Rafale RB of Indian Air Force : News and Discussions

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
12,070
9,209
India
But it would be necessary to make squadrons of 6 or 7 Rafales only

It's too less. Our geography is bigger than France's and we share our borders with both enemies. You have to consider that Rafale is not a magic plane, one plane can't operate in two places at once, nor is it so fast that it can cover 1000Km in 5 minutes. Then you also have to consider the potential damage that the enemy can do on the ground, hence the need to disperse the squadrons over a wide area and that needs numbers too.

You forget that while the Rafale is better than the MKI, the Chinese have gone much further than the MKI already. So we will need to match their local strength in a near 1:1 basis.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hydra

vstol Jockey

Professional
Dec 1, 2017
5,957
11,624
New Delhi
"42 sqns were calculated to be adequate to take care of two front war in 1967..."
It seems to me that it is not peacetime that determines the number of aircraft in a squadron :)
These calculations were done after 1965 Indo-Pak war. They need to be revised now considering the increase in the strength of PLAAF. I will go for 60 sqns.
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
12,070
9,209
India
These calculations were done after 1965 Indo-Pak war. They need to be revised now considering the increase in the strength of PLAAF. I will go for 60 sqns.

Right now, the official request is 45 squadrons. Also due to the introduction of superior aircraft, mig-air refuelling, SAMs, upcoming drones, transfer of some roles to helicopters etc, the need for 60 squadrons isn't there anymore. For example, more modern aircraft have 3x or 4x or even more on-station time compared to older jets like the Mig-21, the most predominant aircraft when the requirement for 60 squads was created, so the number of jets needed for air defence and air support has reduced considerably. And with swing role and the ability to escort themselves, the number of jets required for strike missions has also reduced.
 

vstol Jockey

Professional
Dec 1, 2017
5,957
11,624
New Delhi
Right now, the official request is 45 squadrons. Also due to the introduction of superior aircraft, mig-air refuelling, SAMs, upcoming drones, transfer of some roles to helicopters etc, the need for 60 squadrons isn't there anymore. For example, more modern aircraft have 3x or 4x or even more on-station time compared to older jets like the Mig-21, the most predominant aircraft when the requirement for 60 squads was created, so the number of jets needed for air defence and air support has reduced considerably. And with swing role and the ability to escort themselves, the number of jets required for strike missions has also reduced.
I came to this figure based on the long range bombers and other such long legged assets created by PLAAF in last decade. They did not have them in 1967. We are dealing with a much highly evolved PLAAF now
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
12,070
9,209
India
I came to this figure based on the long range bombers and other such long legged assets created by PLAAF in last decade. They did not have them in 1967. We are dealing with a much highly evolved PLAAF now

Why would having more aircraft than necessary stop bombers?
 

Tatvamasi

Well-Known member
Jan 5, 2018
894
865
India
 

Tatvamasi

Well-Known member
Jan 5, 2018
894
865
India
If you had read my entire answer you would have seen that the answer was yes 3 squadrons of Rafale can do the job of 7 squadrons of Mirage 2000, and the reasons for that yes.
So you think the two-front nuclear-armed threat perception and lack of quantity is a none issue.

Has your air force ever done a high-tempo operation in the last 30 years? Do you understand the concept?

Are all other airforce stupid to add mostly one-on-one replacement? From USAF to Japan.
 

Picdelamirand-oil

Senior member
Nov 30, 2017
2,675
3,013
73
France
transition.wifeo.com
Are all other airforce stupid to add mostly one-on-one replacement? From USAF to Japan.
They don't have Rafale.

The Rafale was explicitly developed to replace 7 aircraft types in the French Air Force and the 152 Rafales that are operational replace 593 aircraft. At the time of its introduction it was thought that it would take around 300 Rafales to replace all our aircraft but experience has shown that 225 will suffice. The current plans are therefore to retire our remaining Mirage 2000s (all other fighter types have been replaced) by 2032 and replace them with a smaller number of Rafales.
Despite these replacements the French Air Force has never been stronger. It is unquestionably the strongest in Europe and can even afford to sell second-hand aircraft.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jk007 and Sathya

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
12,070
9,209
India
Inceased number of aircraft will allow us to interdict them much farther away and also put more aircraft in air which will help us intercept missiles fired by them.

I was thinking that numbers can be surmounted by more flight time and more alternate means of increasing weapons loads.

So let's assume we are in 2040, so we are still some ways away from achieving 42 squadrons, and many of our jets have been given an optionally manned capability. Today, when we send out two jets on CAP, they last 2-3 hours on-station, and can be extended by another 2-3 hours through mid-air refuelling, beyond which human limits step in and the jets are forced to land. However, with unmanned capability and buddy refuelling using tanker drones, a 2-flight CAP can stay in the air practically indefinitely, like a Rafale/AMCA should easily be able to do a 16-hour CAP when human limits aren't a factor.

Furthermore, the jets do not even have to expend their own weapons loads. All we need is ground launchers, not fully-equipped SAMs, but just launchers with different types of missiles datalinked to the fighter jets. So the jets can kill enemy missiles with ground launched missiles cued by fighter radars. This way, merely 4-8 jets on rotation in a single area can run CAP missions for 16 hours each while unloading an unlimited amount of missiles on the enemy.

This system will even allow us to engage ballistic missiles.

Because it would be more difficult to slip past. Also, I am not sure modern air forces are really taking into account threats to air bases. Chances are, a lot of the aircraft will be lost on the ground in the opening stages of the war.

Long time no see.

In India's case, our air bases will be heavily defended with a multi-tier SAM system, no different from AEGIS ships. So the most important bases will have long range, medium range and short range missiles, while less important bases will at least have medium and short range or just short range missiles. You should already know about the S-400, with options for ultra-long, long, medium and short range, and apparently more are planned. Then there are Indian equivalents, VL-Astra Mk2 (250Km), MRSAM (100Km) / Akash NG (70Km) / Akash Mk1/S (25-30Km) and SPYDER (up to 15Km) / VL-Astra Mk1 (up to 20Km). We have pretty big plans for an IADS.
 

Tatvamasi

Well-Known member
Jan 5, 2018
894
865
India
Yes Lybia.
From the Charles-de-Gaulle for Rafale M and from CRETE and CORSICA for French Air Force Rafale
So none. You do not even have an idea what that means.

It means generating thousands of sorties in a day. Numbers are required when you are facing adversaries which can field capable fighters. During OP Gagan Shakti the entire fleet was at 80% availability and it involved 1000+ aircraft and 10,000+ sorties in 13 days.

Bombing Lybia or some African country with a nonexistent air defense system is not an achievement in this part of the world.

They don't have Rafale.
Come on, there are some limits to PR. Rafale is not a unicorn. Its just another overpriced fighter.
 

STEPHEN COHEN

Senior member
Dec 4, 2017
6,724
4,185
So none. You do not even have an idea what that means.

It means generating thousands of sorties in a day. Numbers are required when you are facing adversaries which can field capable fighters. During OP Gagan Shakti the entire fleet was at 80% availability and it involved 1000+ aircraft and 10,000+ sorties in 13 days.

Bombing Lybia or some African country with a nonexistent air defense system is not an achievement in this part of the world.


Come on, there are some limits to PR. Rafale is not a unicorn. Its just another overpriced fighter.

Sir , you have talked about Gagan Shakti Sorties , But have you also Ever Considered the Losses that IAF would face in the ABSENCE of RAFALE

Rafale , Meteor and Spectra would do for us what Su 30 will otherwise Have to do after suffering losses and Casualties

Rafale would be used for Achieving Complete Air Superiority because it would knock out the AWACS and its Escorts

If we devote 18 Rafales of Ambala against PAF and they manage to down 36 PAF planes on Day 1 , the battle is over

Thereafter These 18 Rafales can also be deployed against China
 

Sathya

Senior member
Dec 2, 2017
2,322
1,311
India
Sir , you have talked about Gagan Shakti Sorties , But have you also Ever Considered the Losses that IAF would face in the ABSENCE of RAFALE

Rafale , Meteor and Spectra would do for us what Su 30 will otherwise Have to do after suffering losses and Casualties

Rafale would be used for Achieving Complete Air Superiority because it would knock out the AWACS and its Escorts

If we devote 18 Rafales of Ambala against PAF and they manage to down 36 PAF planes on Day 1 , the battle is over

Thereafter These 18 Rafales can also be deployed against China

Rafale is the best fighter we have..
Chosen as the better among 6.
I am highly sceptical whether there will be flying Super sukhoi within next 5 years .

Or we are going in for any other fighters in this decade.