Indeed.
You said on another forum that Qatar Rafale will have it. We just have to wait some weeks now.... or maybe was it for Qatar MLU ?
You said on another forum that Qatar Rafale will have it. We just have to wait some weeks now.... or maybe was it for Qatar MLU ?
It's not about what IN 'wants', it's about how the RFP plays out. As long as MiG meets RFP requirements, they are in. Meaning, IN wants an aircraft that can fulfill their requirements properly.
The aircraft, as you have already seen with MMRCA, are being selected based on their merits, not politics. Any aircraft that will meet RFP will be an option, after that the cheaper aircraft wins.
If Rafale beats tender requirements by a wide margin, it does not result in automatic victory against other aircraft that can only match all requirements. After this, Rafale has to prove that it is less than 10% more expensive than an aircraft that can meet requirements to become L1/T1. Getting L2/T1 is a loss.
As I mentioned earlier, Mig-29 can get to 3000Km with 6.8T of fuel. But to get to 3700Km, Rafale needs 9.5T of fuel. That is not really Rafale's advantage. With every T of fuel, the Mig-29 manages to fly 441Km while the Rafale can only do 389Km. So how do you quantify such differences? These things matter because fuel supply is limited.
It's the same thing with avionics, weapons etc. The requirements will not necessarily give Rafale any advantage.
The Russians have this plan for making a much more modernized Mig-29 with 110KN engines and 5.6T of internal fuel. So it's unclear where everything is headed right now. IN may want the Rafale for now, but we don't know what the situation will be like in 2021. The Russians are planning to buy 170 new Mig-35s themselves.
It's 2000l
No I speak of the French Rafale M, I suppose that they proposed a modified version.
Yes it's a russian engine in development that is to say with west performance at the expense of lifetime and reliability.
Some Qatar plane have been produced already but Qatar delivery will be in June due to the non availability of new M-88 so far.Indeed.
You said on another forum that Qatar Rafale will have it. We just have to wait some weeks now.... or maybe was it for Qatar MLU ?
Interesting video which shows that MiG29K can take off without the ski jump from the carrier:
Also, I find that the MiG29K won't be able to land with any munition or fuel tank attached as the arrestor wires may rip them off. What does one do when there is extra munition left under the wings/fuselage after bombing desired targets?
Also, I find that the MiG29K won't be able to land with any munition or fuel tank attached as the arrestor wires may rip them off. What does one do when there is extra munition left under the wings/fuselage after bombing desired targets?
That's touch and go, not take off.
And the Mig-29 can land with stores. It's called bring-back load. The aircraft dumps fuel in order to get to the load limit required for landing.
If it's a criteria Dassault will also propose CFT and 3000 km autonomie
For 3700 km it need 4700kg internal and 4800 kg external. But external fuel is with 50% efficiency due to Drag compare to internal so it's like if it need 7100kg internal then for 3000 km it needs 5757 kg internal but it can only get 4700 so it need 1057 equivalent more.
Fuel in CFT is 75% efficiency compare to internal so 1057 give 1410 kg in CFT and that's 1761l .
Rafale CFT are 1125l each that's 2250 l > 1761l So with only 2 CFT and no Drop tank range of Rafale will be superior to Mig 29. Total mass for fuel to have the same range than Mig 29 will be 4700 + 1410 = 6110 kg < 6800 for Mig 29.
And CFT on Rafale have been already tested and all Rafale already have supply circuits already available for CFT.
The first requirement IN wants is availability, and whatever Mig says about availability, IN will not believe that Mig 29 will meet availability requirement.
Agreed when it comes to range. But the performance of the Rafale will be reduced. The Mig-29's CFT's specialty is its ability to not affect flight performance. When in combat, the Rafale's CFTs will become a liability.
I partly agree with that.
There have been spares issues since IN only signed a direct purchase contract and signed the support contract much later. There have been early engine troubles which have been rectified for the most part. Overall, the engine is quite reliable. An older and less advanced engine is use on the JF-17 and PAF is happy with its reliability, so the same should apply to the IN fleet.
During multinational exercises, the Mig-29s being operated from carriers have always had near 100% availability. The last one had 100% availability.
The MRCBF will have performance based logistics, something we have never signed with the Russians before. This time we will be asking for 40 years servicing contract with PBL. So the availability of 75% can be met as long as the Russians are given proper contracts, similar to what Dassault was asked to sign for GTG. Previously, our spares contracts with Russians were not good. We would sign intermittently and with a lot of bureaucratic delays which affects availability. This is being rectified with the Russians, so I don't see availability as a serious future issue.
Rafale may continue to have better availability as long as spares are available, but the Mig-29 should meet the minimum required in the RFP.
Russian spares for Indian weapon systems
“Russia has amended its laws permitting lot of their OEMs to enter into long-term agreements for spares with our companies. The ministry is now drawing up a list of the OEMs, which are related to the platforms we have in service,” defence sources said on Wednesday.
Currently, procurement of spares is a long and cumbersome process as India cannot deal directly with the OEMs but with designated intermediaries like Rosoboronexport. The change in law does away with that.
A lot of people believe the poor availability of Russian aircraft is due to technical issues. But that's nowhere near the truth, it's all bureaucratic.
It takes as much as 6 months just to get a quotation from the Russians for spares. And this is not counting delays from Indian bureaucracy. It takes as much as 12 months just to start producing spares in Russia because of Rosoboronexport. It took 20 years to reduce this from 12 months to just 30 days because of all the Russian laws.
The actual duration for spares supply is a secret, but it's very small. After all that circus, we can only sign a short term contract, 1 year or less. Can you imagine if India has to negotiate for spares every year with the French govt because DGA doesn't allow IAF to talk to Dassault? Even Rafale's availability would have been very low if that happened. Now we can sign 5 year contracts with the Russians like we did with Dassault.
So now you know the secret to the low availability of Russian jets around the world.
For an object without Drag and lift and leaving the desk at 117 kt with an angle of 14 ° because of ski jump, the vertical speed is 28.3 kt or 14.56 m/s and it will be canceled by gravity in a time t such that gt = 14.56 => t = 14.56 / 9.81 = 1.48
Now if you add lift and thrust you need more Data. To simplify we will get AoA constant to 16° close to the 14.3° of Viki ski jump.
Due to Drag the air speed when Rafale leave the deck is not 117 kt but 104.9 kt.
Rafale lift allow 16t at 120 kt and first order of lift is in V^2 so the lift at 104.9 is 12.22 t
Vertical composant of thrust at 16° will be 7.5 t * sin 16 =2.07 t
So the vertical force on Rafale will be 22t - (12.22 +2.07) = 7.71
and then the acceleration will be 7.71/22 = 0.35g = a = 3.44 m/s^2
Vertical speed will be 104.9 * sin 16 = 28.9 kt or 14.87 m/s
and it will be canceled by vertical acceleration in a time t such that at = 14.87 => t = 14.87 / 3.44 = 4.32 s.
But during this 4.32 s the lift increase because the speed increase.
What is the speed after these 4.32s?
acceleration is 7.5/22 = 0.341 g= 3.34m/s^2
added speed is 3.34*4.32*3600/1852= 28.04 kt so speed is 104.9 + 28.04 = 133 kt and then lift is 19.65 t
and vertical force at this time is 22t - (19.65 +2.07) = 0.28 t
and acceleration is 0.28/22=0.012 g
but in fact acceleration varie from 0.35g to 0.012g during these 4.32s instead of the constant 0.35g we take and this mean that we will need more than 4.32s to cancel the 14.87 m/s of initial vertical speed and then Rafale take off easily even with a failure on one engine.
I can assure you that with a spike at 29 ° AOA it's better.
Last edited:
Perhaps. I really want to see how the combination of folding wings and CFT will really affect its performance. All for the sake of getting slightly more range.
There is not folding wing, just the wing tip missile launches mounts and dismounts like a pylon.
With 2xCFTs rafale-M useful load will drop by another 2.2 tons from the 6.5 tons that it can carry from STOBAR carriers. That will bring its useful load below that of Mig-29K.
Nice calculations but using wrong data. The launch velocity of the aircraft in parabolic trajectory is a function of ship's speed + aircraft speed. So all calculations have to be done on actual velocity and not IAS/CAS. The Trajectory is decided by the ground speed and stall is based on IAS/CAS. so for time of flight and height of trajectory you need to use the ground speed which will be ship's speed plus the speed acquired by the aircraft while rolling on the deck. You will need to use this data for calculating the trajectory and after that add the actual wind speed to calculate the IAS/CAS at any point of trajectory.
hopefully you are talking about item 30, will they provide it to MIG company too?
It will be very foolish to do so as oil will run out before that and there will be nothing to service. Moreover, these MiG29s are already old and there is no point signing 40 year agreement. The service life remaining is about 15 years only
It's the way the 104.9 kt is computed: ship's speed plus the speed acquired by the aircraft while rolling on the deck less Drag influence. So where is the problem?