It's hard to be better than 100% effective. But the Rafale manages it because it can generate up to 350 flight hours per month in ‘surge’ mode, whereas the F-35 barely exceeds 15!
Trump Offers F-35 Jet to India in Push for More Defense Deals
- Thread starter Ginvincible
- Start date
To understand why the F-35 is a bad idea, you have to understand how the IAF fights a war. It fights the whole of India as a single air defence theatre. All its radar and sensor systems are fused together as part of India's integrated air command and control system, where data from the S-400, Barak MRSAM, Akash, VSHORADS, LRTR theatre radars, India's NETRA AWACS, and radar data from Sukhois, Rafales, Tejas and Mirage 2000 fighters communicate with each other. And that's not counting the army's ground radars and the air force's surveillance radars. They work together as a system of systems where data and communications are transmitted through secure channels within this network. If America gives away an F-35 without allowing its sensors, weapons and data links to be opened up and integrated into this network, it is a lonely player. It gets nothing.
Do you really think that the Americans are going to accept that the S400‘s radar and the F-35’s radar work together to merge data?
The contours of the program will be set this year through a CDR. It is going to be the same as what you have already seen. If the IN's next jet is not 6th gen, then that's going to be a huge downgrade 'cause it's not going to be ready anytime before 2050.
Vikky will go through a major refit by the mid-2030s and extend life to the early 2050s, minimum 15 years. If it's upgraded to the same standards as Kuznetsov is going through, we are talking early 2060s. The IN is talking about a 2035 shelf life without the refit. So they are using that as an excuse to push the next carrier in line. You seriously think the IN will give up the ship without upgrading it even once?
We are obviously not going to develop a cat-jet simultaneously as TEDBF. Rafale M will act as a stopgap for IAC-3.
In fact, TEDBF seems to have gone through a redesign to use AMCA's avionics and engine while delivering capabilities beyond what a Rafale can. It has gone through the same process as Dassault's plan B in case SCAF fails, ie, an actual Super Rafale. So it's not gonna be DOA.
What's the use of stealth if you can operate only in permissable airspace in the first place?
And I'm not very sure about the USN and less capable CCAs. There's only so much deck space. PANG was reported to carry 32 SCAF alongside 32 drones, it's a given that those drones will be advanced jets.
Then ADA will never learn and never deliver the next jet in time.
Terrain-hugging is evergreen. Once the F-35 loses its stealth advantage in another 10 years, it will need CCAs to protect it, and it will be forced to operate below radar horizon to be survivable. So even stealth jets will eventually have to go low.
Jets are needed to operate at high altitude, but that works only for a while before they become outdated. That's why stealth is necessary. That's also why most advanced stealth jets become contemporary in just 15-20 years post which they will have to resort to 4th gen tactics if their stealth is not upgradeable. That's also why Rafale F5 will be useful until 2050 or AMCA until 2060 before the capabilities they brought to the table are replaced by better jets while they muddle through obsolescence.
They obviously don't carry advanced EW suites and sensors. And they are not as maneuverable as jets either.
M88-4E is already an advanced engine and F5 will come with a new engine.
T-REX project: Safran seeks to increase M88 engine power, key to the future Rafale F5
The vice chairman of the French National Assembly’s Defense Committee, Frank Giletti, has announced on his social networks that, as part of the Rafale fighter’s F5 Standard, Safran Aircraft Engines has set out to develop a more powerful version of the M88 engine, which has powered Dassault Aviation’
www.aviacionline.com
The only mistake the article makes is it's going to be a larger engine, but it's being made to fit in older Rafales too.
Even after F3R went through ISE, the IN's Rafale M is expected to come with 14 other changes from the F4. There's already consistency in how they work. So the F-35 will have to finish B4 at the bare minimum for the IAF to be interested.
In any case, the MRFA partner is expected to assist in the development of both AMCA and TEDBF. TEDBF was chosen to be a conventional design for 3 reasons. One, it's going to be relevant for naval use. Two, it's faster and simpler for ADA to develop before going for more complex programs. Three, the 3 carriers. But you wanna kill two programs and destroy the roadmap for indigenization, when all three are necessary to accomplish our goals.
The F-35 provides absolutely no advantage to our indigenization roadmap. That's why it can only be chosen if there's a deficiency in our LCA, MRFA, and AMCA plan, a plan that's absolutely unshakable right now. And that's why the F-35 has to be able to provide all its advertised capabilities, it cannot be a half-arsed jet providing capabilities the IAF is not intereted in. But the only hitch is that by the time it's ready a lot of other more advanced jets will become available.
To be fair, the S-400 will be significantly indigenised over time, including its software. So it will essentially be an Indian SAM system using Russian mostly hardware and some software for core functions, like the MKI. The data generated will essentially be Indian so it can be merged with all our Indo-Franco-Israeli hardware as seemlessly as possible.
Even if seamless integration will not be possible, the Indian F-35 will still carry an Indian computer, and given it's a stopgap, the quality of pilots will be higher, so some manual integration will be necessary alongside manual use of the Indian component of the EW suite.
It won't be entirely unworkable.
Well that's a surprise. Who would have thought you would say it's a bad idea?
I agree with you there. The F-35 won't come without conditions. Given turkey was ejected as a partner, over the S series
F35 isn't bad idea as on today, our former enemy #1 had placed order for 40 j31 and struck a deal with Turkey for co development and subsequent procurement for KAAN stealth fighter. The later one will be true meadium stealth fighter and being a NATO country, turkish electronics will have an edge over J31 & AMCA too.
Our current enemey#1 is alredy operating J20 in hundreds and will touch that figure in thousands.
A 6 to 7 squadrons of F35 is the minimum deterrent we need, and i beleive uncle sam put 0 restrictions on us while using F35 against china.
All the US equipments are comes with some sort of restrictions, yet we are operating p8I, chinook Apache etc.
And to some extant those so called restrictions are meaningless too, PAF had used F16 & AIM 120c against us, anything happened to PAF? Answer is no.
It's yet to clear the PDR phase, let alone CDR. IN is well within its rights to change their QRs considering the project is yet to receive Govt sanction.
Nothing is set in stone as of yet, calm down.
As per latest publicly released info, IN wants a 5th gen (not 6th gen) fighter as their long term deck based aircraft. It'll take time for this to be distilled into updated QRs. After that, TEDBF will have to undergo a design change to meet the new QR. We don't expect to induct this plane anytime soon, so there's no point in rushing into an outdated design that will be disadvantaged against the type of aircraft it'll be facing by 2040, like J-35B, J-36 & J-20C.
There's no point in asking the IN to fight with both hands tied behind their back.
The Russians keep the Kuznetsov around for pride reasons, it's really not an effective platform that warrants the spending. Kinda like we kept Viraat around for so long cuz we didn't have a replacement carrier in time.
When we have the option of building a 2nd Vikrant (which would serve the dual purpose of keeping our shipyards happy), there's no need to keep a sub-optimal carrier around past 2040. If we keep it around, we'll need TEDBF in its current form to replace its air wing (Rafale won't fit), which in turn reduces the future-proofing of our deck-based fighter program.
You don't double down on a bad investment.
I'm saying we need to develop a CAT-jet instead of TEDBF. Hopefully as a derivative of AMCA Mk-2.
AMCA's avionics & engine are just the Tejas Mk2's avionics & engine. The tech is the same. There's like 75% commonality of the total aircraft, which means nearly 100% commonality in avionics.
The next-gen avionics that'll come with AMCA Mk2 (supported by the 5th gen engine) are yet to emerge.
Cuz it won't be permissible airspace, but contested airspace. Carrier jets will have to deal with likes of J-36 & J-20B (and their CCAs) sent to destroy the carrier groups.
Contested airspace is not the same as an airspace where the enemy has established dominance - which is what PCA/NGAD is supposed to penetrate & overturn.
If F/A-XX isn't stealthy, it'll be engaged & destroyed from long range by the probing Chinese jets, after which any CCAs will lose their C&C and then the carriers will lose their BARCAP, leaving them vulnerable. But that won't happen because F/A-XX will be stealthy.
However with TEDBF, that's exactly what will happen.
If it's the experience of building a carrier-based twinjet you want, build a demonstrator. Our own X-planes. We're already using the NLCA to prove a lot of tech that'll go into future carrier jets. Including a MAGIC CARPET-equivalent.
There's no need a saddle the IN down with an outdated jet just for that reason.
So your solution to buying a jet that'll be forced to become a second-line fighter in 15-20 years (which is perfectly fine for our requirement, btw), is to buy a jet that's already become second-line?
Please make it make sense.
Terrain-hugging is not an optimal way to fly or maximize reach. It's a tradeoff you make when you realize you won't be survivable if you fly high. Or at least it was. Radars have gotten a lot better, smart sensors & sensor fusion are a thing. They can tell the difference between something moving at 700kph vs the static background. Like I said, we aren't dealing with Soviet radars of the 90s that lose you as soon as your background stops being a clear sky.
Not to mention, for our geography where because of the mountains, any terrain hugging flight to reach a fixed target (like an AFB) can only happen along highly predictable paths. We aren't sitting on the Northern European Plain out here.
We need stealth.
M88-4E is already an advanced engine and F5 will come with a new engine.
T-REX project: Safran seeks to increase M88 engine power, key to the future Rafale F5
The vice chairman of the French National Assembly’s Defense Committee, Frank Giletti, has announced on his social networks that, as part of the Rafale fighter’s F5 Standard, Safran Aircraft Engines has set out to develop a more powerful version of the M88 engine, which has powered Dassault Aviation’
The only mistake the article makes is it's going to be a larger engine, but it's being made to fit in older Rafales too.
Like they say, it's gonna be an evolutionary increase. I doubt it's gonna be at the level of what was achieved by F414 EPE (vs regular 414) even. Otoh, this is what a revolutionary increase looks like:
And as we're seeing in the AMCA program, an improved/evolved 4th gen engine is not going to be enough to power real 5th gen avionics. Let alone 6th gen which will have like 1 mVa of output per engine compared to F-35's 400 kVa (in turn compared to the 40-50 kVa per engine on 4th gen motors).
It doesn't work like that. Besides, we don't know how many of the changes were physical alterations designed to ensure optimum operation from the Vikrant's small elevators. And we'll be replacing the HMD, SDR, datalinks & a bunch of other stuff so it can network with our other assets.
That's not the same as what F-35 B4 brings.
The only unshakable parts are LCA & AMCA.
MRFA & TEDBF still have no legs to stand on as far as AoN/program sanction goes. And I've already said what I've had to say about both of them - I think they're both outdated for the requirement and need a reassessment.
Survivability matters. If the plane doesn't come back from the 1st sortie, it won't matter how many more it can put up.
If the F-35 does come, it'll come with customized avionics. Not the NATO-spec stuff it currently has. The things that went on Israel's F-35I Adir variant are a useful pointer to see what kind of changes will be made.
It will be like how our P-8I version differs from the NATO P-8A version. The P-8I can talk with our MiG-29Ks as well as with Western platforms (like a P-8A from the US or Australia, as demonstrated in various exercises...there was even a news about them transferring targets to each other, I'll see if I can find it).
But American/Australian P-8As cannot talk with our MiG-29Ks (unless our P-8I is acting as a go-between). The F-35 situation will be similar.
@randomradio
Seems IN agrees with me.
Building a new, STOBAR-focused 4.5G fighter to enter service in 2040 is sheer stupidity & short-sightedness.
We agree, and in fact the French engineers were aiming to optimise the Rafale's survivability when they designed it, whereas the US engineers were only thinking in terms of stealth.
We got the best survivability for the lowest price and the US got the best stealth for the highest price.
Last edited:
All this talk in the media about a two-way competition brewing between the F-35 and the Su-57 puts the GoI in a tight spot (wrt its delicate balancing act with the Americans and Russians). If it goes for a G2G deal with either party, the opposition will make corruption allegations over a breach of DPP rules. There could be blow back from the losing country as well. For example, the US clearing F-16 B70 or Russia offering Su-57 to Pak. (In the past, the Russians sold Mi-35s to Pak after losing the IAF's AH competition to the Apache.) If the GoI launches a formal competition, this could unfold into another MMRCA-like saga.
The cost could be another bottleneck, imo. Between them, the two Rafale deals will have cost us over 14 billion Euros. Any prospective 5G fighter purchase could also be in the double digits. Given all the rona-dhona over the cost of 31 MQ-9Bs, (the Navy was apparently told to choose between MQ-9B or more P-8Is), or even the A-330 MRTT, this one could play out in slow-motion as well. Imo, Nothing short of J-31 in PAF colours touching down in Pak would jolt Indian babus out of their slumber.
Given that the LCA Mk2 is being used to prove multiple 5G tech elements (synthetic vision system, AI pilots associate, ethernet (fibre-optic?) databus, etc) we should be able compress the projected 10-11 year dev time frame for AMCA Mk1 to 2031-32. Apparently, HAL et all have already been using digital-twin tech for aerodynamic testing, etc. We have to double down on this approach.
The cost could be another bottleneck, imo. Between them, the two Rafale deals will have cost us over 14 billion Euros. Any prospective 5G fighter purchase could also be in the double digits. Given all the rona-dhona over the cost of 31 MQ-9Bs, (the Navy was apparently told to choose between MQ-9B or more P-8Is), or even the A-330 MRTT, this one could play out in slow-motion as well. Imo, Nothing short of J-31 in PAF colours touching down in Pak would jolt Indian babus out of their slumber.
Given that the LCA Mk2 is being used to prove multiple 5G tech elements (synthetic vision system, AI pilots associate, ethernet (fibre-optic?) databus, etc) we should be able compress the projected 10-11 year dev time frame for AMCA Mk1 to 2031-32. Apparently, HAL et all have already been using digital-twin tech for aerodynamic testing, etc. We have to double down on this approach.
Rafale is LO.
Turbofans are hiding with S duct. huge turbofans ? they are among the smalest of the world....
Even if Rafale C seems a copy and paste of Rafale A, all were redesigned with stealth in mind (as requested by Ministry of defense, with a always secret level), but not as a VLO with internal bays.
I don't see Russia leaving you the S400 keys, as I absolutely don't see USA giving a single F35 key !
Even if Trump want to make business with F35 (a bird he tried to sunk during its first mandate), the US senate will not follow. It's far too risky to give it to a non aligned and direct neighbor of China country. I really don't see Modi falling in a so evident trap.
Sure. PDR in a few months then, I guess delayed by the new design changes after Deodhare had claimed completing its PDR in 2023. But prototype construction is set for 2026.
Pushing Vikky further is cheaper than buying a new carrier.
That's in the future. It's not in competition with TEDBF.
That's a permissible airspace. When you do not require penetration, you are in a permissible airspace. F/A-XX will also launch its LRASM at enemy ships from permissible airspace.
TE comes with its own set of problems. Building a demonstrator is expensive, especially when a use case for the TE jet already exists.
All the jets you see today will become second-line jets in 20 years, even Rafale, even F-35. The USAF is worried NGAD will become second-line in just 10 years after service entry.
Like they say, it's gonna be an evolutionary increase. I doubt it's gonna be at the level of what was achieved by F414 EPE (vs regular 414) even. Otoh, this is what a revolutionary increase looks like:
And as we're seeing in the AMCA program, an improved/evolved 4th gen engine is not going to be enough to power real 5th gen avionics. Let alone 6th gen which will have like 1 mVa of output per engine compared to F-35's 400 kVa (in turn compared to the 40-50 kVa per engine on 4th gen motors).
The F-35 currently has 2x80 kVA generators connected to the engine. It will be upgraded to 300 or 400 kVA, probably in 2029. All engines can be upgraded like this.
How does that change the fact that the IAF will expect B4 to be ready anyways?
Nope. The F-35I uses generic F-35 avionics, and comes with extras added for Israeli use.
That's just 'cause of a different comm system.
Er... yeah. Concept phase in 2030, review around 2035. PDR and CDR around 2040. First flight between 2040-45, and flight testing and introduction after 2050. FOC squadron deliveries by 2055-60.
You can expect first flight of the new jet when TEDBF is in production in the 2040s. So this new jet is not competing with the TEDBF, this is already well-known.
That's why I said both IAF and IN will get new jet programs once AMCA and TEDBF are approaching IOC or have achieved it. So don't expect anything new to happen until the 2040s. And naturally, both designs will have to be a generation ahead of whatever comes out of the West in 2030.
Nothing new will happen beyond what's already planned.
It's not possible. First flight is expected in 2028, so 3 years is not enough.
The Bars radar was developed with all Indian computers. It has 2 radar computers. Initially the signal processor was supposed to be Indian, but failed, so a Russian one was chosen. You can be sure it's been replaced with an Indian one since then. Display processor for the cockpit is also Indian. The radar is fully sensor fused with the Indian EW suite for almost a decade now.
So the radar is essentially Indian. Similarly, the S-400 has undergone the same process using Indian computers, so it's fully integrated with the IADS.
Plus the system is highly programmable, so even the Russians have used Indian computers in their Su-30SM.
Missile integration between the S-400 and Western fighters will be difficult or impossible, only due to political reasons, but that's okay, we have other jets.