Rafale DH/EH of Indian Air Force : News and Discussions
- Thread starter Herciv
- Start date
-
- Tags
- indian defence forum
I'm somewhat surprised people are even contemplating the possibility of landing a Rafale on a bridge like that. I live in a country that uses civilian infrastructure for ad hoc military purposes, like landings and no highway strip is even remotely as congested as that bridge due to safety concerns. None of them have lights near landing or take off locations, nor guard rails or walls. Trees yes, but they're typically surrounded by flat ground so the aircraft has some space to slow down it it overshoots a landing or ends up off road.
The Luftforsvaret, Ilmavoimat and Flygvapnet all have dedicated strips on civilian roads for landings and regularly practice such. They're still pretty harrowing what with all the trees in the Nordic countries, and roads can get very slippery when it rains (it rains a lot) or icy (it's cold a lot).
Those are safe road strips used by the Finnish Air Force. This isn't. There's too much congestion.
Some highway strips around here can accommodate aircraft as large as C-295s.
Maybe, maybe in an extreme emergency with not regard for the condition of the air-frame afterwards, could you land on that bridge. Otherwise it's just too risky.
I guess if you're feeling particularly ballsy you could try landing a helicopter?
The Luftforsvaret, Ilmavoimat and Flygvapnet all have dedicated strips on civilian roads for landings and regularly practice such. They're still pretty harrowing what with all the trees in the Nordic countries, and roads can get very slippery when it rains (it rains a lot) or icy (it's cold a lot).
Those are safe road strips used by the Finnish Air Force. This isn't. There's too much congestion.
Some highway strips around here can accommodate aircraft as large as C-295s.
Maybe, maybe in an extreme emergency with not regard for the condition of the air-frame afterwards, could you land on that bridge. Otherwise it's just too risky.
I guess if you're feeling particularly ballsy you could try landing a helicopter?
Last edited by a moderator:
Breguet 941 even landed and took of in a stadoim in New York. Interestingly, A400 is able to take off on a distance equal to 4 times itzs own length.
Somebody said that the AASM seen on the picture are BLU 126 that is to say low collateral damage bomb.
I thought RB and BS are airframe number initials named after former (and serving) IAF personnel. Isn't the Indian version of the plane itself called Rafale EH (and twin seat DH)? H for Hindustan. The Egyptian ones were called DM and EM.
I'm somewhat surprised people are even contemplating the possibility of landing a Rafale on a bridge like that. I live in a country that uses civilian infrastructure for ad hoc military purposes, like landings and no highway strip is even remotely as congested as that bridge due to safety concerns. None of them have lights near landing or take off locations, nor guard rails or walls. Trees yes, but they're typically surrounded by flat ground so the aircraft has some space to slow down it it overshoots a landing or ends up off road.
The Luftforsvaret, Ilmavoimat and Flygvapnet all have dedicated strips on civilian roads for landings and regularly practice such. They're still pretty harrowing what with all the trees in the Nordic countries, and roads can get very slippery when it rains (it rains a lot) or icy (it's cold a lot).
Those are safe road strips used by the Finnish Air Force. This isn't. There's too much congestion.
Some highway strips around here can accommodate aircraft as large as C-295s.
Maybe, maybe in an extreme emergency with not regard for the condition of the air-frame afterwards, could you land on that bridge. Otherwise it's just too risky.
I guess if you're feeling particularly ballsy you could try landing a helicopter?
Large freeways like the Yamuna Expressway in northern India can make for landing strips (already demonstrated with Su-30MKI, Mirage-2000 & Jaguar touch-and-gos and a C-130J-30 full landing), but the bridge in question is a no-go unless someone sends a team to saw off all the light poles first.
Last edited:
A couple of journalists said that, but they were debunked quickly.
Halloweene's info is that indeed, "RB has been chosen to represent the fleet", meaning both twin- and single-seaters. I guess we'll have confirmation either way soon enough.
Pretty usual, but there should be a reason to fly like that.Maybe Mica ER realease is not at it best behind a damocles.
Rafale Deal: Comprehensive data analysis of the cost proves that India has got a far better deal compared to 2007
Good overview of why Rahul Gandhi's claims are demonstrably false. All that's missing to get a complete picture of the so-called controversy is some dirt about Robert Vadra, Christian Michel, and Rahul Gandhi; hopefully a court of justice will bring these details to light.
Good overview of why Rahul Gandhi's claims are demonstrably false. All that's missing to get a complete picture of the so-called controversy is some dirt about Robert Vadra, Christian Michel, and Rahul Gandhi; hopefully a court of justice will bring these details to light.
Poor pic, at least in the past you tried it with wrong statements of French ministers, now you are down to wrong claims of blogs and so called journalists, that don't understand the difference between ADA and HAL, because PAC criticised primarily ADA, for the development and certification delays of LCA, not HAL. Even the government on their official website makes clear, who is responsible for the LCA problems:
So that is not an excuse, not to mention that Eric Trappier himself stated that he was happy with HAL. Do no matter how hard you try, the only honest answer to why not HAL is, there is no licence production. And who's fault is that? Oh wait the government has confirmed that too =>
Non compliant Dassault!
Congress dug their own grave actually. And this is even after they knew they were being dishonest.
