Rafale DH/EH of Indian Air Force : News and Discussions

[Lolwa]

They don't say the Rafale is a 4.5 generation aircraft and the J-20 is a fifth generation aircraft, they say the Rafale is almost a light aircraft and the J-20 is a heavy aircraft !

But the Rafale while being light has the performance of a heavy aircraft ....

You don't even need to take the payload capacity or range. The electronics make the whole difference and Chinese electronics are inferior which they won't accept.
Because France is so Tiny how can tiny nation be better than us. Something what Chinese do think...

 

[Picdelamirand-oil]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1377313054912745472

 

[Picdelamirand-oil]

The Rafale is here to stay

Today, the Rafale is at the peak of technology. Its weapon system is not very different from the best of the so-called fifth generation aircraft. It is a weapon system that achieves a perfect balance between technology and kinematics. In addition, it is optimal in terms of maintenance costs, availability, reliability and mass production possibilities.

Ongoing technological advances such as GaN, smart weapons, increased connectivity that enables networked warfare and extended sensors will increase its utility.

The war of the future will be network-centric with human-driven machines and artificial intelligence-driven machines. Remote Carrier drones, UCAVs, drone swarms and smart weapons will team up with a manned mothership.

These systems will greatly enhance the utility of the Rafale. The war will be fought in dangerous areas without endangering manned systems.

Recently, US Air Force Chief of Staff General Charles Brown Jr. told the media that the Air Force was studying a "new design" to replace hundreds of aging F16s. The F-35 was supposed to replace the F16, but it is outclassed in most missions the USAF flies today. The cost of acquiring the F35 has been significantly reduced, but the maintenance of this aircraft requires much greater funds.

The all-stealth approach does seem to be a dead end. The right approach is to find the right balance between stealth fighters like the NGF and less expensive aircraft like the Rafale. If we apply the 80-20 rule, 80% of missions can be carried out by Rafales and the network they lead for only 20% of the total expenditure.

Today, when budgets are not unlimited as they were during the "cold war", a balanced approach will yield results that may change the long-term strategic positioning.

 

[randomradio]

Let me write about the opinions of military enthusiasts on the Internet in China Rafale RB of Indian
1. Too expensive, twice the price of F35.
2. India cannot use the data link to exchange information between Rafale, A50, su30, and ground radar stations.
3. India attaches great importance to the ground attack capability of Rafale fighter jets. Tibet’s railways and bridges will be threatened.
4. The Indian army has chaotic management, no air superiority fighters (J11, J20), no frontline fighters (J10), strategic bombers (H6),

1. Although the unit price is higher, the LCC is much lower. The lack of overhauls needed makes the jet's upkeep cost extremely low.

2. Doesn't make sense because India uses Israeli datalinks. The Su-30 uses an Indian mission computer with an Israeli link. Naturally the A-50/Phalcon also uses Israeli tech, only the platform is Russian, not the electronics.

3. India attached greater importance to all roles. Rafale in particular can perform any role.

4. That's a very weird opinion. The Su-30 is an air superiority fighter, as is the Rafale. The same with M2000 and Mig-29. The LCA as well. All these are frontline fighter jets. The Su-30 has consistently beaten both the F-15C and F-16C in dog fights in international exercises. The only operational aircraft that performs strike is the Jaguar. The IAF is only interested in air superiority fighters with a secondary strike role, and that's how its current inventory is. The IAF currently has no need for a conventional bomber like the H6. China needs it due to the threat from the sea, but we do not have any such threat right now, all our enemies are within striking distance of fighter jets. Maybe in the future, we will see.

 

[randomradio]

首先让我谈谈Su-30战斗机！印度的Su 30 MK I源自su27P。印度选择了两个座位，这导致飞机的重量过大，机动性差。在苏军中，苏30也承担了责任。它是多用途战斗机和其他职责。在军事演习中击败对手并不值得骄傲，因为演习有很多限制。在去年的空战中，印度没有获得绝对的空中优势。

The Su-30 surpasses the F-15C in performance, even the Su-27. Even though it's two seat, it does the job of an air superiority fighter. Even if there are restrictions in exercises, it still surpasses the F-15C and F-16C within those restrictions. And if you remove those restrictions, the Su-30 does even better. In the Flanker family, only the Su-35 surpasses the Su-30MKI.

As for the combat with Pakistan, it's the opposite of what you believe. You are simply a victim of propaganda. India is a democracy, we don't hide news.

 

[randomradio]

The strategic bomber is a cheap cruise missile launch platform. We fly in Sichuan and can launch attacks on military targets in India. India needs to break through China’s air defense network to shoot it down. If India attacks targets in China, India needs to use precious fighter jets,

Even J-11 can fly in Sichuan and launch attacks in India with cruise missiles.

 

[randomradio]

我知道印度声称击落了f16，但巴基斯坦也声称击落了su30。唯一可以证明的是，印度损失了一架MiG-21。我们对Su 35战斗机，其发动机寿命，仅为俄罗斯宣传的1/3以及其重量都比俄罗斯宣传的重量还大。我认为它无法击败F15。

Are you seriosuly saying a dictatorship like Pakistan will provide actual news? Maybe you trust Chinese news as well.

Sorry, buddy, you will have to trust democratic news sources more than the story writers in Pakistan and China.

Engine quality and engine performance are not related. Russian engines only need more maintenance, but their performance is on par with American engines.

重要的是，可以廉价地发射大量巡航导弹。即使美国攻击叙利亚，许多巡航导弹也会被击落。因此，重要的不是容量，而是数量。您不能使用珍贵的战斗机来攻击敌人廉价的地面目标。

Ground launched missiles can be launched in greater numbers than any bomber can. A truck can carry 6 long range missiles, the same as the H-6. The performance of 10 trucks is far superior to the performance of 10 bombers, because I can reload the truck in 15 minutes, while the bomber needs 3-6 hours.

My one truck is equal to many H-6 bombers. I only have to keep reloading the truck and firing the missiles.

 

[suryakiran]

Use only English for communication. Any other language will be deleted.

 

[vstol Jockey]

1.If time goes back to 2010, India can only buy 150 su30MKI, 100 su35, buy radar technology to improve fighter, buy 100 JAS 39 from Sweden to replace MiG23/MiG27/Jaguar fighter/M2000
At the same time, tu22M was introduced from Ukraine as the launch platform of the BrahMos missile,

2。In Tibet, China has very few airports. Fighters can only carry 70% of the fuel and missiles. However, the range of anti-aircraft missiles has been greatly increased (a lot of fuel for anti-aircraft missiles is wasted on climbing altitude). At the same time, we are in the mountains of Tibet. The radar station has become an early warning aircraft that we do not need to land, and we can easily see the flight situation of the entire South Asian continent.
3。
Air supremacy is obtained not by air combat but by bombing. Destroying enemy aircraft on the airport is a hundred times more efficient than destroying them in the air. The air force is born for offensive purposes. Therefore, after 2010, China will develop large bombers. Will develop stealth bombers
In China’s air force system, the future J20 fighter jets will obtain air supremacy and undertake long-range interception tasks. The J16 fighter jets suppress the ground’s air defense firepower, attack the enemy’s command post and other high-value targets. The J10C fighter jets cooperate with a large number of ground air defense missiles and anti-stealth radar , Attacking the enemy’s attempt to enter China’s territory, repeatedly competing for frontline air supremacy, and cooperating with JH7A to provide support operations for ground forces



This is the translation of the above sentence

First let me welcome you here. I have read what all you have posted and I am surprised at your thinking about use of air power. have you heard of London Bombing campaign of world war -2? The use of bombers against airports has very little effect. But using them against industrial complexes has a profound effect on the overall battle. Germany bombed UK for over six months and lost over 4500 bimbers but could not stop RAF from shooting down their bombers. Take the other case, Allied forces used long range escort fighters to accompany bombers in raids across Germany to destroy the military industrial complex and that turned the tide. Use of H6 as stated by you will have near zero effect on IAF for many reasons. First and the foremost, we are holding much higher ground in Tibet than you and we can see you much before you see us.In recent Ladakh stanoff, all your fighters which came close to the Indian borders had a welcome party ready for them much before they reached the area. So more than you, PLAAF is aware of the fact as to where do they stand with respect to IAF.
AND your lack of airbases in Tibet is a very big problem for you and even bigger problem is the altitude. Regarding the comparison of aircraft that you did, we are well aware of the numerical superiority which you have but how many can you bring to battle is what matters. We are well aware of the poor maintenance status of your fighters. Su-30MKI and Upgraded M2K and Mig-29s are far superior to any fighter that you can bring to battle in air. You are not even aware of what all is fitted to these aircraft what all they can do to your SAMs and fighters. on 27th feb 2019, IAF showed what it is capable of. They were surprised, numbered and ambushed and yet PAF was not able to down any of the Su-30MKIs or the M2k which was their primary aim. They fired nearly 5 AMRAAMs and IAF defeated all of them? Does PLAAF has any such tactics in place and can they do it? lastly, If platform performance was the sole criteria to decide the outcome of an air battle, than how do you explain IAF defeating PAF in 1965 & 1971 wars when PAF was flying far superior fighters. I hope you have heard about Pilot Skills and its not the machine but the man behind the machine who makes all the difference. A Mig-21 BISON shot down an F-16 in the same battle. remember that.

Use only English for communication. Any other language will be deleted.

ask him to post it in his language only but than translate it also. I can understand that he thinks and writes in Mandarin and after that he can use google translator to convert it in English. Let us see what he has to say here.

 

[Hydra]

First let me welcome you here. I have read what all you have posted and I am surprised at your thinking about use of air power. have you heard of London Bombing campaign of world war -2? The use of bombers against airports has very little effect. But using them against industrial complexes has a profound effect on the overall battle. Germany bombed UK for over six months and lost over 4500 bimbers but could not stop RAF from shooting down their bombers. Take the other case, Allied forces used long range escort fighters to accompany bombers in raids across Germany to destroy the military industrial complex and that turned the tide. Use of H6 as stated by you will have near zero effect on IAF for many reasons. First and the foremost, we are holding much higher ground in Tibet than you and we can see you much before you see us.In recent Ladakh stanoff, all your fighters which came close to the Indian borders had a welcome party ready for them much before they reached the area. So more than you, PLAAF is aware of the fact as to where do they stand with respect to IAF.
AND your lack of airbases in Tibet is a very big problem for you and even bigger problem is the altitude. Regarding the comparison of aircraft that you did, we are well aware of the numerical superiority which you have but how many can you bring to battle is what matters. We are well aware of the poor maintenance status of your fighters. Su-30MKI and Upgraded M2K and Mig-29s are far superior to any fighter that you can bring to battle in air. You are not even aware of what all is fitted to these aircraft what all they can do to your SAMs and fighters. on 27th feb 2019, IAF showed what it is capable of. They were surprised, numbered and ambushed and yet PAF was not able to down any of the Su-30MKIs or the M2k which was their primary aim. They fired nearly 5 AMRAAMs and IAF defeated all of them? Does PLAAF has any such tactics in place and can they do it? lastly, If platform performance was the sole criteria to decide the outcome of an air battle, than how do you explain IAF defeating PAF in 1965 & 1971 wars when PAF was flying far superior fighters. I hope you have heard about Pilot Skills and its not the machine but the man behind the machine who makes all the difference. A Mig-21 BISON shot down an F-16 in the same battle. remember that.

ask him to post it in his language only but than translate it also. I can understand that he thinks and writes in Mandarin and after that he can use google translator to convert it in English. Let us see what he has to say here.

If bombers are outdated why USA & RuAF is still using it? Remember both these nations are working on next generation bombers too.

 

[Ashwin]

The radar station has become an early warning aircraft that we do not need to land, and we can easily see the flight situation of the entire South Asian continent

This is hilarious!.

Even early warning aircraft have a hard job but you think its like Zhanjiang from you can see the entire SCS.

Red : 5Km altitude line
Green : 500 meter

 

[vstol Jockey]

If bombers are outdated why USA & RuAF is still using it? Remember both these nations are working on next generation bombers too.

Please read my post again. I did not say that bombers are outdated. I spoke about two different campaigns of WW2. What I wanted to tell him was that Bombers will need escorts and bombing airfields using bombers is not an option. I was asked by a member here to give my insight on how IAF is positioned vis a vis PLAAF. I had written there that IAF can very quickly disberse to roads and other satellite airfields and continue high temp operations which are not available as an option to PLAAF.
The kind of bombs that can be carried inside the internal weapons bay and the number of missiles that can be carried on hardpoints externally remains a limitation for bombers and in a highly contested airspace, even the missiles fired by them will be detected and neutralised even before they reach their intended target. A lot has been written about use of loitering drones based on Nogorno-Karabach war. But was that a contested airspace?

 

[vstol Jockey]

This is hilarious!.

Even early warning aircraft have a hard job but you think its like Zhanjiang from you can see the entire SCS.


View attachment 19677

View attachment 19678
Red : 5Km altitude line
Green : 500 meter

As we can see in these pics, the farther you are from the border, larger will be the radar shadow zone and an aircraft capable of doing blind flying thru vallies like M2K and Rafale will enter deep inside enemy territory and also fire its weapons to deadly effect. Not even one aircraft in PLAAF has such an ability.

 

[randomradio]

1.If time goes back to 2010, India can only buy 150 su30MKI, 100 su35, buy radar technology to improve fighter, buy 100 JAS 39 from Sweden to replace MiG23/MiG27/Jaguar fighter/M2000
At the same time, tu22M was introduced from Ukraine as the launch platform of the BrahMos missile,

There's not much difference between Su-30MKI and Su-35, it's just duplication of capabilities. We have Tejas instead of JAS 39.

Tu-22 was meant for use in the oceans, it wasn't necessary.

2。In Tibet, China has very few airports. Fighters can only carry 70% of the fuel and missiles. However, the range of anti-aircraft missiles has been greatly increased (a lot of fuel for anti-aircraft missiles is wasted on climbing altitude). At the same time, we are in the mountains of Tibet. The radar station has become an early warning aircraft that we do not need to land, and we can easily see the flight situation of the entire South Asian continent.

The terrain on the Chinese side is really bad for SAMs.

3。

Air supremacy is obtained not by air combat but by bombing. Destroying enemy aircraft on the airport is a hundred times more efficient than destroying them in the air. The air force is born for offensive purposes. Therefore, after 2010, China will develop large bombers. Will develop stealth bombers
In China’s air force system, the future J20 fighter jets will obtain air supremacy and undertake long-range interception tasks. The J16 fighter jets suppress the ground’s air defense firepower, attack the enemy’s command post and other high-value targets. The J10C fighter jets cooperate with a large number of ground air defense missiles and anti-stealth radar , Attacking the enemy’s attempt to enter China’s territory, repeatedly competing for frontline air supremacy, and cooperating with JH7A to provide support operations for ground forces



This is the translation of the above sentence

Nothing's correct there. According to an IAF Air Marshal, China will need over 300 ballistic missiles to shut down just 1 air base for 1 day.

Bombing works only if the defender is not defending and all the aircraft are parked outside. That's never going to happen against India or anyone else.

Chinese bombers can't be used against India over land, it's pointless. Bombers are for when there's a massive distance between the adversaries. It's the same reason why the Europeans also do not have bombers to deal with Russia, fighter jets are enough. China can use bombers in the Indian Ocean against India due to the distances involved.

Whether the J-20 will work against India or not is yet to be seen. Personally I don't think it will work against India until J-20C or later enters service.

 

[AbRaj]

Yo chora chini

There's not much difference between Su-30MKI and Su-35, it's just duplication of capabilities. We have Tejas instead of JAS 39.

Tu-22 was meant for use in the oceans, it wasn't necessary.



The terrain on the Chinese side is really bad for SAMs.



Nothing's correct there. According to an IAF Air Marshal, China will need over 300 ballistic missiles to shut down just 1 air base for 1 day.

Bombing works only if the defender is not defending and all the aircraft are parked outside. That's never going to happen against India or anyone else.

Chinese bombers can't be used against India over land, it's pointless. Bombers are for when there's a massive distance between the adversaries. It's the same reason why the Europeans also do not have bombers to deal with Russia, fighter jets are enough. China can use bombers in the Indian Ocean against India due to the distances involved.

Whether the J-20 will work against India or not is yet to be seen. Personally I don't think it will work against India until J-20C or later enters service.

I don’t know why but all Chinese civics think same like sheep. You can always guess what they gonna talk before opening their mouth

 

[vstol Jockey]

There's not much difference between Su-30MKI and Su-35, it's just duplication of capabilities. We have Tejas instead of JAS 39.

Tu-22 was meant for use in the oceans, it wasn't necessary.



The terrain on the Chinese side is really bad for SAMs.



Nothing's correct there. According to an IAF Air Marshal, China will need over 300 ballistic missiles to shut down just 1 air base for 1 day.

Bombing works only if the defender is not defending and all the aircraft are parked outside. That's never going to happen against India or anyone else.

Chinese bombers can't be used against India over land, it's pointless. Bombers are for when there's a massive distance between the adversaries. It's the same reason why the Europeans also do not have bombers to deal with Russia, fighter jets are enough. China can use bombers in the Indian Ocean against India due to the distances involved.

Whether the J-20 will work against India or not is yet to be seen. Personally I don't think it will work against India until J-20C or later enters service.

Bombers work best when you have very large overflying uncontested airspace. But in case of India and China, every inch of airspace is contested and worst for China is that in Tibet, we can not only choke them anyday but can also make a dash for Lhasa to liberate Tibet.
China fighting against Taiwan or Japan or USA or anyother nation around SCS will have an advantage just the way USA has due to its location. You need to overcome the seas to be able to invade China but in case of India, we have direct land borders. China will always remain vulnerable to India and any force using Indian Territory to take out China. remember the WW2 when chinese resistance to Japan was sustained from India by those over the hump flights by USAF.

 

[STEPHEN COHEN]

Bombers work best when you have very large overflying uncontested airspace. But in case of India and China, every inch of airspace is contested and worst for China is that in Tibet, we can not only choke them anyday but can also make a dash for Lhasa to liberate Tibet.
China fighting against Taiwan or Japan or USA or anyother nation around SCS will have an advantage just the way USA has due to its location. You need to overcome the seas to be able to invade China but in case of India, we have direct land borders. China will always remain vulnerable to India and any force using Indian Territory to take out China. remember the WW2 when chinese resistance to Japan was sustained from India by those over the hump flights by USAF.

India China War will be decided by Surface to Surface Missiles

Unless SAM sites and Radars are taken out by multiple salvos , no side will undertake deep sorties

 

[Hydra]

Dassault paid 1 million euro as 'gift' to Indian middleman in Rafale deal: French report

Dassault, the manufacturer of Rafale jets, agreed to pay one million euro to an Indian middleman just after the signing of the Indo-French contract in 2016, according to an investigation by a French publication.

www.indiatoday.in

If true,it's the end of Rafale's journey in mmrca2 rendering saga. Sad,a finely engineered aircraft went to such trouble.

 

[lcafanboy]

Congress raises Rafale deal again after French media claims ..

Read more at:
Congress raises Rafale deal again after French media claims of 1.1 million euros 'commission' | India News - Times of India

 

[Hydra]

@Picdelamirand-oil what prompt you to put that emoji?
1) The allegation came first in french media,
Are you undermining your own media by using that emoji?
2) or do you think that we indians are brainless and will go for Rafale again even if that allegations are true?