Key.Aero Network
Register Free

Page 3 of 98 FirstFirst 12345671353 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 90 of 2928

Thread: Rafale news & discussion part XVI

  1. #61
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    1,977
    Quote Originally Posted by BlackArcher View Post
    Jesus, kill me already, 3 years? I bet by this point the French are like, "Please God, no more, here, just take the damn planes, they're free, just f-off!"

  2. #62
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    New Sarum
    Posts
    4,256
    which may well be the Indian strategy!

  3. #63
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    1,977
    India don't seem to have left many vendors happy over the years.

  4. #64
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    2,715
    Quote Originally Posted by lukos View Post
    India don't seem to have left many vendors happy over the years.
    LM, Boeing, IAI/Elta & Sukhoi are probably pretty happy all things considered, if not downright delighted. BAE's is probably content too (M777 deal just got greenlighted).

    Dassault withdrawing would probably solve a problem for the Indian govt. (Free jets would be much more welcome of course.)
    Last edited by Vnomad; 20th May 2015 at 15:44.

  5. #65
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    1,977
    Quote Originally Posted by Vnomad View Post
    LM, Boeing, IAI/Elta & Sukhoi are probably pretty happy all things considered, if not downright delighted. BAE's is probably content too (M777 deal just got greenlighted).

    Dassault withdrawing would probably solve a problem for the Indian govt. (Free jets would be much more welcome of course.)
    Why, what are the politics behind this one?

  6. #66
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    2,715
    Quote Originally Posted by lukos View Post
    Why, what are the politics behind this one?
    Stick with the 126 order and it'll blow in hole in their budget. Cancel it outright and the IAF will continue to make entreaties for new strike aircraft and point fingers at the govt in public. Go for the American alternative and it'll be perceived as a personal snub to France by the new Indian PM.

    The Indian MoD has chosen to play it safe and adopt the middle path. Ordered enough of them to complicate logistics and just few enough to limit their impact in wartime. (Incredibly myopic but there it is.) Of course if Dassault voluntarily withdraws, the GoI gets its 'out' without any blame to go with it.

  7. #67
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    1,977
    Quote Originally Posted by Vnomad View Post
    Stick with the 126 order and it'll blow in hole in their budget. Cancel it outright and the IAF will continue to make entreaties for new strike aircraft and point fingers at the govt in public. Go for the American alternative and it'll be perceived as a personal snub to France by the new Indian PM.

    The Indian MoD has chosen to play it safe and adopt the middle path. Ordered enough of them to complicate logistics and just few enough to limit their impact in wartime. (Incredibly myopic but there it is.) Of course if Dassault voluntarily withdraws, the GoI gets its 'out' without any blame to go with it.
    So the best plan of action is literally just to mess France about as much as possible until they give up by the sound of things.

  8. #68
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    2,715
    Quote Originally Posted by lukos View Post
    So the best plan of action is literally just to mess France about as much as possible until they give up by the sound of things.
    Ain't it grand? It would solve their problems, but that sort of deviousness requires a level of competence that's beyond the Indian MoD. More likely its just bureaucrats being bureaucrats, by trying to avoid problems instead of addressing them.

  9. #69
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Cataclysm
    Posts
    8,639
    Quote Originally Posted by Vnomad View Post
    Stick with the 126 order and it'll blow in hole in their budget. Cancel it outright and the IAF will continue to make entreaties for new strike aircraft and point fingers at the govt in public. Go for the American alternative and it'll be perceived as a personal snub to France by the new Indian PM.
    Likewise, the F-35 would blow an impact crater in the budget.. How's that a viable alternative?

  10. #70
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    2,715
    Quote Originally Posted by MSphere View Post
    Likewise, the F-35 would blow an impact crater in the budget.. How's that a viable alternative?
    126 of them certainly would, even without a local assembly line. Its a viable alternative only to the under-negotiation deal for 36 units. Would be useful in wartime as an ISTAR asset loitering in depth, and for attacking enemy high-value-assets. Its function well as a force multiplier.
    Last edited by Vnomad; 20th May 2015 at 21:49.

  11. #71
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Cataclysm
    Posts
    8,639
    Buying F-35s at this stage of completion makes little sense.. Still underdeveloped, untested, with teething problems and extremely costly.. Let fools pay the LRIP and come back in ten years...

  12. #72
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    2,715
    Quote Originally Posted by MSphere View Post
    Buying F-35s at this stage of completion makes little sense.. Still underdeveloped, untested, with teething problems and extremely costly.. Let fools pay the LRIP and come back in ten years...
    Its nearly at the IOC stage and just two years away from full capability. No more LRIPs after 2018 (the last batches in any case are very marginally hampered by concurrency requirements). If ordered next year, and given a two year lead time for production the IAF could have a full squadron of FRP aircraft before 2020. Its not significantly costlier than the Rafale which is the basic point. Meanwhile the PAK FA/FGFA remains at an relatively early stage of development.

  13. #73
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    209
    Its about two years to early for the F35 for India in my opinion.

  14. #74
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    3,085
    Quote Originally Posted by lukos View Post
    Most strange this isn't documented anywhere.
    it is documented, but as i wrote the article i think it is useless to link it.

  15. #75
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    3,085
    Quote Originally Posted by lukos View Post
    7.8nm, the IIR missile seeker would lock itself from that range, so it's impossible to verify if any additional capability was used other than a bog standard LOAL OTS shot.
    you're getting tiring. The photo was taken from a cell phone during the flight, not at the very moment of the shot. I already linked you the dialogs i had with the pilot (he will be at PAS 15 btw and i'll meet him again there), nothing i can do to cure your blindness if you do not want to open your eyes.

  16. #76
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    871
    Quote Originally Posted by Vnomad View Post
    If ordered next year, and given a two year lead time for production the IAF could have a full squadron of FRP aircraft before 2020. Its not significantly costlier than the Rafale which is the basic point. Meanwhile the PAK FA/FGFA remains at an relatively early stage of development.
    Another basic point is that one is combat proven while the other still is at promises stage. There's also a not so basic point : the number of strings attached to it.

  17. #77
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    1,977
    Quote Originally Posted by halloweene View Post
    you're getting tiring. The photo was taken from a cell phone during the flight, not at the very moment of the shot. I already linked you the dialogs i had with the pilot (he will be at PAS 15 btw and i'll meet him again there), nothing i can do to cure your blindness if you do not want to open your eyes.
    What shot? No missile was actually fired. Simulated only.

  18. #78
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Near Paris (France)
    Posts
    1,536
    What a useless message... Of course it was simulated.

  19. #79
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    1,977
    So you fired an imaginary missile from 7.8nm OTS and assumed it hit? I don't see what capability was actually demonstrated here. Imaginary missiles can be assumed to hit from 780nm away.

  20. #80
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    132
    Lukos, you are tiring. I don't believe you're incredibly idiot.. just stop being a smart ass.
    Do you think they fire live ammo during exercise ? You perfectly know how they can validate or not virtual kills.

  21. #81
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    3,085
    Quote Originally Posted by EC 5/25 Corsair View Post
    Lukos, you are tiring. I don't believe you're incredibly idiot.. just stop being a smart ass.
    Do you think they fire live ammo during exercise ? You perfectly know how they can validate or not virtual kills.
    Exactly. Won't answer him anymore on this topic, he is just a Troll (or worse he believes in what he says)

  22. #82
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    New Sarum
    Posts
    4,256
    or both!!!!!

  23. #83
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    2,715
    Quote Originally Posted by OPIT View Post
    Another basic point is that one is combat proven while the other still is at promises stage. There's also a not so basic point : the number of strings attached to it.
    - 'Combat proven' against Libya. No enemy AWACS,, no enemy fighters, limited numbers of obsolete SAMs, no C4I, all manned by a poorly trained conscripts. Hardly mirroring a conflict between India and China.

    - Far from engaging stings, the US would probably expedite supplies to India if tensions rise against China (no similar tilt from France can be expected). As for US-Pak relations, they'll look past the mutual animosity only until the Afghan business is wrapped up (for better or worse).

  24. #84
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    3,013
    that's obvious when you look at how they sold additional fighters to Taiwan... oh, wait!


    fact is, USA sell fighters and weapons, and then they keep weapons in check and the "would be buyer" can never be sure it will be able to use them when needed. France sells fighters and weapons, delivers and let the buyer do what he wants with them... a huuge difference for any country aspiring to be able to decide on its own about their international policies (and, eventually, wars)

  25. #85
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    1,848
    Quote Originally Posted by halloweene View Post
    you're getting tiring. The photo was taken from a cell phone during the flight, not at the very moment of the shot. I already linked you the dialogs i had with the pilot (he will be at PAS 15 btw and i'll meet him again there), nothing i can do to cure your blindness if you do not want to open your eyes.
    Halloweene, if the pictures was taken after the shot, you will either see the missiles symbol there flying to target or see target get destroyed ( simulated of course ) otherwise, it safe to assume the shot was taken before the shot
    Btw, can you link us to that pilot's Facebook ?

  26. #86
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    1,977
    Quote Originally Posted by EC 5/25 Corsair View Post
    Lukos, you are tiring. I don't believe you're incredibly idiot.. just stop being a smart ass.
    Do you think they fire live ammo during exercise ? You perfectly know how they can validate or not virtual kills.
    Not realistically. It could be argued that even a live test firing isn't realistic simply because it's a test but at least it's a 'real' shot. A simulated kill is complete fairyland and with absolutely no evidence of range other than a screen shot saying '7.8nm'.

  27. #87
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    1,977
    Quote Originally Posted by Vnomad View Post
    - 'Combat proven' against Libya. No enemy AWACS,, no enemy fighters, limited numbers of obsolete SAMs (mostly hidden in warehouses) no C4I, all manned by a poorly trained conscripts. Hardly mirroring a conflict between India and China.

    - Far from engaging stings, the US would probably expedite supplies to India if tensions rise against China (no similar tilt from France can be expected). As for US-Pak relations, they'll look past the mutual animosity only until the Afghan business is wrapped up (for better or worse).
    Just a slight bit of detail added.

  28. #88
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    3,013
    as for the "combat proven" part, the f-15 crowd are boasting about "over 100kills with no losses to enemy aurcraft", considering it faced undertrained, undersupported enemies, would you claim it's a worthless claim?

    You can only fight enemies that you have in front of you, Rafale did its job (and very well) in Afghanistan, Libya, Mali and still does it (AFAIK) in Syria

  29. #89
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    1,848
    anyway here is the visual range distance for different fighter that i promised that i will post in last thread
    Name:  Screenshot_2015-05-08-11-45-46~2.jpg
Views: 437
Size:  138.5 KB

  30. #90
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    2,229
    Quote Originally Posted by TooCool_12f View Post
    as for the "combat proven" part, the f-15 crowd are boasting about "over 100kills with no losses to enemy aurcraft", considering it faced undertrained, undersupported enemies, would you claim it's a worthless claim?

    You can only fight enemies that you have in front of you, Rafale did its job (and very well) in Afghanistan, Libya, Mali and still does it (AFAIK) in Syria
    Very poor comparison, the F-15 has been involved in conflicts for the past 30 years and has scored kills with 3 different air forces.

    The Rafale (not picking on it) is combat proven like: the F-22, the Typhoon, and F-16 block 60, by that I mean, any modern fighter could have been swapped out and completed the mission with about the same success and risk. They all have been proven capable of dropping munitions over lightly defended targets with reasonable reliability, accuracy, and minimal risk.
    Last edited by FBW; 21st May 2015 at 17:46.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 3 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 3 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

- Part of the    Network -

KEY AERO AVIATION NEWS

MAGAZINES

AVIATION FORUM

SHOP

 

WEBSITES