Dismiss Notice
Welcome to IDF- Indian Defence Forum , register for free to join this friendly community of defence enthusiastic from around the world. Make your opinion heard and appreciated.

Rafale deal signed

Discussion in 'Indian Air Force' started by PARIKRAMA, Sep 23, 2016.

  1. Ankit Kumar 001

    Ankit Kumar 001 Major Technical Analyst

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2016
    Messages:
    2,589
    Likes Received:
    4,841
    Country Flag:
    India
    So it means they are giving up the plans for Su35?
     
  2. CNL-PN-AA

    CNL-PN-AA 2nd Lieutant MILITARY STRATEGIST

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2015
    Messages:
    276
    Likes Received:
    458
    Country Flag:
    France
    What I have heard sounded like that.
     
  3. BON PLAN

    BON PLAN Major SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2015
    Messages:
    2,781
    Likes Received:
    1,395
    Country Flag:
    France
    Nice idea !
     
  4. Abingdonboy

    Abingdonboy Major Technical Analyst

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2016
    Messages:
    2,742
    Likes Received:
    12,269
    Country Flag:
    United Kingdom


    No details and no time lines given but once again underlines the urgency to release the strategic partnership chapter of DPP-2016, but this is surely some time off still with no permenant DM as of now.

    @PARIKRAMA
     
    SR-91 and PARIKRAMA like this.
  5. BMD

    BMD Colonel ELITE MEMBER

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2012
    Messages:
    10,117
    Likes Received:
    2,918
    Country Flag:
    United Kingdom
    https://www.cairn.info/revue-politique-etrangere-2007-4-page-729.htm

    Hor-hor-hor.

     
  6. BMD

    BMD Colonel ELITE MEMBER

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2012
    Messages:
    10,117
    Likes Received:
    2,918
    Country Flag:
    United Kingdom
    http://www.au.af.mil/au/aupress/digital/pdf/book/b_0125_anrig_quest_relevant_power.pdf

     
    Agent_47 likes this.
  7. BMD

    BMD Colonel ELITE MEMBER

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2012
    Messages:
    10,117
    Likes Received:
    2,918
    Country Flag:
    United Kingdom
    https://www.aei.org/wp-content/uplo...living-on-the-strategic-edge_162239575985.pdf

     
    Agent_47 likes this.
  8. Picdelamirand-oil

    Picdelamirand-oil Lt. Colonel MILITARY STRATEGIST

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2012
    Messages:
    8,109
    Likes Received:
    5,902
    Country Flag:
    France
  9. OnePunchMan

    OnePunchMan 2nd Lieutant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2017
    Messages:
    125
    Likes Received:
    117
    Country Flag:
    India
    whats this libyan SAM thing he is talking about sir??
    was a rafale shot down by a SAM or something i dont know anything about this particular incident would love to have a detailed explanation about this from you.
     
  10. Picdelamirand-oil

    Picdelamirand-oil Lt. Colonel MILITARY STRATEGIST

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2012
    Messages:
    8,109
    Likes Received:
    5,902
    Country Flag:
    France
    All in all, the Libyan campaign was quickly ran , with great efficiency and with very little or no losses (one F-15 down for mechanical failure). It also showed European shortcomings : aerial refueling, only a dozen+ of European Tankers were involved, too few European UAVs , lack of J-Stars.
    The other major problem what the speed loop of the decision making, far too slow. For example, as soon as the FrenchNavy went in with the Tigers and the UK with Her Apaches, we had to takes shorcuts with the NATO chain of command to act on the spot. At that precise moment in time, the entire Intels were from the French and British Navies offshore.
    In fact, after the first month the USA almost disapeared from the tactical battlefield and only provided few Intels and the logistic part.
    That made the European think about futur conflict and what was really needed. While NATO performed very well, we Europeans have to spend more money here and there to fill the blanks, if I may say.

    The fact is nobody in Europe did commit, really. A good war is costly and a very good war costs an harm and sometimes a leg too. France only used about 70 aircraft, 11 of them being Tankers.

    The total OOB was huge but when divided in between the participating Nations, it is rather small in fact.
    Well , Libya wasn 't a big dog anyway but we could have done it faster, but it cost .
    One more time , the USA did provide most of the initial strikes and most of the logistics . They also did various other things but they were not involded like they did in other conflicts . In fact, France lead the Ops with the UK while the other European Nations followed and did their bit , kudos to some , Sweden and Italy comes to mind .
    Some aircraft did put up a nice show: Tornados (as usual) , M2000-Ds (as usual) and Rafales (as usual) . Other types did well : F-16s , Growlers , B2s while some were mostly there for the show: Typhoon.
    Gripen did its part after some fuel problem , quickly resolved.
    Choppers did EXTREMELY well in CAS and have to be accounted for. The Tiger proved to be a real beast (as well as the Gazelles). The UK Apaches, well, excellent as usual.

    I think that the entire Ops went well because we all are so used to train with each other that things went very or at least rather smoothly. NATO keeps improving itself year after year and joint excercises are not wasted money.

    For Rafale
    • All missions were operated without any dedicated SEAD and EW support thanks to Spectra
    • Spectra Allowed accurate detection, location and attack of Libyan Air defenses
    • Spectra jammer allowed soft kills of the Libyan radar systems
    • GBU-12 used for dynamic targeting
    • AASM used against high value well-defended targets and SAM system (SA-3/SA-6/SA-8)
    • Damocles pod used for laser targetting (GBU-12), identification and target GPS coordinates extraction (AASM)
    • Half of the Rafale M missions performed at night
    • Rafale considered as a key tool for ISTAR missions (Intelligence, Surveillance, Taget acquisition, Reconnaissance)
    The Rafale proved that it could enter first in a well defended space.

    http://rafalenews.blogspot.fr/2011/05/libya-aasm-sead-capability-demonstrated.html
     
    Last edited: Mar 20, 2017
    Sancho, Sathya, Abingdonboy and 2 others like this.
  11. Picdelamirand-oil

    Picdelamirand-oil Lt. Colonel MILITARY STRATEGIST

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2012
    Messages:
    8,109
    Likes Received:
    5,902
    Country Flag:
    France
    For SPECTRA

    Since the latest standard ( Rafale F3-O4T), Dassault and Thalès stopped giving away clues about Spectra. They have never been big talkers anyway but in the past, they released a couple of interesting things for us (and for others) to chew on. They only said that Spectra is using more advanced components than the Aesa RBE2. Two new modes have been added and the way the threat library core works is different. The total bandwidth has been increased and the antenna arrays have also been upgraded.

    They said nothing about the output power neither how much juice is needed now. In 2006 , they already re-wired a good part of the electrical system to accomodate the new Spectra and new radar suite .

    From what we heard from Libya and the way they went it , requesting for the Growlers to stay away, I guess that they were very confident with the ECM suite. The USA lost 3 aircraft to SA-3 already (1 F-16 and 1 F-117 in Kosovo , 1 F-16 in Irak . If we believe the NATO operatives in charge at that moment in time, the Rafale had no trouble to "disapear" and soft-kill the Russian system before to kill it with AASM. It is interesting to note that while the AASM can be fired at up to 60km, the Rafale were inside the SAM bubble since they had to jam the bloody thing.
    Obviously a mobile site (Goa kind), unknown to the planners. I guess that a M2000-D would have been shot at, leaving the fighter to deal with the missile 's up link in emergency (ECM).
    Not with the Rafale.
     
    Sancho, Sathya, Abingdonboy and 3 others like this.
  12. randomradio

    randomradio Mod Staff Member MODERATOR

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2013
    Messages:
    10,716
    Likes Received:
    5,702
    France, alongside NATO, attacked Libya in order to take out Gaddafi.

    In order to attack any country by air, first you must take out SAM sites. That's called SEAD/DEAD or Suppression/Destruction of Enemy Air Defences. For this purpose, you utilize special weapons called ARMs or anti-radiation missiles. These missiles target radars. Now, the French don't have these missiles, they had one called Martel but they phased it out. So a NATO report pointed out that the lack of such a missile is a drawback.

    Of course, this is irrelevant to the Rafale because the electronics on it is so sophisticated that the French have no need for such missiles. They can use the Rafale itself to locate such radars and destroy them with conventional PGMs, or Precision Guided Munitions.

    But NATO is not completely aware of the Rafale's capabilities. They don't know that it is also a stealth aircraft now. So they are comparing the Rafale with their older generation jets, so Rafale will obviously fall short of expectations.

    Even though the Rafale doesn't have ARMs, it has not changed the fact that Rafales have been used to take out SAM sites. So Picdel's post shows one such destroyed SAM site. Basically, BMD is harping on non-issues as usual.

    Because SAMs pose a major threat to aircraft, you need to dedicate a few days simply on missions that are dedicated to destroying this threat. Since this takes time, it means the enemy ground troops are less vulnerable to strikes. However, due to the sophistication of the Rafale, the French simply ignored the danger from SAMs and directly started attacking enemy ground troops from the first day. This is a capability that only stealth aircraft have.

    Otoh, the rest of NATO had to have a dedicated SEAD/DEAD mission in Libya before they could start hitting ground targets. This included hundreds of cruise missiles strikes from American submarines.

    The fact that Rafale managed to fly into an enemy country without neutralizing the SAM threat speaks volumes of the capabilities of the Rafale. BMD is simply in denial.
     
  13. BMD

    BMD Colonel ELITE MEMBER

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2012
    Messages:
    10,117
    Likes Received:
    2,918
    Country Flag:
    United Kingdom
    What don't you get about unofficial? For instance, at a cursory glance, how come the annotation on the above is in English if it's French recon?

    http://rafalenews.blogspot.co.uk/2011/05/libya-aasm-sead-capability-demonstrated.html

    [​IMG]

    Meanwhile.

    https://www.cairn.info/revue-politique-etrangere-2007-4-page-729.htm


    https://www.aei.org/wp-content/uplo...living-on-the-strategic-edge_162239575985.pdf

    http://www.au.af.mil/au/aupress/digital/pdf/book/b_0125_anrig_quest_relevant_power.pdf

    How many more statements about no SEAD ability would you like? The only way Rafale can destroy SAMs (short range) is by picking up something, looking around with the targeting point and firing something, it has no spontaneous SEAD capability.

    Meanwhile, until F4, it seems geolocation is just a dream/lie too.

    So much for this phase interferometric geolocation you promised these poor customers.

    [​IMG]

    No mentioned of French SEAD activity here either.

    http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_reports/RR600/RR676/RAND_RR676.pdf

    [​IMG]

    So basically, you have a government contracted report corroborated by two official French reports, a third independent report and an article in Combat Aircraft versus a blog written in English by Donnie Darko in his mum's basement.
     
    Agent_47 and PARIKRAMA like this.
  14. BMD

    BMD Colonel ELITE MEMBER

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2012
    Messages:
    10,117
    Likes Received:
    2,918
    Country Flag:
    United Kingdom
    The above is annotated in English, which should raise flags given it's presented as French recon. It also comes from a blog, which even describes itself as unofficial. Meanwhile this report clearly states that a Rafale was successfully targeted by an SA-8 but fortunately the system was old, very short range (out-of-range) and operated by an idiot.

    http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_reports/RR600/RR676/RAND_RR676.pdf

     
  15. BMD

    BMD Colonel ELITE MEMBER

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2012
    Messages:
    10,117
    Likes Received:
    2,918
    Country Flag:
    United Kingdom
    Originally the French folk on this forum suggested that several SAMs in Libya were picked up by Spectra, instantly geolocated and an AASM IIR/GPS was spontaneously dispatched to take them out, as per an ARM-type ability. We now find several sources stating that:

    a) This didn't happen;

    b) This isn't a capability currently held by France;

    c) This isn't a capability that AASM currently has;

    d) That geolocation will be added in F4 (2023).

    Pic-del presented a picture curiously annotated in English from an unofficial blog. A picture that:

    a) Shows a fixed site, note star formation in upper left;

    b) Could have been destroyed by any aircraft;

    c) Could have been destroyed in any war;

    d) Could have been annotated by anyone;

    e) Was taken by an Israeli satellite apparently - EROS-B;
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EROS_B
     

Share This Page