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

[batman]

The Su-57 has an analog radar, the same as the F-22 and F-35. Even the Rafale F3R carries an analog radar. F4 got the digital upgrade.

This is flat out wrong, Byelka is an active electronically scanned array (AESA) with 1,514 TRMs in the main nose array + two side-looking X-band AESAs (404 TRMs each) + L-band cheek arrays. It is fully digital with electronic beam steering. It has been repeatedly confirmed it is a true AESA with multi-band capability and 360° coverage via side arrays, something the Rafale’s nose-only RBE2 cannot match. F-22’s APG-77 and F-35’s APG-81 are also AESA (digital). Rafale F3R used a GaAs AESA; F4.2 introduced GaN, but it’s still nose-only. The Su-57’s distributed aperture gives it real passive hunting and beaming tactics that Rafale lacks.

And even if it's delivered in a "new technical configuration," it's still WIP. In order to unlock real world capabilities, it has to be operationally tested. F-35 achieved IOC in 2016 and FOC in 2019, but it's still not fully operational. MKI was inducted in 2002 but became operational only in 2007. What was delivered was the hardware with minimal software, and the software is unlocked after operational testing and that takes a few years. Without the software, it's just paperweight.

Su-57 and Su-57M right now are still in IOC. In another 2 years, Su-57M will achieve FOC. And then, whether they take 2 or 3 years (standard French development time for block upgrades) or 10+ years (the F-35 f*ckup), it's up to them.

The “software unlock” argument is the same one used for every new fighter (including F-35 and Rafale F4). The hardware is mature; Indian customisation (Uttam/Virupaksha GaN integration) can accelerate fusion further.

Rafale F5 with full GaN RBE2-XG is still years away from squadron service (ground tests ongoing, IOC ~2030+). Su-57 is already flying upgraded batches today.

For us to make a decision, the jet first needs to get FOC with Izd 30, and then show off their avionics in lab conditions, like the F-35 did with JSE. That's the bare minimum.

And what's this obsession with Izd 30? You seem to have no problem with using a 4th gen aircraft with a 4th gen engine which is inferior to Su57's semi 5th gen interim engine in every way? Does the Izd 177S limit the mission performance in a way the rafale engine does not? It has superior thrust to weight ratio, service ceiling, supercruise capability etc all while put in an much superior airframe than the rafale and russia is offering better tot for it than the france.

It's not that simple. Rafale penetrates enemy airspace using tactics, the Su-57 is not suitable for using such tactics. Rafale's also designed to fight using its own unique strengths that most other fighters are not designed for, that's also why its AAMs, bombs, and defensive systems are unique. Both jets are complementary in the use of tactics.



Su-57 has not been designed to survive in enemy airspace. It's been designed to fulfill Su-35's role, ie, protect Russian airspace from within Russia. You need to read up on Russian air defense doctrine.

For operating inside enemy airspace, they will have to work on a penetrating strike variant that acts as a successor to the Su-34.

The Su-57's main job is to just fire missiles from long range, that's also why it comes with an external EOTS, 'cause dropping bombs is a secondary role. You don't need to penetrate hostile airspace if you don't plan on dropping bombs. The S-37 will handle that.

Russian doctrine for the Su-57 is contested/denied airspace penetration using stealth, side radars, IRST passive detection, networking with S-400/A-100, and supermaneuverability to close and kill, exactly the opposite of “just fire missiles from long range inside friendly airspace.”

It has already conducted SEAD/strike missions with internal Kh-69 stealth cruise missiles and Kh-58 anti-radiation missiles in Ukraine (contested environment). It's tandem bays were designed from day one for both A2A and deep A2G.

Rafale relies on tactics + Spectra EW + standoff weapons because it has no internal bays and higher RCS. Su-57 can penetrate while carrying weapons internally. The “Su-57 is only for Russian homeland defense” narrative is outdated; the two-seat variant offered to India is explicitly for enhanced C3, drone control, and deep strike.

Local production has no relevance to R&D. Whatever we import and produce won't be handed over to ADA or DRDO, be it Rafale or Su-57.

We are already working on far more advanced technologies for AMCA.

In any case, by the time all that ToT comes in, AMCA will be finishing flight testing, making all of this pointless.



We are already there.

NAL hands over AMCA’s flaperon test box to DRDO’s

ADA and NAL's breakthrough in composite technology for AMCA program marks a milestone in it's development. As it promises a more lighter & efficient fighter.

www.republicworld.com

Su-57's tech won't help AMCA.



We are already there. This won't help AMCA either.



None of what you have listed anywhere will help AMCA. It's too late.

All the technologies meant to go on AMCA already exist today. That's why it's taken so much time to start the program.

Building the Su-57 airframe locally teaches actual 5th-gen skills (stealth shaping, internal bays, variable intakes, TVC integration, distributed sensors) that directly transfer to AMCA Mk1/Mk2.

It's one thing to produce something in a lab and its another thing to have the proper tooling, technology and technique involved in mass producing components in a economical and reliable method. China used licensed Su-27/30 production to leapfrog into J-20. India can do the same, Su-57 production is a “university” for 5th/6th-gen manufacturing. Rafale production gives us more 4.5-gen assembly experience we already have.

I'm talking about the level of ToT expected from here on. If the West is willing to give up 5th gen engine tech + roadmap to 6th gen with 100% ToT, the Russians will have to match. It's now the bare minimum.

It's not the west, its just france and mind you, france isnt a better aircraft or engine makes than russia, who already made an 5th gen aircraft upgradable to many 6th gen features and close to perfecting their 5th gen engine which might even surpass america's best engine f135, france isnt handing over any major or noteworthy tot for any of their current engines like Russia or even US hopefully if everything goes allright.

They are offering to codevelop a completely new engine which is nothing more than vapourware or paper weight right now along with us which they will use our money to fund their own r&d to make a 5th gen engine which will act as a stepping stone for a newer engine for FCAS. France is still stuck on 4th gen as of now. Both Russia and US is currently far ahead than France in this matter and have real operational 5th gen engines. They will be even further ahead after 10 or 12 years when this engine is made while they have over decade of experience operating and perfecting their 5th gen engine and would have moved on to even more advanced technologies.

They won't achieve 60% ToT without handing over the airframe and engine.

On Rafale and deadly Panther choppers, India gets a huge offer from France

France has accepted the Indian request that defence technologies shared with the Indian military should not be given to New Delhi’s adversaries. France’s relationship has already reached a new low with Pakistan after PM Imran Khan attacked President Macron.| India News

www.hindustantimes.com

Back then, 70% represented the airframe and engine for the F3R. Electronics has become a whole lot more expensive, so the French should be able to manage 60% after handing over the airframe and engine.

This is an old outdated article from 5 years ago and yet it still nowhere mentions about 100% or transfer of core components of engines. It at best talked about 70% for a mere assembly line. I'm sure you will not be able to find one article where france as you think have offered 100% tot for their engines because it simply never happened. Like I said, I will be happy to be proven wrong if you can find one real evidence where its clearly mentioned 100% tot of engine will be done because all you quoted so far is the 50-60% tot of the aircraft which will be mostly all the non critical tech while they retain all the core tech.

No, the Russians refused to certify the engine. It's fine if they don't provide warranty, but without engine certification, they will even refuse certification on the entire jet.

They basically said we can go ahead without their permission since they can't stop it, but that they won't certify anything, that's pretty much a denial.

Why would they certify an aircraft if the most important part of the aircraft has been tinkered with?

After replacing F414's American parts with Indian, the Americans will certify the engine.

Cool, lets actually sign the deal without jumping to conclusions on what they will and will not do.

Because our goal is now to introduce 6th gen avionics on a 5th gen airframe. Su-57 cannot meet that expectation within the same time as AMCA's arrival. Let's see if it even matches the Rafale first.

Like I said, russia has allowed us to put any avionics we deem necessary on it. Even without a 6th gen one, its capability still would exceed anything else we currently operate and we can incrementally upgrade the tech as per our wish unlike france who wont even give us the source code for their jets let alone upgrade their tech while russia will allow making the jet superior with each iteration.

Hell, all this is irrelevant if the Su-57 doesn't come with Izd 30 in the first place. Even the Su-57M1 comes with just an uprated IOC engine. It shows how far behind the program has fallen.

Already explained above.

 

[randomradio]

Do you have a high failure rate for your TRMs? That surprises me: I was under the impression, based on Thales’ statements when they delivered the first AESA radars, that one of the advantages was that the antenna required no maintenance for ten years because even if a TRM failed, it wouldn’t affect performance, and such failures were rare enough that maintenance wouldn’t be necessary until after 10 years.

I don't know the IAF's failure rate. And, although I cannot say for sure, I think the IAF's maintenance process is on-demand. So we could replace faulty TRMs during inspection or during diagnostics checks rather than sit around with faulty hardware.

While AESA radars can handle TRM failure up to 10% of the total, and while it will still remain operational, it will still be degraded if the failures are concentrated rather than distributed.

And like what happened to the Swiss clocks in IRNSS, a faulty update can result in a cascading failure.

TRMs are delicate enough to be physically destroyed by high power EA that the Chinese are sure to use. The J-36's main radar alone could exceed 50 kW of jamming power.

Or be degraded by environmental factors in India. For example, electronics degrade very quickly under the Himalayan sun due to ionizing radiation producing a single event effect. It also lowers the convection rates in the cooling system.

For example, this incident happened due to ionizing radiation in Australia.

Qantas Flight 72 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

So while TRMs can degrade gracefully in given conditions in Europe, our environment and operational conditions are far more hostile. We have to take multiple factors into account, not just normal wear and tear. And we don't want to end up in a situation where we will have to import TRMs when that happens.

 

[randomradio]

This is flat out wrong, Byelka is an active electronically scanned array (AESA) with 1,514 TRMs in the main nose array + two side-looking X-band AESAs (404 TRMs each) + L-band cheek arrays. It is fully digital with electronic beam steering. It has been repeatedly confirmed it is a true AESA with multi-band capability and 360° coverage via side arrays, something the Rafale’s nose-only RBE2 cannot match. F-22’s APG-77 and F-35’s APG-81 are also AESA (digital). Rafale F3R used a GaAs AESA; F4.2 introduced GaN, but it’s still nose-only. The Su-57’s distributed aperture gives it real passive hunting and beaming tactics that Rafale lacks.

A radar being digital and the TRM being digital are two different things. The Byelka like all other AESAs are digital in design, but the TRMs are analog. They use physical phase shifters and the signals are combined analogically at the array level or the subarray level, typically the latter. Basically, digital backend, but analog frontend. That's for beamforming.

As for receivers, analog AESA comes with a few centralized receiver channels. RBE2 comes with 4, just like APG-77, with later upgrades adding up to 6 channels. Bars comes with 3 and Irbis is upgraded to 4. And the new digital upgrade for RBE2 adds an unknown number of channels. You can either have it at element level (true DBF) or subarray level (hybrid DBF). The more receivers you have, the more functions you can perform simultaneously.

It means while the analog RBE2 AESA could do 4 functions at once, like volume scan, SAR, ECCM, multi-target tracking of 4 targets etc, with the new digital upgrade you can do advanced SAR, GMTI, air search, surface search, multi-target tracking of far more than 4 targets (likely 8), sensor fusion, ECCM, finetuning, mode interleaving etc all simultaneously.

It means you can have 10 or 15 or 20 receiver channels at the subarray level, or even as many as there are TRMs at the element-level. The only limitation at that point will be processing. The next step is to add processing within the TRM itself.

N036 uses analog TRMs that are digitized at the subarray level. And based on what we know, RBE2 has been upgraded to element-level, so 1050 receivers. Uttam and Virupaksha are also hybrid designs like Byelka. Of course, it's also possible element-level is at the XG level instead. But whatever the case, even if RBE2 is hybrid today, it is operational, mature, and ahead of its competition. Russian and Indian radars are still chasing after it.

Uttam Mk2 exceeds the capabilities of F3R's radar though, that's a standard analog AESA.

The “software unlock” argument is the same one used for every new fighter (including F-35 and Rafale F4). The hardware is mature; Indian customisation (Uttam/Virupaksha GaN integration) can accelerate fusion further.

Indian avionics on Su-57 is almost a decade away from entering service, if done today. It's a moot point. I prefer the IAF chasing after 6th gen rather than upgrading a 5th gen jet with what will be mediocre avionics for the time. It's fine for MKI and LCA, not for stealth jets.

Rafale F5 with full GaN RBE2-XG is still years away from squadron service (ground tests ongoing, IOC ~2030+). Su-57 is already flying upgraded batches today.

We need to see how and when they transition to true next gen RF avionics. Su-57's main competitor is the F5 after all, given the timeframe.

And what's this obsession with Izd 30? You seem to have no problem with using a 4th gen aircraft with a 4th gen engine which is inferior to Su57's semi 5th gen interim engine in every way? Does the Izd 177S limit the mission performance in a way the rafale engine does not? It has superior thrust to weight ratio, service ceiling, supercruise capability etc all while put in an much superior airframe than the rafale and russia is offering better tot for it than the france.

Yes. In given Indian conditions, a half-measure will always fail. The Su-57 has specifically been designed with Izd 30 in mind. Their half-measures with interim engines will work out in the Siberian plains. But in hot and high conditions, the aircraft will fail to measure up.

Plus without Izd 30, it won't have the necessary RF and IR stealth anyway, never mind the degraded flight performance, inadequate electrical power, and 4th gen maintenance.

The Russians are pushing the 177 on the IAF, but they are not gonna bite. It's like trying to push the 120 kN version of F414 on AMCA instead of a proper 5th gen engine.

Russian doctrine for the Su-57 is contested/denied airspace penetration using stealth, side radars, IRST passive detection, networking with S-400/A-100, and supermaneuverability to close and kill, exactly the opposite of “just fire missiles from long range inside friendly airspace.”

It has already conducted SEAD/strike missions with internal Kh-69 stealth cruise missiles and Kh-58 anti-radiation missiles in Ukraine (contested environment). It's tandem bays were designed from day one for both A2A and deep A2G.

Rafale relies on tactics + Spectra EW + standoff weapons because it has no internal bays and higher RCS. Su-57 can penetrate while carrying weapons internally. The “Su-57 is only for Russian homeland defense” narrative is outdated; the two-seat variant offered to India is explicitly for enhanced C3, drone control, and deep strike.

First para refers to air defense. Second para refers to long range SEAD/DEAD. So yes, the Su-57 is not meant to penetrate. It meets Russia's doctrine of using the S-57 for air defense. Both Su-27 and Su-35 are designed for the same roles.

It flies over its own airspace, fires long range missiles at enemy aircraft and SAMs. Secondary strike is also mainly about firing missiles at other surface targets. That's all it does. The side array allows it to keep an eye on one enemy while freeing up the main radar for others. The F-22 was also supposed to come with it to do the same thing.

Building the Su-57 airframe locally teaches actual 5th-gen skills (stealth shaping, internal bays, variable intakes, TVC integration, distributed sensors) that directly transfer to AMCA Mk1/Mk2.

Su-57 won't help AMCA in any of these areas. By the time the first Indian-made Su-57 is delivered, AMCA Mk2 will be flying with an Indian engine in the IAF. To put that into persepective, while the MKI entered service in 2002, the first fully Indian-made MKI began production only in 2013. If we start Su-57 with Indian avionics, it will take until 2040 to begin producing from raw materials stage.

Essentially 5 years to MKIze (2031), 3 years to import the first jet (2034), 2 more years to begin assembly of knocked-down kits (2036), then raw materials stage from year 12-15 (2040-43). The ToT alone takes 10 years to complete once production begins.

And HAL will lead Su-57 production whereas AMCA will be led by a private company. There are no real learning opportunities here.

It's not the west, its just france and mind you, france isnt a better aircraft or engine makes than russia, who already made an 5th gen aircraft upgradable to many 6th gen features and close to perfecting their 5th gen engine which might even surpass america's best engine f135, france isnt handing over any major or noteworthy tot for any of their current engines like Russia or even US hopefully if everything goes allright.

France and UK offering 100%. US offering 80%. Russia offering 60%. The winner is clear.

They are offering to codevelop a completely new engine which is nothing more than vapourware or paper weight right now along with us which they will use our money to fund their own r&d to make a 5th gen engine which will act as a stepping stone for a newer engine for FCAS. France is still stuck on 4th gen as of now. Both Russia and US is currently far ahead than France in this matter and have real operational 5th gen engines. They will be even further ahead after 10 or 12 years when this engine is made while they have over decade of experience operating and perfecting their 5th gen engine and would have moved on to even more advanced technologies.

They already have the engine tech they are gonna give us. Plus SCAF will use a 6th gen engine from the first prototype onwards. Even if SCAF does not go ahead, the French and Germans plan on developing the engine together anyway.

This is an old outdated article from 5 years ago and yet it still nowhere mentions about 100% or transfer of core components of engines. It at best talked about 70% for a mere assembly line. I'm sure you will not be able to find one article where france as you think have offered 100% tot for their engines because it simply never happened. Like I said, I will be happy to be proven wrong if you can find one real evidence where its clearly mentioned 100% tot of engine will be done because all you quoted so far is the 50-60% tot of the aircraft which will be mostly all the non critical tech while they retain all the core tech.

There's no such thing as a 70% "assembly line." That's just Indian media's technical knowledge. What was offered was 100% of Panther and 70% of Rafale, with 100% of airframe and engine. Snecma made the offer officially too, in 2020 or 2021. They have always been willing to give more advanced tech than what was on the Rafale since the very beginning. Ever heard of the Kaveri K10?

Why would they certify an aircraft if the most important part of the aircraft has been tinkered with?

Why would they not? It's their airframe. It's necessary for them to certify it.

All changes that affect aerodyanmics are certified by OEMs.

Cool, lets actually sign the deal without jumping to conclusions on what they will and will not do.

It's expected to be signed in a month or two along with P-8I.

Like I said, russia has allowed us to put any avionics we deem necessary on it. Even without a 6th gen one, its capability still would exceed anything else we currently operate and we can incrementally upgrade the tech as per our wish unlike france who wont even give us the source code for their jets let alone upgrade their tech while russia will allow making the jet superior with each iteration.

Su-57 with Indian avionics is a decade away. Su-57 with current lot of Russian avionics is not good enough. Izd 30 is non-negotiable.

Rafale's avionics and weapons are far superior. The Rafale's upgrade plan is better than what we have, so that's not a problem either.

 

[randomradio]

the russian TRM experience on the mig 29k wasnt particularly good so we dont know. The Indian TRMs are fine the russians on the other hand is a mystery. They could honestly be a lot better now considering this was 10 years in the past adn this was by mig(basically extinct now) and not sukhoi.

Radar? Mig-29K has a standard MS scan radar, the Zhuk-ME. Some media reports confused that with MAE though, an earlier prototype before AE, which led to the development of FGA-29, 35 with GaAs and later 35D with GaN.

The Russians are apparently making a new AESA for their Mig-35S derived from the AE family.

And not by Mig, but Phazotron. Different company from Sukhoi using NIIP's AESA tech of course.

 

[lmaoxd]

A radar being digital and the TRM being digital are two different things. The Byelka like all other AESAs are digital in design, but the TRMs are analog. They use physical phase shifters and the signals are combined analogically at the array level or the subarray level, typically the latter. Basically, digital backend, but analog frontend. That's for beamforming.

As for receivers, analog AESA comes with a few centralized receiver channels. RBE2 comes with 4, just like APG-77, with later upgrades adding up to 6 channels. Bars comes with 3 and Irbis is upgraded to 4. And the new digital upgrade for RBE2 adds an unknown number of channels. You can either have it at element level (true DBF) or subarray level (hybrid DBF). The more receivers you have, the more functions you can perform simultaneously.

It means while the analog RBE2 AESA could do 4 functions at once, like volume scan, SAR, ECCM, multi-target tracking of 4 targets etc, with the new digital upgrade you can do advanced SAR, GMTI, air search, surface search, multi-target tracking of far more than 4 targets (likely 8), sensor fusion, ECCM, finetuning, mode interleaving etc all simultaneously.

It means you can have 10 or 15 or 20 receiver channels at the subarray level, or even as many as there are TRMs at the element-level. The only limitation at that point will be processing. The next step is to add processing within the TRM itself.

N036 uses analog TRMs that are digitized at the subarray level. And based on what we know, RBE2 has been upgraded to element-level, so 1050 receivers. Uttam and Virupaksha are also hybrid designs like Byelka. Of course, it's also possible element-level is at the XG level instead. But whatever the case, even if RBE2 is hybrid today, it is operational, mature, and ahead of its competition. Russian and Indian radars are still chasing after it.

Uttam Mk2 exceeds the capabilities of F3R's radar though, that's a standard analog AESA.



Indian avionics on Su-57 is almost a decade away from entering service, if done today. It's a moot point. I prefer the IAF chasing after 6th gen rather than upgrading a 5th gen jet with what will be mediocre avionics for the time. It's fine for MKI and LCA, not for stealth jets.



We need to see how and when they transition to true next gen RF avionics. Su-57's main competitor is the F5 after all, given the timeframe.



Yes. In given Indian conditions, a half-measure will always fail. The Su-57 has specifically been designed with Izd 30 in mind. Their half-measures with interim engines will work out in the Siberian plains. But in hot and high conditions, the aircraft will fail to measure up.

Plus without Izd 30, it won't have the necessary RF and IR stealth anyway, never mind the degraded flight performance, inadequate electrical power, and 4th gen maintenance.

The Russians are pushing the 177 on the IAF, but they are not gonna bite. It's like trying to push the 120 kN version of F414 on AMCA instead of a proper 5th gen engine.



First para refers to air defense. Second para refers to long range SEAD/DEAD. So yes, the Su-57 is not meant to penetrate. It meets Russia's doctrine of using the S-57 for air defense. Both Su-27 and Su-35 are designed for the same roles.

It flies over its own airspace, fires long range missiles at enemy aircraft and SAMs. Secondary strike is also mainly about firing missiles at other surface targets. That's all it does. The side array allows it to keep an eye on one enemy while freeing up the main radar for others. The F-22 was also supposed to come with it to do the same thing.



Su-57 won't help AMCA in any of these areas. By the time the first Indian-made Su-57 is delivered, AMCA Mk2 will be flying with an Indian engine in the IAF. To put that into persepective, while the MKI entered service in 2002, the first fully Indian-made MKI began production only in 2013. If we start Su-57 with Indian avionics, it will take until 2040 to begin producing from raw materials stage.

Essentially 5 years to MKIze (2031), 3 years to import the first jet (2034), 2 more years to begin assembly of knocked-down kits (2036), then raw materials stage from year 12-15 (2040-43). The ToT alone takes 10 years to complete once production begins.

And HAL will lead Su-57 production whereas AMCA will be led by a private company. There are no real learning opportunities here.



France and UK offering 100%. US offering 80%. Russia offering 60%. The winner is clear.



They already have the engine tech they are gonna give us. Plus SCAF will use a 6th gen engine from the first prototype onwards. Even if SCAF does not go ahead, the French and Germans plan on developing the engine together anyway.



There's no such thing as a 70% "assembly line." That's just Indian media's technical knowledge. What was offered was 100% of Panther and 70% of Rafale, with 100% of airframe and engine. Snecma made the offer officially too, in 2020 or 2021. They have always been willing to give more advanced tech than what was on the Rafale since the very beginning. Ever heard of the Kaveri K10?



Why would they not? It's their airframe. It's necessary for them to certify it.

All changes that affect aerodyanmics are certified by OEMs.



It's expected to be signed in a month or two along with P-8I.



Su-57 with Indian avionics is a decade away. Su-57 with current lot of Russian avionics is not good enough. Izd 30 is non-negotiable.

Rafale's avionics and weapons are far superior. The Rafale's upgrade plan is better than what we have, so that's not a problem either.

rafales upgrade plan is not better than what we have LMAO.

The nose of the su57 is not so far off from the su30mki nose. We can reuse the su30mki upgrade tech here by reducing some TRMs or by adding more TRMS to the radar we are developing for the AMCA. The su57 has significantly more power than the su30MKI so no worries there.

Name me the ways in which the rafale plan is far superior to the su30mki upgrade plan in terms of electronics(dont focus on the structural stuff like internal bay or whatever). EW they might be better but i think we are better in everything else. The rafale also has only like 900TRMs worth of space in its radome so cant upscale beyond that.

 

[randomradio]

rafales upgrade plan is not better than what we have LMAO.

The nose of the su57 is not so far off from the su30mki nose. We can reuse the su30mki upgrade tech here by reducing some TRMs or by adding more TRMS to the radar we are developing for the AMCA. The su57 has significantly more power than the su30MKI so no worries there.

Name me the ways in which the rafale plan is far superior to the su30mki upgrade plan in terms of electronics(dont focus on the structural stuff like internal bay or whatever). EW they might be better but i think we are better in everything else. The rafale also has only like 900TRMs worth of space in its radome so cant upscale beyond that.

Rafale's roadmap is planned for F6 and F7 too. When they made it, they planned upgrades in a sequence decades beforehand.

For example, the Rafale came with PESA on day 1, then they replaced the frontend with analog AESA, and now the frontend is digital AESA. The next upgrade is a new architecture, and this new architecture will also get new frontend upgrades after a decade or so via F6 and F7. That's how we knew Rafale was gonna get 360 deg conformal arrays in its next phase of upgrades back in the 2000s. Plus the F5's radar will also do EA and communications and will come in a 360 deg configuration in its final form. I'm hoping the Indian F4s will come with GaN too.

We will do such long term planning for AMCA, Ghatak, FRCV, SSNs etc. The current lot of jets just get upgrades as they come in, there's not much planning involved.

As for AESA, the numbers change based on the design of the TRMs. The RBE2 currently carries 1050 TRMs. Each takes up a space of 2.5cm2, which is the smallest TRM currently in operation that we know of. Most other AESA TRMs are between 3.5 and 4 cm2, which is why even large radars like APG-77 or the early J-20 radar have only 2000-odd TRMs. Virupaksha is expected to come with 3cm2 TRMs, so the 920 x 870 mm array comes with up to 2500 TRMs. If we used RBE2's TRMs, we would get over 3000. And Rafale's GaN TRMs could be at least 30% smaller. If we assume 2cm2, Virupaksha would carry around 4000. So XG is likely to carry far more TRMs than 1050 with the same space. Picdel mentioned a few years ago that Thales offered a 4000 TRM radar for the MLU.

The smaller the TRMs, the smaller the sidelobes and the greater is the ECCM and resolution. So, technologically, we are still half a decade at the bare minimum behind the French in terms of hardware.

Anyway, Virupaksha has been designed to operate within the constraints of the Su-30. If we are to use Indian avionics on Su-57, it needs to get a far superior radar. Virupaksha is derived from LCA Mk2's tech base, while Su-57 will need whatever's coming next via AMCA. That's why I keep saying Su-57 MKIzation will only see deliveries after 2035, and of course that it will happen on the two-seat version rather than the vanilla version, the version that's going to be more stealthy and more multirole. The avionics will have to match the timeframe. The Russians screwed up the development of Su-57, so the radar is half a decade behind what it should be today. Only if we go for a stopgap should we use MKI's tech, but that's such a big waste of the Su-57's capabilities, and all we get to do is save 1-2 years, making it pointless.

Since MKI MLU is gonna show up within the timeframe of Rafale F5, we will have to compare these two. The MLU's not getting a whole new bus architecture like the F5 is. And the new bus architecture will cumulatively provide speeds well beyond the max 2-10 Gbps possible on 5th gen. So even the sensors will match the data density of the architecture. The radar with element-level processing will obviously generate far more data than the subarray level Virupaksha. Plus the F5 is expected to get 360 deg radar, IR, and optical coverage, with optics transmitted to the pilot. So the MKI MLU will roughly match the F4's configuration. LCA Mk2 is also in the F4 class. F5 is far too ahead in comparison.

Plus, I'd actually argue we are still a long ways away from matching the F4's already operational real-world capabilities in terms of sensor fusion and collaborative combat, and we will take a decade to achieve it. Su-57 is half a decade away to do that too. Hell, even the F-35 is trying to catch up to the F4, even if it's got better hardware, although partly degraded or non-functional. Everybody's behind the French on the software front, all credit to their multi-decade planning ever since introducing sensor fusion on Mirage 2000 in the 90s. F-35 also comes with longterm planning now. The Americans are actually copying the French.

 

[Picdelamirand-oil]

Rafale's roadmap is planned for F6 and F7 too. When they made it, they planned upgrades in a sequence decades beforehand.

For example, the Rafale came with PESA on day 1, then they replaced the frontend with analog AESA, and now the frontend is digital AESA. The next upgrade is a new architecture, and this new architecture will also get new frontend upgrades after a decade or so via F6 and F7. That's how we knew Rafale was gonna get 360 deg conformal arrays in its next phase of upgrades back in the 2000s. Plus the F5's radar will also do EA and communications and will come in a 360 deg configuration in its final form. I'm hoping the Indian F4s will come with GaN too.

We will do such long term planning for AMCA, Ghatak, FRCV, SSNs etc. The current lot of jets just get upgrades as they come in, there's not much planning involved.

As for AESA, the numbers change based on the design of the TRMs. The RBE2 currently carries 1050 TRMs. Each takes up a space of 2.5cm2, which is the smallest TRM currently in operation that we know of. Most other AESA TRMs are between 3.5 and 4 cm2, which is why even large radars like APG-77 or the early J-20 radar have only 2000-odd TRMs. Virupaksha is expected to come with 3cm2 TRMs, so the 920 x 870 mm array comes with up to 2500 TRMs. If we used RBE2's TRMs, we would get over 3000. And Rafale's GaN TRMs could be at least 30% smaller. If we assume 2cm2, Virupaksha would carry around 4000. So XG is likely to carry far more TRMs than 1050 with the same space. Picdel mentioned a few years ago that Thales offered a 4000 TRM radar for the MLU.

The smaller the TRMs, the smaller the sidelobes and the greater is the ECCM and resolution. So, technologically, we are still half a decade at the bare minimum behind the French in terms of hardware.

Anyway, Virupaksha has been designed to operate within the constraints of the Su-30. If we are to use Indian avionics on Su-57, it needs to get a far superior radar. Virupaksha is derived from LCA Mk2's tech base, while Su-57 will need whatever's coming next via AMCA. That's why I keep saying Su-57 MKIzation will only see deliveries after 2035, and of course that it will happen on the two-seat version rather than the vanilla version, the version that's going to be more stealthy and more multirole. The avionics will have to match the timeframe. The Russians screwed up the development of Su-57, so the radar is half a decade behind what it should be today. Only if we go for a stopgap should we use MKI's tech, but that's such a big waste of the Su-57's capabilities, and all we get to do is save 1-2 years, making it pointless.

Since MKI MLU is gonna show up within the timeframe of Rafale F5, we will have to compare these two. The MLU's not getting a whole new bus architecture like the F5 is. And the new bus architecture will cumulatively provide speeds well beyond the max 2-10 Gbps possible on 5th gen. So even the sensors will match the data density of the architecture. The radar with element-level processing will obviously generate far more data than the subarray level Virupaksha. Plus the F5 is expected to get 360 deg radar, IR, and optical coverage, with optics transmitted to the pilot. So the MKI MLU will roughly match the F4's configuration. LCA Mk2 is also in the F4 class. F5 is far too ahead in comparison.

Plus, I'd actually argue we are still a long ways away from matching the F4's already operational real-world capabilities in terms of sensor fusion and collaborative combat, and we will take a decade to achieve it. Su-57 is half a decade away to do that too. Hell, even the F-35 is trying to catch up to the F4, even if it's got better hardware, although partly degraded or non-functional. Everybody's behind the French on the software front, all credit to their multi-decade planning ever since introducing sensor fusion on Mirage 2000 in the 90s. F-35 also comes with longterm planning now. The Americans are actually copying the French.

I think you're exaggerating a bit: we always end up doing a little less than we planned and it always takes a little longer. I've often been disappointed compared to what I was told, but that's also because others are running late too, so we take the opportunity to save on costs.

 

[randomradio]

I think you're exaggerating a bit: we always end up doing a little less than we planned and it always takes a little longer. I've often been disappointed compared to what I was told, but that's also because others are running late too, so we take the opportunity to save on costs.

True. I've noticed that that's the case with all programs.

For example, the MKI was supposed to come with advanced EODAS with large IIR detectors, but didn't happen 'cause the Russians refused to certify the airframe.

Then take the Rafale's 360 deg radar for example. The French might not go for it, but the IAF will ask for it, just like they did for FGFA even if the Russians didn't want it. But the option to install it will be there 'cause the industry is building to that standard. The same cannot be done on MKI.

I don't know if you will recall, but once I said that AMCA is being designed for extremely accurate passive targeting using multilateration via high levels of synchronization between multiple aerial assets. This requires fiber optics for both FCS and sensors and advanced swarm tactics. At the time it was incorrectly believed that F4 was the F5. But now we know the F5 has all the foundational technologies to make this happen. So the French industry can be encouraged by the IAF to develop it for F5-F6/AMCA Mk2 timeframe too. The same cannot be done on MKI or LCA Mk2 without a fiber backbone.

Next up is cockpit technologies. Fiber backbone allows the use of next gen augmented reality in the cockpit. The F4's HMDS-only AR for symbology and sensor overlays can go into full cockpit view with voice and gesture controls and AI integration and drone sensor feed on F5.

And now we clearly understand the IAF's procurement objectives. Rafale F3R and LCA Mk1A introduces early 5th gen technologies this decade, proven mid-late 5th gen technologies via Rafale F4, MKI MLU, and LCA Mk2 between 2030 and 2035, followed by 6th gen technologies via Rafale F5, AMCA, and SCAF/GCAP after 2035.

Overall, I think a lot of new technologies that the French forces couldn't fund on their own will become reality due to IAF and IN's participation. F3R ISE proves that Indian R&D investment in both hardware and software will be the future for F4 and F5 too.

 

[South block]

 

[Optimist]

France isn't giving access to the codes, get over it, Neither is anybody else

 

[Ashwin]

https://twitter.com/x/status/2044382516610548061

 

[randomradio]

France isn't giving access to the codes, get over it, Neither is anybody else

Nobody within the MoD or IAF is expecting it either. It's the anti-French lobby pushing the message to confuse the public.

This for example is one of those lobby articles.

Software Crisis Threatens Rafale Deal: India Pays 100% But Gets Only 60% of the French Fighter: OPED

The French government’s reported refusal to provide India with the source code for the Rafale’s Thales RBE2 AESA radar, the Modular Data Processing Unit (MDPU), and the SPECTRA electronic warfare suite should prove sobering to New Delhi. Under the circumstances, an emotionally charged debate is...

www.eurasiantimes.com

The author is a Jaguar pilot who's always pushing Russian stuff.

 

[randomradio]

https://twitter.com/x/status/2044382516610548061

Meteor successor is interesting.

And Stratus RS is 90% French while LO is 90% British. It's clear the French have separate plans for LO. I hope India gets in on that action.

 

[lmaoxd]

its bascically their astra mk3. Although ill only believe the 2030 in service stuff once they start the ground based trails within 2 years from now at the latest which in itself is sorta late. Lets see. The meteor is good but its outdated in terms of max range vs the likes of the r37M/R77M(maybe btu we dont know for sure, russia claims 190km for it) and the pl15/16/17/21 and going forward even India will significantly outrange it if we hit the required targest for the mk1(160km), mk2(240km) and mk3 (350-400km).

Meteor successor is interesting.

And Stratus RS is 90% French while LO is 90% British. It's clear the French have separate plans for LO. I hope India gets in on that action.

 

[Optimist]

Nobody within the MoD or IAF is expecting it either. It's the anti-French lobby pushing the message to confuse the public.

Any controversy is better than no controversy, Mostly I think it's just a journalist wanting a clickbait headline and story for ad revenue
Like the F-35, there is some anti-US stuff, but it's mostly clickbait

 

[randomradio]

its bascically their astra mk3. Although ill only believe the 2030 in service stuff once they start the ground based trails within 2 years from now at the latest which in itself is sorta late. Lets see. The meteor is good but its outdated in terms of max range vs the likes of the r37M/R77M(maybe btu we dont know for sure, russia claims 190km for it) and the pl15/16/17/21 and going forward even India will significantly outrange it if we hit the required targest for the mk1(160km), mk2(240km) and mk3 (350-400km).

Perhaps ramjet, perhaps dual or triple pulse, but yes, double range compared to Meteor at the very least. The new radar will be able to handle that.
R-37M is 350 km out of a Su-35 and 400 km out of a Mig-31. R-77M is more medium range, 220 km as per Vstol.

Lot of interesting things happening in Europe though.

 

[randomradio]

Any controversy is better than no controversy, Mostly I think it's just a journalist wanting a clickbait headline and story for ad revenue
Like the F-35, there is some anti-US stuff, but it's mostly clickbait

These are lobbyists. This guy pushes Russian stuff. There's another guy who published nonsense about the Su-57 and Rafale while shilling for American stuff. Made fake claims and got called out by the IAF for it.

Indian media is a cesspool of anti-India propaganda. Free speech and all.

 

[Tamilan57]

These are lobbyists. This guy pushes Russian stuff. There's another guy who published nonsense about the Su-57 and Rafale while shilling for American stuff. Made fake claims and got called out by the IAF for it.

Indian media is a cesspool of anti-India propaganda. Free speech and all.

I mean do we have a really reliable Nationalistic and Pro-Hindu media organisation?

I don't trust a single media organisation in India. The Hindu covered the OP Sindoor with some real reporting skills. But they are incredibly Pro-left and anti-nationalistic in terms of policy/opinions.

 

[Hydra]

If RBE2-XG is going to be GaN-on-SiC and not GaN-on-Diamond like what was earlier speculated, then forget about MKIised Su-57/60, even Su-30MKI UPG. with a monster 2400+ TRM Vurupaksha, based on same tech base(GaN-on-SiC) is going to be much superior to it. MKI's radar also would be on a repositioner giving it almost 240° coverage in azimuth, vs just 120 or at best 140° coverage provided by fixed RBE2-XG.

Anyways, comparing Rafale with MKI UPG. or Su-57MKI is moot as IAF wants both. It's not going to be Rafale vs Su-57 but Rafale with Su-57.

What is SiC & Si Diamond radar? I mean difference and advantage?

 

[randomradio]

I mean do we have a really reliable Nationalistic and Pro-Hindu media organisation?

I don't trust a single media organisation in India. The Hindu covered the OP Sindoor with some real reporting skills. But they are incredibly Pro-left and anti-nationalistic in terms of policy/opinions.

Republic TV, Zee News. OpIndia, Swarajya, and New Indian Express for print. Many more have joined the list because people prefer consuming right wing content and that's where the money is headed. India's media is freer than Western media, influenced more by free markets than vested interests.

I mean, Hindus have stopped consuming all the caste nonsense shoved in their faces all their lives and how they should feel guilty about being religious and all that crap. Patriotic and nationalist movies are also seeing the most success. Apart from feel-good narratives being pushed by the govt, the people are also being exposed to real history, not the stage-managed swill from our school days.

People were complaining about Modi's lack of education spending without realizing that the govt's taking itself out of the school education system and privatizing it, so now students are able to access real education. Many youth are graduating with higher motivation and have a greater purpose than earlier generations. And the economy is able to absorb all these changes.

All of this is forcing media to adapt with the times to stay relevant.

The added advantage is we don't have just a handful of media organizations controlling the narrative like in the West, we have too many with higher reach and they all cannot be bought. The Internet has been a great equalizer too.