Rafale news XII

[AlphaZulu]

All good, but you forget that Rafale M can also carry the ASMP-A, and it would be very hard to detect them on a aircraft carrier.

Sorry Sir, I don't forget nothing. I agree that binoculars won't be of much help, here. But detecting a CV group still is by far easier than detecting a SSBN, even for the serious players.
If you know (roughly) where is the CV, you know (roughly) where to look/watch out.

In addition for countries like Russia or China, detecting submarines isn't that hard either.

Yes yes, it's very easy to detect SSBNs. It's not like they were built specifically to avoid detection. And after all, oceans account for no more than 70% of the planet's surface. Piece of cake.

BTW, even if you can't detect them, just poke them: On that topic, see the last encounter between two SSBNs (one british, one french) in the Atlantic...

---------

eagle1, did you notice I gave the very same link 5 posts above?


Cheers
AZ

[mrmalaya]

All good, but you forget that Rafale M can also carry the ASMP-A, and it would be very hard to detect them on a aircraft carrier. In addition for countries like Russia or China, detecting submarines isn't that hard either. Detecting SLBM launch is even easier. The Russian have had a ABM defence for ages now. Beside because every Rafale could potentially carry the ASMP-A it won't be that easy to tell.

Hmmmm,

It sounds like you are writing off submarine based deterrence to add weight to the Rafale as a Nuclear strike asset.

I am questioning 2 things really. Why do France feel the need to operate the ASMP and is the Nuclear Strike mission of great importance these days?

As to ASMPA being impervious, its a lot slower and will get to the target later than an SLBM, and I doubt it is as hard to find and destroy as you say....

But really its a question of how relevant the Nuclear strike mission is these days. Does a squadron (is it one?) of Rafales add to the deterrent in the grand scheme of things? Its the same question as whether a squadron of French Nuclear Bombers (moving in and out of NATO control) deterred the Soviets from Armageddon during the Cold War?

Or is it the promise of destruction popping out of the ocean close to an enemy' shores that keeps us all alive?

[AlphaZulu]

Why do France feel the need to operate the ASMP and is the Nuclear Strike mission of great importance these days?

The ASMP-A / aerial component adds flexibility, show-offability (!) and the capacity to easily do a "final warning" before the engagement of the full oceanic force, without disclosing the position of a submarine.

As to ASMPA being impervious, its a lot slower and will get to the target later than an SLBM, and I doubt it is as hard to find and destroy as you say...

ASMP-A certainly is slower than a SLBM in re-entry phase. That said, it's not easy to intercept either. ASMP was already not, and ASMP-A is even tougher.

[mrmalaya]

Show-offability in this context seems a bit perverse?

I suppose its more along the lines of national pride (which is fine).

When people talk about a warning shot - when would this happen? Is it similar to the concept of dumping a dummy warhead on a rogue capital to say "behave or else"?

I think national pride plays a huge part here. Having invested so much in the concept of ASMP its hard to drop it I suppose.

[snafu352]

"showoffability" is deterrence by another name.

I don't think you are grasping the utility of being able to execute a staged escalation, or the threat that poses to anybody seeking to do harm.

The launch of a SLBM by anybody is going to make a lot of others very very nervous, to the extent that despite various musing on the "tactical" use of such the likelyhood of launching in anything other than a full everybodies going to die strike is zero.

Take a un-stable (in Western terms) "state" that makes threats towards it's neighbours, that seeks to and demonstrates an ability to deploy mass effect weapons, that then continues the threatening stance or actually executes a small scale action.

Do you launch an SLBM to elimiinate that threat in response? Do you tell Russia and China prior to launch that it's only a limited launch, don't be worried, oh and please forget where our subs are patrolling afterwards?

Or do you launch an air (or sea) based cruise missile that is actually quite deniable and then express regret at the loss of life due to poor controls and pursuit of illegal(?) weaponary by the clearly aggressive rogue state?

Flexibility and options are always a good thing.

This is something the French seem to be doing rather well at present; this stands rather sadly in contrast to the UK and our worship of the US.

[mrmalaya]

So the ASMP exists now to allow France to lob a 150KT nuclear warhead into a city as a deterrent?

Thats no deterrent is it? That is the start of the end.....

And on the assumption that France is the only country that will ever operate this weapon, its fairly easily traceable (unlike a Trident D5 Launch).

Non of us ever want the french to have to warn anyone then?

Also, (and I need this explaining) how does the launch of one missile from a mobile and highly stealthy platform make it innefective in the future?

The thinking behind ASMP prior to the fall of the SOviet Union was to warn them not to escalate by nuking them right?

This is almost new thread territory, I just wanted to think about how relevant Rafale with nukes was to the French

[obligatory]

Hold on.....the subs are a deterrent vs strategic targets,
the missile on the tactical fighter is for use vs tactical targets,
the subs won't target that

[eagle1]

The purpose of the french "air" deterrent is officially called "pre-strategic".

One of the possibility offered by the ASMP-A is to make what is officially called an "ultimate-warning" by making a nuclear explosion at very high altitude.

[mrmalaya]

ok. That effects lots of people but i can see where it fits into the planning.

As far as we know is the warhead limited to 150/300KT yield? No smaller?

[Mildave]

The launch of an SLBM isn't very quiet or stealthy. The moment one is in the air, every nation will know something is coming and they retaliation will be in the air within minutes. That's why there are so many talks surrounding any SLBM tests. You need to make sure your ally don't mistake your intention very clearly. Even civil satellites or anyone close enough will see the missile go, and because it's such a big deal new defences like airborne lasers, or high atmospheric interceptor defence systems will have at least 20m to track your missile and know where it's going to explode.

With the ASMP-A you can be far more discreet and strike very important target with very little warning time. The time the enemy realise you're not just sending a conventional cruise missile will likely be when it explode. Every time a country sees a carrier aircraft near its littoral they know there is a chance to see an ASMP-A coming their way should they chose to play dirty.

So it allows you a flexible "first strike" option with political and military room to manoeuvre afterwards (unless it's on a nuclear country with credible second strike capabilities).

[toan]

>> As far as we know is the warhead limited to 150/300KT yield? No smaller?

A: It is said that the power of ASMP-A's warhead has three choices: 20KT, 90KT, and 300KT.

So if any rogue country gives France a limited NBC attack (such as one or two ballistic missile(s) with primitive NBC warhead(s).....), France shall have the weapon with precise power for a reasonable revenge without killing too many innocents or provoking other nuclear powers too much....

[AlphaZulu]

Show-offability in this context seems a bit perverse?

Nope, show-offability is the deterrence (as snafu352 pointed the right term) made visible. It does not imply real employment (yet).

As said above:

I don't think you are grasping the utility of being able to execute a staged escalation, or the threat that poses to anybody seeking to do harm.

Quoting a General from the Forces Aériennes Stratégiques:
"Un convoi nucléaire bien en vue lorsque tel satellite de tel pays passe au dessus d'Istres, ça fait toujours son petit effet."
"A prominent nuclear convoy when a satellite of that country passes over Istres, that always impress your guests!"

-------

Re: National pride?
Why not. But that's (by far) not the main reason. Only a bonus.
The air component:
1/ provides a more flexible deterrent
2/ maintains high level of skills in the industry
3/ maintains high level of skills in the forces
4/ participates in political weight in international relationships
5/ adds a bit to national pride.

-------

Mildave: Agreed on flexibility.

AZ

[swerve]

So the ASMP exists now to allow France to lob a 150KT nuclear warhead into a city as a deterrent?

Thats no deterrent is it? That is the start of the end.....

And on the assumption that France is the only country that will ever operate this weapon, its fairly easily traceable (unlike a Trident D5 Launch).

Non of us ever want the french to have to warn anyone then?

Also, (and I need this explaining) how does the launch of one missile from a mobile and highly stealthy platform make it innefective in the future?

The thinking behind ASMP prior to the fall of the SOviet Union was to warn them not to escalate by nuking them right?

This is almost new thread territory, I just wanted to think about how relevant Rafale with nukes was to the French

The point of a deterrent is to deter. If you have to use it, it has failed. But if it's too big to use against anything except an existential threat, or indistinguishable from an all-out strike, then it can lack credibility against anything short of a strike meant to destroy your country.

The theory of a graduated deterrent is that the lower tiers deter smaller attacks, calculated not to trigger the launch of your strategic deterrent. ASMP was to stop someone taking the risk that he could, e.g., nuke a naval or air base (& an associated small city) without France daring to blow up Moscow in retaliation, by giving France the option to reply in kind to the lesser attack.

[toan]

Nope, show-offability is the deterrence (as snafu352 pointed the right term) made visible. It does not imply real employment (yet).

As said above:

Quoting a General from the Forces Aériennes Stratégiques:
"Un convoi nucléaire bien en vue lorsque tel satellite de tel pays passe au dessus d'Istres, ça fait toujours son petit effet."
"A prominent nuclear convoy when a satellite of that country passes over Istres, that always impress your guests!"

-------

Re: National pride?
Why not. But that's (by far) not the main reason. Only a bonus.
The air component:
1/ provides a more flexible deterrent
2/ maintains high level of skills in the industry
3/ maintains high level of skills in the forces
4/ participates in political weight in international relationships
5/ adds a bit to national pride.

-------

Mildave: Agreed on flexibility.

AZ

And a much cheaper choice for low grade nuclear revenge ~ The unit cost of a M-51 SLBM should be several ten times higher than the unit cost of a ASMP-A. If the French government wants to give a limited nuclear revenge to a rogue country with outdated air-defense capability, an ASMP-A from a Rafale B with two pilots should be much more economic than a M-51 SLBM from a SNLE with 111 officers and sailors......

[Nicolas10]

This is something the French seem to be doing rather well at present; this stands rather sadly in contrast to the UK and our worship of the US.

Sarkozy is getting us there. I sure hope that he doesn't get another term to stop the slaughter. In the latest DSI magasine, he's quoted saying that France should be remain relevant by cooperating (read we are going to become another US puppet).

Nic

[Nicolas10]

Edit: swerve said it much better than I did.

[mrmalaya]

I suppose that you could say that an ASMP is more relevant to today's threats than Trident in that case? I don't know if I think that was the case back when it entered service however.

All theoretical of course. I'm not convinced that France nuking a nation in revenge wouldn't kick off the same chain of events that the UK (for example) launching a pre arranged SLBM in revenge would. One nation vapourising another's city is all much of a muchness in this scenario isn't it? I mean rogue state attacks innocent nuclear power, the world is up in arms and the the security council allow revenge to be taken "safely".

Its all a little hypothetical.

What was the name of that book where Birmingham was nuked in a Cold War tit for tat nuclear exchange agreed by the government's?

[AlphaZulu]

mrmalaya, you're speaking about actually nuking someone's city. You can do that with a sub or with an aircraft (or even with a land or ship launched weapon). But when you're there, deterrence is already a failure.

I agree with you, there:

I'm not convinced that France nuking a nation in revenge wouldn't kick off the same chain of events that the UK (for example) launching a pre arranged SLBM in revenge would.

What we're saying is that:
- a sub can't execute a staged escalation visible to your opponent.
- a sub isn't the best way to launch a weapon to detonate on desertic region of your opponent's country, and/or in high altitude above it.

Why? Because France has one sub on patrol at all times. A second sub may be at sea while doing rotations (or for training purpose), but "only" one is always ready. This one is your joker. You don't play with it, you don't reveal its position, you don't use it except for the worst case.

So France maintains (for now) its Forces Aériennes Stratégiques. For that.
It costs, sure. Much, but not that much.
And the capabilities built are a good investment for other things: French tankers were bought for the FAS needs, but we also use them for a lot of other things. Technology developped for the aircrafts (M2K, Rafale) for the nuke mission can be used for other missions (deep strike, low level penetration...). Same goes for the missile technology.

AZ

[haavarla]

Sarkozy is getting us there. I sure hope that he doesn't get another term to stop the slaughter. In the latest DSI magasine, he's quoted saying that France should be remain relevant by cooperating (read we are going to become another US puppet).

Nic

Hardly.. If that is true, US would press France to block the Mistral sale to Russia.
Which of course France will never ever never do in real life.

[Nicolas10]

Hardly.. If that is true, US would press France to block the Mistral sale to Russia.
Which of course France will never ever never do in real life.

???

[Bluewings]

Nic :

In the latest DSI magasine, he's quoted saying that France should be remain relevant by cooperating (read we are going to become another US puppet).

Nonsense . Re-read our White Book on Defense ...

Cheers .

[Nicolas10]

Or read DSI.

Nic

[Bluewings]

DSI is a magazine and the White Book is the official bible of France futur warfare system .

Secondly , this :

read we are going to become another US puppet

is a nonsense and a gross misunderstanding of Sarkozy 's words .

Cheers .

[eagle1]

Indians propose partnership if Dilma chooses Rafale
Veja, March 31

Brasilia - In the bilateral meeting between Brazil and India, Hyderabad House, the Indian government informed the President Rousseff that if she opts for the purchase of Rafale fighters, similar to what India did, the Indians are interested in establishing a technology partner with Brazilians to set up a joint project of technology transfer. According to the offer, the Indian government's willingness to transfer the information they receive in relation to the Rafale, and the three countries - Brazil, India and France (the airplane manufacturer) could then work together in a project technology partnership.
[...]

http://veja.abril.com.br/noticia/bra...pte-por-rafale

[mrmalaya]

mrmalaya, you're speaking about actually nuking someone's city. You can do that with a sub or with an aircraft (or even with a land or ship launched weapon). But when you're there, deterrence is already a failure.

I agree with you, there:


What we're saying is that:
- a sub can't execute a staged escalation visible to your opponent.
- a sub isn't the best way to launch a weapon to detonate on desertic region of your opponent's country, and/or in high altitude above it.

Why? Because France has one sub on patrol at all times. A second sub may be at sea while doing rotations (or for training purpose), but "only" one is always ready. This one is your joker. You don't play with it, you don't reveal its position, you don't use it except for the worst case.

So France maintains (for now) its Forces Aériennes Stratégiques. For that.
It costs, sure. Much, but not that much.
And the capabilities built are a good investment for other things: French tankers were bought for the FAS needs, but we also use them for a lot of other things. Technology developped for the aircrafts (M2K, Rafale) for the nuke mission can be used for other missions (deep strike, low level penetration...). Same goes for the missile technology.

AZ

I see what you meen and thanks for going to the effort to explain it to me.

[Nicolas10]

DSI is a magazine and the White Book is the official bible of France futur warfare system .

Secondly , this :


is a nonsense and a gross misunderstanding of Sarkozy 's words .

Cheers .

Come on it's not just his words, it's all his actions since he was finance minister.

Nic

[Bluewings]

Nick , this is not the place to talk about French politics even if I have the will to do so .
Just one thing : if you think (or worse believe) that Sarkozy wants to see France under the USA umbrella , you are indeed grossly mistaking .
Don 't you remember what he never stopped doing within the European Union and at the UN for the past 5 years ?
Not even talking about ... Lybia .

Cheers .

[J-20 Hotdog]

France interested in selling Rafales to Libya

France is interested in selling 12 Rafales to the new Libyan government



http://www.aljazeera.net/news/pages/...e-c2d155282dbb

[Scorpion82]

I think I have asked this question before, but IIRC there was no entirely satisfactional answer to it (except if my memory is fooling me^^).

Is there any more up to date list about the individual capability changes of the F3 standard? I'm specifically talking about the F3.1 to F3.3. If I'm not mistaken F 3.4 = F3+ aka F3 04T?

Thus far from F2 to F3 I gathered:
- updated MDPU (software only or hardware as well?)
- Updated SPECTRA (software, spare DDM-NG for F3.2 since 2011?)
- RBE2 modes SAR, anti ship and full TF capability
- Updated MIDS (Any specific details?)
- Digital or full MICA IR integration (LOAL)
- weapons ASMP-A (F3.1), Exocet (F3.2?), GBU-24 (F3.2?), SBU-64 (F3.2), Damocles-M (F3.2?), Reco-NG (F3.2?)

Is ROVER III already fitted or coming with F 3.3?
New radios (F3.2?)

Schedules for:
- GBU-49 (underway as far as I understand)
- New MIDS terminal?
- MODE 5 IFF?

Thx in advance.

[eagle1]

Some elements of response :

-Rover III is already fitted and is integrated directly in the aircraft rather than in the pod allowing to tranmit any weapon system video.

-GBU-49 integration is underway and integration is schedule soon. (No more info than that for the moment)

-The recent surprise is about current spectra hardware upgrade which was not scheduled and quickly implemented. We know from A&C that the Elint and Singint is getting a significant boost as the frech air force wanted to go further that way after a succesfull use in Lybia.

-Another unschedulded upgrade reported by Air Fan and Tmor is a software enhancement for the Damocles pod.