Rafale RB of Indian Air Force : News and Discussions

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
11,314
8,561
India
It's just a Swiss evaluation who refuse to take into account official American documents that describe the defects of the plane and its cost and who prefer to believe L.M.'s power point.

The tech specs were based on what the Swiss tested physically, with an actual flying aircraft. It wasn't a paper evaluation.

At the very least, they have emphasised on its stealth superiority, and any subterfuge is easily revealed by simply pointing a radar at it.
 

Picdelamirand-oil

Senior member
Nov 30, 2017
2,356
2,818
73
France
transition.wifeo.com
The tech specs were based on what the Swiss tested physically, with an actual flying aircraft. It wasn't a paper evaluation.

At the very least, they have emphasised on its stealth superiority, and any subterfuge is easily revealed by simply pointing a radar at it.
How you test Anomalies, Availability and disponibility, cost of MCO and if the F-35 is an export version or an US version?
The prblem is L.M. said :"It will be fine in 2025" and the Swiss believed it.
And it will be fine only in 2031.

An article I wrote in 2014

The F-35 software

As the program began in 2001, the estimated date for an operational F-35 brings us to 2031.
It was extremely risky to make this prediction in 2014 and it is much less risky now.
 
Last edited:

Ashwin

Agent_47
Staff member
Administrator
Nov 30, 2017
4,720
7,686
Bangalore
It's just a Swiss evaluation who refuse to take into account official American documents that describe the defects of the plane and its cost and who prefer to believe L.M.'s power point.
Did Dassault present French government document? Or Swiss look into it ?
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
11,314
8,561
India
How you test Anomalies, Availability and disponibility, cost of MCO and if the F-35 is an export version or an US version?
The prblem is L.M. said :"It will be fine in 2025" and the Swiss believed it.
And it will be fine only in 2031.

An article I wrote in 2014

The F-35 software


It was extremely risky to make this prediction in 2014 and it is much less risky now.

Some things can't be tested unless complete, like sensor fusion, but some are pretty much final, like RCS.

On this forum itself, we had anticipated that Block 4 will be ready well after 2025, even though LM claimed 2023-24. GAO now claims it will be at least 2027, so you can argue that your date will be accurate. However, you have to look at this from the Swiss and Finnish perspectives, not American or others', who have already received their jets. Your date may not be that much relevant to the Swiss since it appears they will start taking deliveries of the Block 4 only from 2027, so their entire order will be operational only sometime after 2031. The Swiss could very well be expecting all promised capabilities to be delivered before the last F-35 is delivered.

This export/US version is simply a conspiracy theory. The airframe, engine and hardware configurations are the same. But you are free to propose there are software restrictions.
 

Picdelamirand-oil

Senior member
Nov 30, 2017
2,356
2,818
73
France
transition.wifeo.com
Did Dassault present French government document? Or Swiss look into it ?
Your question is not very clear, but I suppose it is about whether France is as transparent as the US in exposing the problems of developing our weapons systems.

The F-35 supporters want to make believe that the US is the only one to be transparent, but it's not true, there are in all countries control bodies that release reports when there is something wrong.

What is true is that the F-35 programme is so bad that it is under exceptional scrutiny in the US, which gives more information than for other US programmes.

So we have "La cours des comptes" which is the equivalent of the GAO and which makes an annual report to denounce cost drifts on programmes, only when it audited the Rafale programme it found that the cost drift attributable to Dassault was 4.5% over 30 years. Such a result did not make the headlines!

Similarly, when the programme delivers systems in accordance with their specifications, on time and at the agreed price, which is the case with Dassault, there is no exceptional surveillance that is put in place, only the routine that is ensured by DGA audits.

But for example, at the beginning of the Rafale programme, there were problems with the Rafale gun and this was not hidden at all. So when there are abnormal problems, we say so and if we say nothing, it is because the problems will be solved before the next delivery.

Incidentally, in France, when there is a problem that corresponds to category 1 of the F-35 programme (I did say a single problem in this category), all Rafales are stopped from flying and only the flights to correct this anomaly are authorised. Flights can only be resumed when the anomaly has been corrected and the correction has been deployed on the aircraft to be flown.

So we do not understand the deployments of F-35s, by the hundreds, with 13 category 1 anomalies, not counting those that have been abusively downgraded from 1 to 2 in order to be able to postpone the correction.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ashwin

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
11,314
8,561
India
Did Dassault present French government document? Or Swiss look into it ?

Rafale isn't facing development problems, so it's not the same situation.

LM screwed up the F-35 program, hence the need for govt oversight and many of the details of the govt studies are public. And when you screw up, you can only either cancel the program or pump in more money. Hence it becomes a target for criticism as it's a typical case of overpromising and under-delivering. Rafale didn't face this issue at all.

For a journalist, a successful program would mean only 1 or 2 articles. But a failed program that's still continuing over many years would mean dozens of articles and many times more readers. Most taxpayers are not interested in reading about successful programs that are more or less within budget and on time like the Rafale was, but are more interested in knowing why the govt is spending more on an imagined lemon when the money could have gone towards a bigger health budget that could have saved the life of a family member.

The problem Rafale is facing in relation to the F-35 is it's still not developed to the point where it's competitive yet. So, based on the Swiss trials, the Swiss would rather bet on LM eventually delivering to specs than induct something that's obviously inferior to the F-35 on paper. Which means the only argument against the F-35 is not the jet's specs itself, but LM's questionable abilities to deliver the jet as per specs promised. Hence the need to rely on govt audits for any criticism against it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Picdelamirand-oil

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
11,314
8,561
India
  • Like
Reactions: JustCurious

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
11,314
8,561
India
The PESA and AESA have about the same electronic agility the main difference is on the range as there is some energy loss in the PESA compared to the AESA but the antenna of the SU-35 is so big that its radar is still respectable.

While size is an obvious advantage, the ECCM options are much more limited. So it was good enough when it came out, 2002 for Bars and 2014 for Irbis, but as an upgrade beyond 2025 for use until 2040-45, it's a very bad idea. It has to be AESA from here on.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JustCurious

Picdelamirand-oil

Senior member
Nov 30, 2017
2,356
2,818
73
France
transition.wifeo.com
While size is an obvious advantage, the ECCM options are much more limited. So it was good enough when it came out, 2002 for Bars and 2014 for Irbis, but as an upgrade beyond 2025 for use until 2040-45, it's a very bad idea. It has to be AESA from here on.
The new RBE2 AESA modes, which are software developments, are also introduced on the PESA to keep the AESA antenna plug and play. It is less effective on the PESA but the modes exist.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: JustCurious

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
11,314
8,561
India
The new RBE2 AESA modes, which are software developments, are also introduced on the PESA to keep the AESA antenna plug and play. It is less effective on the PESA but the modes exist.

That's because the RBE2 is still behind the true potential of an AESA radar at this time. We need AESA radars to eventually take over most of the transmit and receive functions of the aircraft in its entirety. So, communications, jamming, EW etc. PESAs do not have multifunction capabilities like AESA. And this needs to follow an evolutionary approach because software development will take a long time. Can't expect anyone to jump from PESA to multi-array UWB GaN AESA overnight.
 

STEPHEN COHEN

Senior member
Dec 4, 2017
6,584
4,084
That's because the RBE2 is still behind the true potential of an AESA radar at this time. We need AESA radars to eventually take over most of the transmit and receive functions of the aircraft in its entirety. So, communications, jamming, EW etc. PESAs do not have multifunction capabilities like AESA. And this needs to follow an evolutionary approach because software development will take a long time. Can't expect anyone to jump from PESA to multi-array UWB GaN AESA overnight.

Now for IAF , the questions that arise are

1 How will The Radars of PAF and PLAAF
function against RAFALE

2 If Su 30 / Su 35 also carries a Powerful Jammer , how does that Affect RBE 2 AESA

3 What are we going to do if The Waiting list for Additional Rafales becomes very long , given that orders for Rafales are coming in thick and fast
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
11,314
8,561
India
Now for IAF , the questions that arise are

1 How will The Radars of PAF and PLAAF
function against RAFALE

2 If Su 30 / Su 35 also carries a Powerful Jammer , how does that Affect RBE 2 AESA

3 What are we going to do if The Waiting list for Additional Rafales becomes very long , given that orders for Rafales are coming in thick and fast

Answers for 1 and 2 don't really exist. The only way to know for sure is to test them.

As for more Rafales, I think Dassault plans to assemble any new order for 36 in India itself.
 

Picdelamirand-oil

Senior member
Nov 30, 2017
2,356
2,818
73
France
transition.wifeo.com
That's because the RBE2 is still behind the true potential of an AESA radar at this time. We need AESA radars to eventually take over most of the transmit and receive functions of the aircraft in its entirety. So, communications, jamming, EW etc. PESAs do not have multifunction capabilities like AESA. And this needs to follow an evolutionary approach because software development will take a long time. Can't expect anyone to jump from PESA to multi-array UWB GaN AESA overnight.
Everything you mention is what I call the new modes and it is planned for F4. And I think we'll still keep the compatibility with PESA, but I don't want to argue, we'll see.
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
11,314
8,561
India
Everything you mention is what I call the new modes and it is planned for F4. And I think we'll still keep the compatibility with PESA, but I don't want to argue, we'll see.

Yeah, but all that's with CARAA and MELBAA.

Anyway, my only point is it's really irrelevant if the Russians or anyone else think Irbis is good, it doesn't seem to be something the IAF is interested in regardless of all the possible upgrade options within the PESA family.
 

Abingdonboy

Team StratFront
Dec 1, 2017
154
387
UK
Answers for 1 and 2 don't really exist. The only way to know for sure is to test them.

As for more Rafales, I think Dassault plans to assemble any new order for 36 in India itself.
No. dassualt definitely won’t assemble 36 in India, they said the minimum they needed was a 90 unit commitment for that.

local assembly isn’t even desirable- it will also things down and add needless cost for little (if any) gain.

think India will order another 36 (hopefully 54) around 2022-3
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
11,314
8,561
India
No. dassualt definitely won’t assemble 36 in India, they said the minimum they needed was a 90 unit commitment for that.

local assembly isn’t even desirable- it will also things down and add needless cost for little (if any) gain.

think India will order another 36 (hopefully 54) around 2022-3

Welcome back.

Local assembly is possible for 36 because the Rafale uses the same line as the Falcon, which they are setting up in India. Airbus offered the same as offsets to Switzerland. Saab's doing the same in Brazil. With the Falcon line, it's actually easier for Dassault to do the same.

What's not possible is the production of the fuselage, landing gear, most avionics and engine with just 36. With an order for 90, Dassault can move 100% of the airframe and engine production to India, or 70% of the aircraft in terms of cost.
 

Picdelamirand-oil

Senior member
Nov 30, 2017
2,356
2,818
73
France
transition.wifeo.com
No. dassualt definitely won’t assemble 36 in India, they said the minimum they needed was a 90 unit commitment for that.

local assembly isn’t even desirable- it will also things down and add needless cost for little (if any) gain.

think India will order another 36 (hopefully 54) around 2022-3
Happy to see you again, the only thing missing is the return of PARIKRAMA/Aashish for my joy to be complete