Well, it's my presumption that we received the integration access in the 2016 GtG deal.
That may be what they want - but what is the system as it exists?
Rafale DH/EH of Indian Air Force : News and Discussions
- Thread starter Herciv
- Start date
-
- Tags
- indian defence forum
Well, it's my presumption that we received the integration access in the 2016 GtG deal.
That may be what they want - but what is the system as it exists?
Le ministère des Armées finance le développement de l’AASF, un missile antiradar destiné au Rafale
The French Ministry of Defence is funding the development of the AASF, an anti-radar missile for the Rafale fighter aircraft
by Laurent Lagneau - 18 October 2024
Last week, the future combat drone [UCAV] intended to accompany the Rafale upgraded to the F5 standard came under the spotlight, with the announcement by the Minister for the Armed Forces, Sébastien Lecornu, that contracts for its development had been awarded to Dassault Aviation, Thales and Safran.
This stealth combat drone will be equipped with new-generation sensors, ‘resilient’ connectivity and artificial intelligence algorithms. Capable of being refuelled in flight, it will have a ‘wide range of action’, according to the French Ministry of Defence. This means that its development will have to meet a number of technical challenges.
The Rafale F5 and this collaborative combat drone will have to operate the future ASN4G [Air Sol Nucléaire de 4e Génération] nuclear-capable missile. To do this, the pair will have the ability to suppress and destroy enemy air defences [SEAD - Suppression of Enemy Air Defences]. This capability was lost by the French Air Force [AAE] with the withdrawal of the AS-37 MARTEL [Matra Anti-Radar TELévision] anti-radar missile at the end of the 1990s.
With the proliferation of A2/AD systems and the introduction of increasingly sophisticated air defence systems, the question of equipping the AAE with a Rafale dedicated to electronic warfare to jam enemy radars has been raised by a number of Members of Parliament with the Ministry of Defence. But each time, the Ministry replied that it was not necessary to develop such an aircraft.
However, in a forward-looking document published in 2019, the AAE indicated that it wanted ‘to have weapons capable of neutralising enemy air defences as quickly as possible’, the aim being to guarantee its ability to ‘enter theatres of operations first’.
During the debates on the 2024-30 Military Planning Law [LPM], General Stéphane Mille, then Chief of Staff of the AAE, insisted on the recovery of this SEAD capability. ‘It is central to our future commitments: it will enable us to be much more at ease in increasingly contested environments, at a time when modern equipment will be diversifying around the world’, he explained.
He added: ‘To neutralise a ground-air defence system, there are means other than those of the Air Force's kinetic domain. We need to develop this SEAD capability to give the Army Chief of Staff several strings to his bow and create gaps in an enemy system’. And that means the Rafale F4 standard.
General Mille also mentioned the imminent arrival of the Future Cruise Missile [FMC], which, developed in cooperation with the UK, ‘will go very quickly and will be able to penetrate ground-air protection’ as well as ‘other, stealthier missiles’.
‘The SEAD capability is based on a range of weapons, an aircraft, a doctrine and, above all, several capabilities [...] which, when added together, will make it possible to create a breach in an enemy system’, summarised General Mille.
However, the development of an anti-radar missile was not explicitly mentioned in the LPM 2024-30. However, given that the LPM is relatively ‘vague’, such a munition is well and truly the subject of a programme, conducted in relative secrecy insofar as, for the moment, the French Defence Procurement Agency [DGA] has not, unless I'm mistaken, communicated on the subject. Nor has the AAE, for that matter.
The Annual Performance Project [PAP] appended to the 2025 Finance Bill refers to the Future Air-Surface Armament [AASF] programme, which has a budget of €41.90 million for the period 2024-2027. According to the description given, this is a PEM [major effect programme] that ‘meets the need for a capability to neutralise short- and medium-range surface-to-air threats, an essential prerequisite for the Rafale's first entry capability’.
‘The maturity phase should enable the choice of the option that meets the operational requirement to be made prior to the launch of production,’ adds the document, under the heading “Programme 146 - Forces Equipment”. ‘The order/delivery schedule for the AASF programme, as well as the industrial organisation, will be defined at the time of the production launch,’ it adds.
Yes, but you'll have to get used to doing without me, I'm going to disappear from this site little by little so you won't be too sad when I will disappear completely.
MRFA was issued to induct an aircraft to fill the gap observed in 1999 kargil war, 25 years had passed since the kargil war, IAF policy of 4.5 gen would have been good if it was inducted in 2010s. Its no longer an option, we need a stealth aircraft or an aircraft capable of hiding from a stealth aircraft % destroy enemy stealth aircraft. Sadly, no 4.5 gen aircraft existing today in market.
Nuke them first.
I hope you're not suggesting we're using SCALP in a N role!@Speedster1, @_Anonymous_
, @STEPHEN COHEN
Guys, BrahMos-A's primary job to deter Chinese Carrier Battle Group and turn IOC as their graveyard once they try to get naughty. I don't want discuss about this topic on an open forum but just think about the other French beauty for the role you're deeming for MKI + BrahMos combo
If 40 odd MKIs were modified for the Brahmos A & 40 odd MKIs were earmarked for usage by the SFC, don't you think it's a remarkable coincidence?
I mean you're actually talking about a country whose scientists used enriched Uranium / Plutonium from the CANDU reactor for the N tests in Pokhran -1 which made the Canadians livid & prompted them to sever all connections with the Indian civilian N program not to mention that our first boiling water reactors were copied from those CANDU designs without any authorisation.
Apart from gravity N bombs what else did we have a decade ago which'd meet our requirements in case of a decapitation strike? Please don't come up with Prithvi or Agni or Shaurya etc. They aren't meant for decapitation strikes.
Why else would we modify the MKIs to carry the Brahmos? You actually think we'd go about advertising our capabilities the world over. Why, if the Chinese didn't blow the whistle on our Agni series program about the range they went to town with, we'd still be accepting everything the GoI put out as facts vide the PIB ?! We already have one who diligently collects those press releases with more dedication than I did with stamps & coins as a child.
The day we have our own HCM / HGV & it's derivatives / analogues it'd be a different story . We'd probably use the Brahmos THEN purely for conventional strikes .
As regards operational control viz C&C , maintenance, etc these are details that can be mutually worked out between the said service , SFC , the CDS office & the MoD. What's the MO we follow in case of the SSBNs? The same would be true for the air component of our N strike capabilities.
As of now I'd expect this to be WiP. Eventually all these assets would be under the full operational & administrative control of the SFC along with the bases & other supporting facilities including ancillary equipment with personnel from various forces deputed to the SFC for fixed tenures.
I'm surprised RST didn't figure this one out or maybe I should'nt be . He's an overactive imagination just not in areas where it matters.
Not that you bring that up, Brahmos could theoretically carry a n-warhead. This is from a Pakistani strategic affairs analyst fwiw.@Speedster1, @_Anonymous_
, @STEPHEN COHEN
Guys, BrahMos-A's primary job to deter Chinese Carrier Battle Group and turn IOC as their graveyard once they try to get naughty. I don't want discuss about this topic on an open forum but just think about the other French beauty for the role you're deeming for MKI + BrahMos combo
How the Extended Range BrahMos Changes the India-Pakistan Deterrence Equation
The new range will bring distant targets within range of the BrahMos, as well as enhance Indian precision strike capabilities.
thediplomat.com
All I've been saying so far is that some MKIs could likely be earmarked for n-delivery, not the Brahmos itself. Simply because the MKI forms the bulk of our fighter fleet. One (ALA?) missile each on the fuselage centerline. Quite possible, imo.
That's true of everyone here. We're all journeymen to a man . Till we reach the final destination, enjoy the journey & spread joy.
Certainly, but I'm already 77That's true of everyone here. We're all journeymen to a man . Till we reach the final destination, enjoy the journey & spread joy.
I'm told the French live longer on account of a Mediterranean diet ( plenty of garlic & olives) , wine & extra marital affairs in healthy doses if there is such a thing as extra marital affairs in healthy doses .
So eat drink & be merry.
Brahmos for Air Launched Nuclear Strike makes much more sense because of the Speed and Reach of Su 30
For example if US and Indian Satellites Pakistani warheads being mated to NASR TELs ,.then India has Every Right to conduct a First Strike
Whether it is Khuzdar Garrison in the South ie Balochistan or Wah Cantonment near Rawalpindi, only Su 30 with a Brahmos can conduct a Quick Decapitation Strike
There is NO VIRTUE in being Nuked first by your enemy
Brahmos can even carry a thermonuclear warhead. But we separate conventional systems from nuclear ones. This prevents the enemy from becoming jittery every time a nuke-capable conventional weapon is fired in mass. So when we fire a lot of Brahmos missiles, the enemy is assured that it's conventional.
That's why I proposed TEDBF modified for a dedicated SFC role in its ORCA form. When it starts flying aggressively, that's message sent.
But during nuclear war, it can be done. So it's only a peacetime rule.
We have a clearly articulated NFU policy while our neighbours don't. That's a huge confidence boosting measure in itself which is not reciprocated by them.
There may be some end-use restrictions by the Russians that prevent us from adapting Brahmos for nukes.
If we wanted to work around those, we'd need to indigenize its ramjet engine engine. But, there are other options (LFRJ, HCM) under development which should give our own ASMP++ in the time to come.
CAATSA doesn't affect India as much, and it does not affect old deals either, only new ones. But CAATSA affects other countries, like Vietnam and Indonesia that wanted to buy Russian tech.
Russian SAMs are doing very well. The main problem is battlefield transparency. NATO is providing all the intelligence necessary, and Russia cannot attack those intelligence systems. And Ukraines' only managed to find success against isolated systems with 2 or 3 launchers, whereas actual Russia IADS is massive with at least 40-50 launchers in one site.
Furthermore Russian IADS has proven itself against NATO's long range and massive fires, like SCALP, HiMARS, and ATACMS, which are the weapons in the greatest numbers in NATO's arsenal, rendering them ineffective to a large degree, which means NATO has to expend more money into upgrading, bulking up and finding replacements. The financial implications are big, especially when Russia's still building new SAMs at a greater rate than NATO's missile modernization, while at the same time China's putting a lot of pressure on the US.
France is unlikely to fight Russia alone, but the French military was designed to fight Russia alone, as per CdG's great plan for independence in 1966.
It's a different story whether France can fight a newly resurgent Russia alone in the next decade. Time keeps moving.
Right now, our BMD only protects Delhi. The S-400 has some capability too, but that's separate. Once Phase 2 and 3 are complete, we will have the tech and the financial ability to protect our most important cities and industrial clusters.
So our current goal is deterrence. In the future, as BMD is established in large numbers, we will have to create counterforce capabilities, which means we will aim for the destruction of Pak's nuclear capabilities. Overall, this is all very expensive stuff.
I don't think so.
It is as the IAF wants it. When SFC wanted either MKIs or Rafales for nuke role, it was rejected by the IAF, and that's how it is right now. People wrongly attributed the second 42 MKI deal for the SFC, which the IAF publicly denied, and the same with F3R.
And given the dearth in numbers, the IAF has refused non-air force use of new aircraft. So SFC's gonna have to wait for LCA Mk2 or even TEDBF/ORCA.
The report argues that this capability is for 2035, 10 years away, and a solution need to be found for immediate use.
We don't need an exclusive fleet of stealth.
With Ghatak, FUFA, and AMCA, we will have 40% stealth jets.
Not that you bring that up, Brahmos could theoretically carry a n-warhead. This is from a Pakistani strategic affairs analyst fwiw.
How the Extended Range BrahMos Changes the India-Pakistan Deterrence Equation
The new range will bring distant targets within range of the BrahMos, as well as enhance Indian precision strike capabilities.thediplomat.com
All I've been saying so far is that some MKIs could likely be earmarked for n-delivery, not the Brahmos itself. Simply because the MKI forms the bulk of our fighter fleet. One (ALA?) missile each on the fuselage centerline. Quite possible, imo.
MKIs will not be used by SFC. All those Brahmos MKIs are for IAF use only. These modified MKIs have already been distributed to all squadrons in small numbers, with only the squadron in Thanjavur with 8 such MKIs.
Right now only Jags and M2000s have nuclear certification.
Our NFU policy includes a clause where we will use first if "we perceive" there's a threat of a nuclear attack. The idea behind that is to make their own capabilities transparent to prevent our first strike. That's why we are also transparent about our nuclear capabilities.
I don't know if the Russians are preventing us from equipping our own warhead, given Brahmos is majority owned by India, but we don't need it for nuclear deterrence.
And I wouldn't pay attention to Pakistani reports about Brahmos being nuclear capable. It's just a psyop tactic in order to keep bringing international attention to Russia and our nuclear stockpile. That Diplomat article has been written for fear-mongering.
In 2013, a 052C guided missile destroyer conducted a live-fire exercise at the sea firing range of the East China Sea test base, in a strong electromagnetic interference environment, through the ship's 346 phased array radar to catch the target and launch HHQ-9 missile interception, successfully shot down five flying speed of Mach 3 sea-grazing targets.@Speedster1, @_Anonymous_
, @STEPHEN COHEN
Guys, BrahMos-A's primary job to deter Chinese Carrier Battle Group and turn IOC as their graveyard once they try to get naughty. I don't want discuss about this topic on an open forum but just think about the other French beauty for the role you're deeming for MKI + BrahMos combo
Intercepting supersonic sea-skimming targets is a technology that has matured since the Cold War
