Rafale DH/EH of Indian Air Force : News and Discussions
- Thread starter Herciv
- Start date
-
- Tags
- indian defence forum
I didn't address all of his post. NCTR is enemy target recognition and yes it is US exportable. The French TALIOS has IRST
Last edited:
Rafale have NCTR even without Talios, using FSO and SPECTRA. Indian Rafale don't have Talios.
I didn't say the Rafale didn't use a NCTR, the poster was referring to US radar and such. The TALIOS was in reference to IRST India uses an Israeli IR and I haven't checked the specs.
It is a regular timeline for any new missile project. All missiles that are in the testing phase now were started 5+ years back.
Case in point : RudraM Series Air-launched Missiles : Updates & Discussions
@randomradio What can be done to hold DRDO/HAL Accountable for their timelines?
This thing seriously cannot go as it is.
Something needs to be done.
Also Happy Diwali.
MICA and
But they maintain compatibility with it, as the IAF has reserved the option to procure Talios pods at a later point.
AFAIK the TALIOS is a stand alone pod, that they advertise will sell to others makes of planes. So yes Indian can even put them on the SU
However it is a dream
defenceupdate.in
However it is a dream
India acquires 164 Rafael Litening targeting pod
Rafael will supply 164 examples of its Litening targeting pod to the Indian air force, for use on four types of combat aircraft including New Delhi’s Sukhoi Su-30 fighters. Guy Oren, director of Ra…
defenceupdate.in
Last edited:
Nothing much the govt can do.
At the low and mid end, DRDO is getting competition from DPSUs and the private sector already. And DRDO has always been serious about the high end market. There's no competition in this segment yet, but it should happen over the next decade.
6 Squadron, RAF visited India, where pilots had the opportunity to fly joint sorties with Indian Su-30MKI Flanker and Rafale EH fighter aircraft
TARAMMAA and PST GE Aero 2025
Launched at the end of 2019 as a continuation of the CARAA (Capacités Accrues pour le radar RBE2 à Antenne Active) and MELBAA (Modes et Exploitation Large Bande pour l'Antenne Active) upstream study plans, the TARAMMAA Scientific and Technological Project (PST) for Multichannel Active Antenna MLU Radar Technology and Architecture, aims to study new transmitter-receiver modules and a new software architecture for future radars.
Director of the Rafale programme at the DGA, the French Defence Procurement Agency (IGA) General Engineer Guilhem Reboul explains that the idea is to ensure that "part of the processing is done directly in the antenna itself and no longer in dedicated computers".
"It's very innovative," he says. He adds: "Gallium nitride [GaN] technology will be preferred for the antenna modules in order to allow new functions such as the interleaving of air-to-air and air-to-ground modes. Combined with enhanced processing capabilities thanks to increasingly powerful algorithms and computing resources, these modules will guarantee remarkable detection ranges and high resistance to jamming," in line with the Aero Electronic Warfare 2025 PST, which is preparing the Rafale F4 and... Rafale F5 upgrades.
Hence the priority given by the DGA to setting up a French gallium nitride industry, within the framework of the NIGAMIL programme [for "Gallium nitride for MILimetric applications"]. This material is used in particular for the manufacture of high-performance integrated circuits operating at up to 100 GHz, which would significantly improve the power level, efficiency and therefore the compactness of radar systems, active antennas or electronic warfare systems.
Within the Rafale programme, constant investment in electronic warfare has always been a priority and remains so to counter emerging and future threats
If the tweet actually said it will be available for MRFA, then it would have made sense. Aren't we still waiting for a proper confirmation about GaN radar, even conformal arrays, within MRFA timeframe?
If MRFA is delayed, ie, a contract is signed in 2027 or beyond, then we could end up jumping straight into the F5 era.
In fact, the Rafale's evolutions follow a path that corresponds to the needs of those who pay for the evolutions. And France is the main payer of the evolutions, and we realise that the Russian weapon systems are not very impressive and that we need more quantity than to make the systems evolve. So I don't know which way we're going to go after F4.If the tweet actually said it will be available for MRFA, then it would have made sense. Aren't we still waiting for a proper confirmation about GaN radar, even conformal arrays, within MRFA timeframe?
If MRFA is delayed, ie, a contract is signed in 2027 or beyond, then we could end up jumping straight into the F5 era.
Most likely we will purchase F5 standard in early 30s, after a disastrous & defeat in the hands of Chinese.If the tweet actually said it will be available for MRFA, then it would have made sense. Aren't we still waiting for a proper confirmation about GaN radar, even conformal arrays, within MRFA timeframe?
If MRFA is delayed, ie, a contract is signed in 2027 or beyond, then we could end up jumping straight into the F5 era.
(omnirole-Rafale.com (fr), oct.30)
Is the sale of Rafales to the Indian Navy putting the project back on the agenda?
No two-seater Rafale for the French Navy
The story of a two-seater aircraft is not new. In the early 2000s, the magazine Air Fan mentioned "... 40 two-seat Rafales for the Navy ... the M15 will be a "BM" ...". In fact, France plans to equip the French Navy with 60 aircraft, including 35 two-seaters by 2014!
From an employment strategy point of view, in the 1990s the French Air Force planned to have a two-seater "C2" (Command and Control) version. However, following the Kosovo operations in 1999, it is moving towards a 'tactical' two-seater, with the Navigateur Officier Système d'Armes (NOSA) aiming to relieve the pilot's workload.
For its part, the Navy favours a single-seat version in pairs alongside the E-2C Hawkeye. Surprisingly, it even mentions the possible "incompatibility" of two crew members for certain tasks, "parasiting" the decision-making process. On the technical side, the Navy version is already 600 kg heavier than the Air version. A two-seater would then weigh an additional 200 kg, taking into account the second ejection seat and various structural reinforcements. Consequently, to limit the extra weight to 800 kg, the gun would probably have to be removed, as well as 215 kg of fuel. It therefore concluded on several occasions (1991 and 2000) that a two-seater version was not necessary. Finally, the French Navy abandoned the "Rafale BM or N" project in September 2004.
Did you know that? Initially, the Navy requested a retractable refuelling boom. However, for reasons of cost, lightness and reliability, the boom will be fixed and positioned on the right-hand side of the aircraft to provide clear visibility during landing. By the way, a lighter pole will save a few precious knots during landing.
The question of landing qualification
Following the Indian Air Force's acquisition of 36 Rafales, it is now up to the Indian Navy to consider replacing its Mig-29s with American Super Hornets or French Rafales. However, it seems that India is expressing the need to have some (8?) two-seater aircraft among the 26 aircraft in the tender. Is it to provide for pilot training or is it an operational necessity?
As far as training is concerned, one could imagine that India could operate in the same way as France. In this case, the Indian Navy pilots could then benefit from the 8 two-seater Rafales of the Indian Air Force. However, France qualifies its pilots for landing in the United States on T-45Cs, due to the lack of a navalized (two-seater) trainer aircraft. The Air Force's two-seat Rafales are therefore only a complement to the initial training of French naval aviation pilots. In addition, of course, flight simulators are used.
The situation is different in India. All fighter pilots first join INAS 551 (Indian Naval Air Squadron) for basic naval training. They then fly the Hawk 132, a non-naval aircraft. Then they were selected for conversion to the Mig-29K/KUB in INAS 300. Afterwards, they were appointed to the INAS 303 operational squadron, also flying the Mig-29K/KUB. Operational conversion to the Mig includes air combat training, weapons deployment, air-to-air refuelling and, above all, landing qualification. Consequently, the Mig is the only aircraft involved in pilot landing qualification. Unless India wants to change its training method, it must be able to replace its Migs with an aircraft offering the same capabilities.
The Mig-29K/KUB have a strictly identical airframe in appearance. For example, the cockpit canopy is similar. The second ejection seat is replaced by an additional 630-litre fuel tank on the single-seat version.
Super Hornet advantage?
Similarly, if the Indian Navy's need is operational, the question of a two-seater Rafale Marine arises. From this point of view, the advantage goes to the Super Hornet, which already has a two-seat version, but also a two-seat electronic warfare version. The latter has increased its weight by 800 kg, for more than 15 tonnes when empty.
Unlike France, the US Navy makes full use of two-seater aircraft.
In the past, these included the F-4 Phantom and the legendary F-14 Tomcat. On these aircraft, the officer in the rear seat was known as the RIO: Radar Intercept Officer. He was responsible for navigation, the essential use of radar and the use of long-range air-to-air missiles such as the AIM-54 Phoenix. Similarly, the A-6 Intruder, the A-3 Skywarrior and the A-5 Vigilante had navigating officers.
Today, this preference for dual crews continues. In addition to the 172 EA-18G Growlers in 16 US Navy squadrons, the Navy also operates 10 all-F/A-18F squadrons and 23 single-seat or mixed squadrons for training.
Towards a two-seat Rafale marine?
What is the situation today? In fact, the "Air" and "Navy" versions of the Rafale share 80% of common components. Moreover, although France has not wished to follow up on this version, nothing indicates that the project is impossible. As mentioned earlier, less fuel and the removal of the gun could compensate for the addition of a second ejection seat. To obtain a training version of the Rafale Marine, the concessions would seem minimal.
The reasoning remains simplistic... Even if the operation were possible, how quickly could Dassault Aviation bring such a version to fruition? If the studies carried out at the time of the M01 and M02 prototypes proved sufficient, it would nevertheless be necessary to carry out a substantial campaign of ground and flight tests. Moreover, India's decision on the replacement of its Mig-29s seems to be looming by the end of this year.
There are other issues that could work in favour of such a version. The US seems to be interested in a successor to the T-45C that would not necessarily be able to land on an aircraft carrier. The aircraft would simply be robust enough to withstand touch and go on the flight deck or ASSP. There are many contenders: Boeing/Saab's T-7A, Leonardo's T-100 (derived from the M-346), or Lockheed Martin/KAI's T-50A. This is also the solution that China seems to want to adopt with its JL-9. In the United States, the two-seater Super Hornet could then be used to train pilots for landing. Thus, France could be forced to rethink the training of its pilots. /deepl
Cover photo © Dassault Aviation - C. Cosmao.
Towards a two-seater naval Rafale?
Is the sale of Rafales to the Indian Navy putting the project back on the agenda?No two-seater Rafale for the French Navy
The story of a two-seater aircraft is not new. In the early 2000s, the magazine Air Fan mentioned "... 40 two-seat Rafales for the Navy ... the M15 will be a "BM" ...". In fact, France plans to equip the French Navy with 60 aircraft, including 35 two-seaters by 2014!
From an employment strategy point of view, in the 1990s the French Air Force planned to have a two-seater "C2" (Command and Control) version. However, following the Kosovo operations in 1999, it is moving towards a 'tactical' two-seater, with the Navigateur Officier Système d'Armes (NOSA) aiming to relieve the pilot's workload.
For its part, the Navy favours a single-seat version in pairs alongside the E-2C Hawkeye. Surprisingly, it even mentions the possible "incompatibility" of two crew members for certain tasks, "parasiting" the decision-making process. On the technical side, the Navy version is already 600 kg heavier than the Air version. A two-seater would then weigh an additional 200 kg, taking into account the second ejection seat and various structural reinforcements. Consequently, to limit the extra weight to 800 kg, the gun would probably have to be removed, as well as 215 kg of fuel. It therefore concluded on several occasions (1991 and 2000) that a two-seater version was not necessary. Finally, the French Navy abandoned the "Rafale BM or N" project in September 2004.
Did you know that? Initially, the Navy requested a retractable refuelling boom. However, for reasons of cost, lightness and reliability, the boom will be fixed and positioned on the right-hand side of the aircraft to provide clear visibility during landing. By the way, a lighter pole will save a few precious knots during landing.
The question of landing qualification
Following the Indian Air Force's acquisition of 36 Rafales, it is now up to the Indian Navy to consider replacing its Mig-29s with American Super Hornets or French Rafales. However, it seems that India is expressing the need to have some (8?) two-seater aircraft among the 26 aircraft in the tender. Is it to provide for pilot training or is it an operational necessity?
As far as training is concerned, one could imagine that India could operate in the same way as France. In this case, the Indian Navy pilots could then benefit from the 8 two-seater Rafales of the Indian Air Force. However, France qualifies its pilots for landing in the United States on T-45Cs, due to the lack of a navalized (two-seater) trainer aircraft. The Air Force's two-seat Rafales are therefore only a complement to the initial training of French naval aviation pilots. In addition, of course, flight simulators are used.
The situation is different in India. All fighter pilots first join INAS 551 (Indian Naval Air Squadron) for basic naval training. They then fly the Hawk 132, a non-naval aircraft. Then they were selected for conversion to the Mig-29K/KUB in INAS 300. Afterwards, they were appointed to the INAS 303 operational squadron, also flying the Mig-29K/KUB. Operational conversion to the Mig includes air combat training, weapons deployment, air-to-air refuelling and, above all, landing qualification. Consequently, the Mig is the only aircraft involved in pilot landing qualification. Unless India wants to change its training method, it must be able to replace its Migs with an aircraft offering the same capabilities.
The Mig-29K/KUB have a strictly identical airframe in appearance. For example, the cockpit canopy is similar. The second ejection seat is replaced by an additional 630-litre fuel tank on the single-seat version.
Super Hornet advantage?
Similarly, if the Indian Navy's need is operational, the question of a two-seater Rafale Marine arises. From this point of view, the advantage goes to the Super Hornet, which already has a two-seat version, but also a two-seat electronic warfare version. The latter has increased its weight by 800 kg, for more than 15 tonnes when empty.
Unlike France, the US Navy makes full use of two-seater aircraft.
In the past, these included the F-4 Phantom and the legendary F-14 Tomcat. On these aircraft, the officer in the rear seat was known as the RIO: Radar Intercept Officer. He was responsible for navigation, the essential use of radar and the use of long-range air-to-air missiles such as the AIM-54 Phoenix. Similarly, the A-6 Intruder, the A-3 Skywarrior and the A-5 Vigilante had navigating officers.
Today, this preference for dual crews continues. In addition to the 172 EA-18G Growlers in 16 US Navy squadrons, the Navy also operates 10 all-F/A-18F squadrons and 23 single-seat or mixed squadrons for training.
Towards a two-seat Rafale marine?
What is the situation today? In fact, the "Air" and "Navy" versions of the Rafale share 80% of common components. Moreover, although France has not wished to follow up on this version, nothing indicates that the project is impossible. As mentioned earlier, less fuel and the removal of the gun could compensate for the addition of a second ejection seat. To obtain a training version of the Rafale Marine, the concessions would seem minimal.
The reasoning remains simplistic... Even if the operation were possible, how quickly could Dassault Aviation bring such a version to fruition? If the studies carried out at the time of the M01 and M02 prototypes proved sufficient, it would nevertheless be necessary to carry out a substantial campaign of ground and flight tests. Moreover, India's decision on the replacement of its Mig-29s seems to be looming by the end of this year.
There are other issues that could work in favour of such a version. The US seems to be interested in a successor to the T-45C that would not necessarily be able to land on an aircraft carrier. The aircraft would simply be robust enough to withstand touch and go on the flight deck or ASSP. There are many contenders: Boeing/Saab's T-7A, Leonardo's T-100 (derived from the M-346), or Lockheed Martin/KAI's T-50A. This is also the solution that China seems to want to adopt with its JL-9. In the United States, the two-seater Super Hornet could then be used to train pilots for landing. Thus, France could be forced to rethink the training of its pilots. /deepl