless than a fighter in detecting enemy aircrafts in some situation, as the huge advantage they offer in other situations more than compensate for it and would make them relevant forever.

Why don't you put up the numbers of each of the jets you named that are expected to be operated by 2035 and then let's see if your "lol" applies?
Taking the most ideal situation ( i.e no crashes, delays )
188 - F22s
900- F35s
300- F15 e/ex
600-700 F16s
 

Picdelamirand-oil

Senior member
Nov 30, 2017
1,485
1,813
France
transition.wifeo.com
Pakistan says India’s Rafale deal will disturb balance of power

ISLAMABAD: A day after India received the first batch of five Rafale fighter jets from France, Pakistan on Thursday expressed reservations on the deal, asserting it will disturb the balance of military power in the region.

Responding to the development in the neighbour country, the Foreign Office (FO) called on the international community to “dissuade India from its disproportionate arms buildup which could also lead to an arms race in South Asia”.

“The world is already a witness to the bellicose and irresponsible rhetoric by the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) government in pursuit of a revisionist agenda in the neighbourhood,” said FO Spokesperson Aisha Farooqui during her weekly press briefing.
Farooqui observed that “according to some former senior Indian officials and several international publications […] Rafale jets are dual-capable systems that can also be modified as nuclear weapon delivery platforms”.

The FO statement noticed that it is well-established that India continues to expand and modernise its nuclear arsenal both in terms of type and number of delivery systems. “Besides, India has nuclearised the Indian Ocean and continues to increase the readiness of its arsenal through measures such as canisterisation of missile systems.”

“It is disturbing to note that India continues to amass military capabilities beyond its genuine security requirement. According to credible and reputable international research institutes, India is now the second-largest arms importer in the world,” added Farooqui.

The spokesperson stated that Pakistan has been consistently highlighting “the risks of massive Indian arms buildup as well as India’s offensive security doctrine and force postures, which are adversely affecting strategic stability in South Asia”.

According to the FO, this arms buildup is being aided and abetted through a policy of exemptions, waivers and supply of advanced equipment, technology and weapons for narrow commercial interests.

“Such arms transfers also violate the objectives of various export control regimes on preventing destabilising accumulations of arms in various regions including where there exist outstanding conflicts and disputes.”

“Transfer of advanced systems, where there is an open intention of conversion into nuclear delivery platforms, calls into question the commitment of international suppliers to non-proliferation commitments.”

The FO reiterated that Pakistan remains open to consideration of measures for crisis management, risk reduction, and strategic restraint.

“While remaining opposed to any arms race in South Asia, Pakistan cannot remain oblivious to these developments and remains confident of its ability to thwart any ill-considered act of aggression,” it said.

CONTINUED SUBJUGATION IN HELD KASHMIR:

The FO noted that Thursday marks the 360th day of the continued subjugation and brutalisation of the Kashmiri people in Indian occupied Jammu and Kashmir.

Ceasefire violations along the Line of Control (LoC) and the Working Boundary in Sialkot, targeting civilian populated areas with artillery fire, heavy-calibre mortars and automatic weapons continue unabated, recalled Farooqui.

She condemned restrictions imposed by Indian authorities on Eidul Azha prayers across held Kashmir.

“Imposition of restrictions on prayers on one of the most important days of the Islamic calendar represents complete disrespect by the Indian government for the sentiments of the Muslims of IOJK. It is also a flagrant violation of their fundamental freedom of religion,” she said.

The spokesperson maintained that Indian authorities are using Covid-19 related restrictions as a pretext to curb religious freedom of the Muslims of IOJK, even as the BJP government has been permitting religious activities in various other contexts and instances.

“Disallowing Kashmiri Muslims to offer Eidul Azha prayers is blatant discrimination,” she said.

:D:D:D
 

Lolwa

Active member
Feb 6, 2020
221
111
Delhi
The Rafale F3R doesn't need AWACS because the data dissemination and decision making will be slower than what the Rafale itself can do on its own. When it comes to ISR, its hardware is as good or better than what we already have. And with its ability to operate closer to the target, it's a superior ISR platform. The biggest advantage is the Rafale's intelligence is actionable in real time. Our current assets's ability to create actionable intelligence and mission tasking moves at a snail's pace in comparison.

The Rafale F4.2 won't need AWACS at all because the AWACS will be inferior to the Rafale in every aspect, including detection range, number of targets tracked etc. For example, a Phalcon radar will operate 100Km inside our own territory and look at stuff 400-500Km away, effectively giving it a range of 300-400Km inside enemy territory. Otoh, Rafale F4.2 should be able to see the same targets from 600Km away when flying 10Km inside our airspace.

Basically, even if you upgrade the AWACS with the same hardware that can see all the way to horizon, the Rafale will still fly closer to the threats and see all over to the horizon anyway. During earlier times, a fighter jet could only see up to 150Km, whereas AWACS could see up to 400Km, so it was a force multiplier then. Nowadays, fighter jets have started having more "relevant" range than AWACS. For example, Irbis with 400Km range is effectively similar to an AWACS when you fly closer to the enemy, so you can imagine what a GaN upgrade will do, and later photonics.

If you recall, @vstol Jockey and I used to have discussions on how to fit AWACS sensors on new gen aircraft like MSA and FGFA. It's primarily because AWACS are no longer survivable. In a year or two, within our own theatre, AWACS will become a "previous day of war" aircraft, since the Chinese will have operationalised AWACS-killers with an estimated range of 400-700Km. The same with other ISR and EW aircraft that rely on slow business jets. So all that capability has to be moved into fighter jets. And Rafale F3R is the IAF's first step towards that. It's created a significant assymmetry against both our adversaries.

Simply put, AWACS+fighter combo is 4th generation, or even early operational 5th gen. Late 5th generation to early 6th gen eliminates the need for that combo. So if we get 36 Rafale F4.2, it's the equivalent of buying 36 Phalcon++ (+) 36 ISR++ (+) any number of 4th gen fighter jets.
Does that mean we will have to buy French awacs?? If our awacs are not as good we still need a better situational awareness for our rafale's.
 

STEPHEN COHEN

Senior member
Dec 4, 2017
4,792
2,580
The Rafale F3R doesn't need AWACS because the data dissemination and decision making will be slower than what the Rafale itself can do on its own. When it comes to ISR, its hardware is as good or better than what we already have. And with its ability to operate closer to the target, it's a superior ISR platform. The biggest advantage is the Rafale's intelligence is actionable in real time. Our current assets's ability to create actionable intelligence and mission tasking moves at a snail's pace in comparison.

The Rafale F4.2 won't need AWACS at all because the AWACS will be inferior to the Rafale in every aspect, including detection range, number of targets tracked etc. For example, a Phalcon radar will operate 100Km inside our own territory and look at stuff 400-500Km away, effectively giving it a range of 300-400Km inside enemy territory. Otoh, Rafale F4.2 should be able to see the same targets from 600Km away when flying 10Km inside our airspace.

Basically, even if you upgrade the AWACS with the same hardware that can see all the way to horizon, the Rafale will still fly closer to the threats and see all over to the horizon anyway. During earlier times, a fighter jet could only see up to 150Km, whereas AWACS could see up to 400Km, so it was a force multiplier then. Nowadays, fighter jets have started having more "relevant" range than AWACS. For example, Irbis with 400Km range is effectively similar to an AWACS when you fly closer to the enemy, so you can imagine what a GaN upgrade will do, and later photonics.

If you recall, @vstol Jockey and I used to have discussions on how to fit AWACS sensors on new gen aircraft like MSA and FGFA. It's primarily because AWACS are no longer survivable. In a year or two, within our own theatre, AWACS will become a "previous day of war" aircraft, since the Chinese will have operationalised AWACS-killers with an estimated range of 400-700Km. The same with other ISR and EW aircraft that rely on slow business jets. So all that capability has to be moved into fighter jets. And Rafale F3R is the IAF's first step towards that. It's created a significant assymmetry against both our adversaries.

Simply put, AWACS+fighter combo is 4th generation, or even early operational 5th gen. Late 5th generation to early 6th gen eliminates the need for that combo. So if we get 36 Rafale F4.2, it's the equivalent of buying 36 Phalcon++ (+) 36 ISR++ (+) any number of 4th gen fighter jets.
You must have seen ISTAR planes photographs

They have a large belly mounted SAR
Which then transmits images to
Ground Control Stations

Similarly Phalcon AWACS has a huge Rotating Radar on the Top of the IL 76

DO you mean to say that Rafale' RBE 2 AESA Radars will be to able To be as powerful as the present day ISTAR / SAR And.AWACS radars --- DESPITE the obvious size differences
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
8,126
5,506
India
Was reading the f35 vs rafale thread on f16net yesterday . Interesting reading with lots of fanboyism but real life experiences of french rafale pilots thrown in.
My understanding was , that this is a excellent tool but using it effectively is upto the users.

Also , AWACS will be required as they can see the complete battlefield and direct individual planes, rafale or any other make , to their targets. Like 50 enemy planes get airborne at the same time from different airfields, the AWACS will be directing interception for different areas . Not get overwhelmed like last year when 20 planes came at us at the same time. This role cant be performed by fighter planes.
As I pointed out, the AWACS needs to be operating close enough that it can do all that.

Anyway, modern communication systems will allow complex networking. It's like the difference between 2G with an old phone and 4G with a smartphone.
No it doesn't. But it is completely irrelevant to your core argument. It doesn't matter if AWACS are equally or more helpless than a fighter in detecting enemy aircrafts in some situation, as the huge advantage they offer in other situations more than compensate for it and would make them relevant forever.
You don't even know what I'm talking about, so how would you understand what my core argument is.

Taking the most ideal situation ( i.e no crashes, delays )
188 - F22s
900- F35s
300- F15 e/ex
600-700 F16s
:ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO:
Does that mean we will have to buy French awacs?? If our awacs are not as good we still need a better situational awareness for our rafale's.
The French operate the American E-3. It's inferior to what we already operate today.
 

Sathya

Well-Known member
Dec 2, 2017
1,940
970
India
You must have seen ISTAR planes photographs

They have a large belly mounted SAR
Which then transmits images to
Ground Control Stations

Similarly Phalcon AWACS has a huge Rotating Radar on the Top of the IL 76

DO you mean to say that Rafale' RBE 2 AESA Radars will be to able To be as powerful as the present day ISTAR / SAR And.AWACS radars --- DESPITE the obvious size differences
Large sized sensors of various types..
360 * continous scanning
Large number of target tracking, large volumes of information transmission.
Long time on station..

Being on air for longer time and group of awacs can indentify low flying aircraft s or cruise missiles... On a continous basis..

More number of controllers and stations to control and co ordinate..

If fighter sized radar becomes powerful and awac sized radar should become super powerful.

If fighters get teeth to target awacs, awacs would also evolve to escape.

I think Tactical fighter sized awacs cannot replace Traditional awacs but can only supplement it.
Maybe they can do more in offensive missions.
 
  • Like
Reactions: STEPHEN COHEN

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
8,126
5,506
India
You must have seen ISTAR planes photographs

They have a large belly mounted SAR
Which then transmits images to
Ground Control Stations

Similarly Phalcon AWACS has a huge Rotating Radar on the Top of the IL 76

DO you mean to say that Rafale' RBE 2 AESA Radars will be to able To be as powerful as the present day ISTAR / SAR And.AWACS radars --- DESPITE the obvious size differences
Size is relative to the wavelength used. Our AWACS uses L band, which is 15-30cm, so it requires such a large antenna. X band is just 3cm. So you effectively need a 5-10 times smaller X band radar to get the same capability as an L band radar.

If we assume the Phalcon uses a 10m long L band radar, then a fighter jet has to carry a 1-2m long radar to become its equivalent. However with advanced technology, like GaN, the difference becomes even more stark. And once you bring resolution into the picture, the difference simply becomes heaven and earth. For the most accurate target data, you need a more or less symmetrical radar. But Phalcon doesn't need such an accurate target data since it's main job is volume scan, which is why it's at best a 10mx2m radar. So from one angle, the Phalcon is as accurate as an advanced fighter jet radar, while from another angle, the Phalcon is shitter than the Mig-21's radar in terms of resolution. Which is why fighter jet radars are symmetrical, either a circle or a square, or a similar fancy symmetrical shape like the Zhuk-AE. In simple words, a fighter jet radar is superior to the Phalcon's radar. So if you get the option of choosing between a symmetric X band radar and an asymmetric L band radar with the X band having similar performance as the best figures for the L band, then the X band is the superior radar. Similarly, most ground radars are symmetric, so are superior to the AWACS radar.

But my arguments about AWACS going obsolete have nothing to do with this. The mil pros have understood. It doesn't matter how advanced the AWACS radar is, the problem is the platform, not the sensors. So you have to carry similarly capable or the same sensors on different platforms. Due to the laws of physics and the limits of human bodies, the options are either fighter jets or drones.
 
  • Like
Reactions: STEPHEN COHEN