bubzy Posted September 28, 2017 Share Posted September 28, 2017 à l’instant, tipi a dit : Bah, avec les différentes références de rivets, boulons, câble électrique, connecteurs d'énérgie et de fluides, plus quelques radios et afficheurs, on doit pouvoir monter assez haut en commonalité Tu penses franchement qu'ils vont complètement réinventer le F-16 ? rien que les matériaux et les technologies d'assemblage n'ont plus aucun rapport. Rien que les rivets que tu cite, concernant le revêtement externe ont en majorité laissé leur place à du collage de matériaux composites. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rogue0 Posted September 28, 2017 Share Posted September 28, 2017 Il y a 3 heures, Picdelamirand-oil a dit : Some buzz from James Mattis Meeting (first few points) Guaranteed sharing of approximately 70% components commonality between F16 Block 7F and F35s with a intended target to make it 75%. (...) Its also added by a LM representative later that A2G mode of APG 83 can scan upto 290 kms and A2A mode is roughly 180 km for a 3m2, ~120km for 1m2 based on various factors and IRST will track in the range of ~80kmhttp://indiandefence.com/threads/f16-gripen-make-in-india-single-engine-aircraft-news-and-possibilities.56222/page-265#post-596562 Merci pour les infos Pour ta remarque sur la portée radar sur indian-defense: La portée radar annoncée pour un avion de SER 1m² reste cohérente s'il parle de radar en mode de recherche (proportionnel à la racine cubique de la réduction de la SER). ça ne colle pas pour le mode veille (racine carrée) ou le contrôle de tir (racine quatrième) il y a 31 minutes, bubzy a dit : C'est exactement ce que je me suis dit ! Mais que mettent-ils dans leurs parties commune ? ça me semble être de l'esbrouffe complet. Peut être une partie de l'électronique ? Mais la motorisation, la génération électrique, hydraulique, le train d'atterrissage, toutes les parties mobiles, absolument TOUT sera différent. Comment peuvent ils manipuler les chiffres pour arriver à 70 % ? Déjà 7 % ça serait énorme... Moi je dis qu'il parlait du poids des matériaux. ben oui, il doit bien avoir au moins 70% d'alliage d'aluminium pour le le F-16 et le JSF, non ? il suffit de faire fondre l'avion en lingots, et voici la communalité <mode charriage en série ON > Citation P.S. Fuck off le keyboard QWERTY... Qui est le con qui a invente cette merde.... Un certains Sholes, source de la première machine à écrire populaire. D'ailleurs, je vois que les légendes urbaines ont la peau dure, je vous recommande un tour par le wiki (ça accélère la frappe au contraire): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sholes_and_Glidden_typewriter Pour le tonton @Henri K., c'est pas bon ça : c'est un sacré trou dans ta couverture FR-EN-CH. Si tu préfères, je te propose ce clavier alternatif, et de saisir en pinyin https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dvorak_Simplified_Keyboard#/media/File:KB_United_States_Dvorak.svg Le 26/09/2017 à 17:47, Boule75 a dit : Boule : expert en démêlage de marteaux. N'oublie pas les faucilles, elles font un come-back Le 26/09/2017 à 15:58, Henri K. a dit : Cela fait des années donc je ne me rappelle plus le wording exact, mais c,est plus dans le sens "ce n'est pas favorable" de faire face a un Rafale sous les conditions que j'ai cite. Il n'y a pas d'autres commentaires donc il ne faut pas faire de la sur-interprétation.(...) Merci pour les infos. La capacité de dogfight en 1-contre-1, c'est bon pour le moral/mojo des pilotes et comme dernier recours, mais ce n'est plus primordial pour gagner des guerres aériennes. Les capacités de combat BVR / EW sont bien plus importantes dans les "vrais" conflits Par curiosité, je suppose qu'il y a peu d'études publiques sur le résultat de conflit avec d'autres armées de l'air ? ( au sens système complet avec C4I, awacs, ravitailleurs, engagements d'escadrilles). Genre une étude sur la corrélation de forces avec l'armée de l'air indienne ? Ou un CVBG américain ou l'armée de l'air Taiwanaise (sans ASBM ou TBM) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prof.566 Posted September 28, 2017 Share Posted September 28, 2017 5 minutes ago, rogue0 said: ça ne colle pas pour le mode veille (racine carrée) ou le contrôle de tir (racine quatrième Explain? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bon Plan Posted September 28, 2017 Share Posted September 28, 2017 Il y a 21 heures, FATac a dit : [HS] Je croyais que ce qui avait coulé GIAT sur cette transaction, c'était le montage financier, et notamment l'aspect spéculatif des versements de fonds en devises sans prise de garantie sur les variations de taux de change. [/HS] [HS] il n'y a pas que cela : il y avait une clause (écrite surement en tout petit) qui exigeait que les chars émiratis soient mis au gout du jour "à vie" : ca qui veut dire par exemple que lorsque GIAT sortait un nouveau blindage composite, il devait rétrofiter toute la flotte des UAE. Il y a eu aussi les retards de livraison, qui ont conduit à ce que les premiers chars soient livrés en Antonov ! une paille... Il y a 2 heures, bubzy a dit : C'est exactement ce que je me suis dit ! Mais que mettent-ils dans leurs parties commune ? ça me semble être de l'esbrouffe complet. Peut être une partie de l'électronique ? Mais la motorisation, la génération électrique, hydraulique, le train d'atterrissage, toutes les parties mobiles, absolument TOUT sera différent. Comment peuvent ils manipuler les chiffres pour arriver à 70 % ? Déjà 7 % ça serait énorme... C'est peut être 70% de l'avionique. Ca semble déjà un peu plus plausible, quoique. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henri K. Posted September 28, 2017 Share Posted September 28, 2017 Il y a 4 heures, rogue0 a dit : Genre une étude sur la corrélation de forces avec l'armée de l'air indienne ? Ou un CVBG américain ou l'armée de l'air Taiwanaise (sans ASBM ou TBM) Je ne crois pas avoir déjà lu des études chinoises dans ce sens avec l'armée indienne. D'une manière générale ils étudient les "meilleurs". Henri K. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teenytoon Posted September 28, 2017 Share Posted September 28, 2017 Sous estimer un éventuel adversaire n’est il pas la meilleure manière de préparer une défaite ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Picdelamirand-oil Posted September 28, 2017 Author Share Posted September 28, 2017 (edited) Citation Picdelamirand-oil said: ↑ There is somthing wrong with the range of Radar if the range is 120 km for 1 m^2 it has to be 1.316*120 for 3 m^2 that is to say 158 km. I think they try to minimise delta with the RBE2 AESA Range The numbers LM state anyways will get validated by IAF and they wont get swayed by claims.. of course cant say much if the political deal goes through.... there radar comes with +/- 60 degree sweeping zone for 20 targets.. OTOH Rafale RBE 2 AESA radar - sweeping zone on record is +/-70 degree for 40 targets 1m2 detection range at 160 km, 3m2 - 220 km and 5m2 -300 km and IRST @ 120km for IAF specified version It will get further upgraded with GaN and F4/4.2 upgrades with usage of higher power and better detection algos. The challenge is active sources detect 0.1m2 around 110-120km at par with IRST detection range. (Rafale case). not overtly relevant now but in a decade it will be relevant a lot more.. So the upgarde F4/4.2 matters a lot from taht perspective. Make it 0.01m2 and it drops to almost 75 km - again detection range of RBE 2 AESA The challenge in future will be with active cancellation and EW induced signature reduction. Thats where the issue will come. Bcz a alert detection of a incoming bogie by ground based long ranged radars or say airborne radars ~300 km, followed by a sortie preparedness in 3 mins and climbing to say 15000 feet in 2 minutes will leave limited range left - Mach 1.2 incoming bogie, detection range will be less than 180 kms easily . Now consider a situation if the incoming bogie has suppressing abilities and have more of 0.1m2 or even lesser towards 0.01m2. The ground based detection or airborne itself will be limited or far lesser than before..so the whole scenario changes.. We also need to understand that detection range means nothing if the engagement rings and Probability of Interception (success rate) is not deemed enough for a mission. It is this part where we need to understand why F16 radar system is adequate for their (USA) kind of infrastructure versus ours where Pakistan breadth is around just ~150 kms. and incoming bogie leaves limited scope. And yes they dont have anything which is 1m2 or less...(except missiles may be) OTOH of course any bogie from East side barring perhaps J20 with suppressing /cancellation abilities (to be demonstrated) , this same issue will plague many. Thats why MKI radar is basically a blessing with its monster detection range... and AESA upgrade will serve well.. But again MKI wont be in forefront.. it will be deeper so first line of detection wont be MKIs.. http://indiandefence.com/threads/f16-gripen-make-in-india-single-engine-aircraft-news-and-possibilities.56222/page-265#post-596619 Edited September 28, 2017 by Picdelamirand-oil 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Picdelamirand-oil Posted September 30, 2017 Author Share Posted September 30, 2017 (edited) Je place ici une analyse dont l'idée m'est venue après la lecture d'un post et même de plusieurs posts de Parikrama. Ce post a surpris et j'en cite l'extrait qui m' intéresse: Citation France will soon talk with UAE for Rafales again French DM Florence Parly and Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian is expected to lead the talk Ça semble peu crédible à priori, mais cela m'a incité à comparer l'expression du besoin des EAU et les caractéristiques connues de F4. Expression du besoin: Le besoin des EAU est discuté par le général Alain Silvy dans le DSI édition spéciale d'Août 2010 Citation Is the Air force interested by some of the UAE requirements ? From my point of view, it depends where. We could be potentially interested by the M88-X with 9 tons of thrust because it would be, in the circumstances, an open field. But, on the other hand, we have not yet reached the stage of maturity - which requires about 150,000 flight hours – with the current M88 with 7.5 tonnes thrust. [....] And about the UAE demand to have a more powerful RBE2 radar, could it answer to some expectations for the Air force? The Air Force is interested in having a RBE2 with an active antenna. It is now established with the powerful AESA antenna which will equip our tranche 4 Rafale. What the Emirians are calling for is much more complex. They want, in addition to the AESA, to have new functionalities on their Rafale, such as GMTT / GMTI (detection and tracking of moving ground target), interlacing between air/air and air/ground modes, etc.. Even if this is not for us an urgent need, the operational 'plus' obtained could nonetheless eventually interest us. However, the key Emirian demand is about the range of the RBE2. And, with the same antenna diameter, the only way to achieve the 10% range increase (compared with the Basic AESA F3 "roadmap") that wish to obtain the Emirians, is a big boost to the power of the radar. But more power to the RBE2, could it be a risk to generate serious electromagnetic interference (EMI) with the SPECTRA receptors ? There is indeed a very real EMI risk to treat. This is the case whenever we want to change aircraft emission systems. There are solutions, obviously, but this will require to reexamine SPECTRA. But the biggest problem we have identified is about electric generation, which could be insufficient. To increase the maximum range of a few nautical miles, we would have to deeply review the electrical generation system of the aircraft. [....] Beyond the radar, they are showing fairly strong requirements into SPECTRA development with, for example, the expansion of some frequency bands, an increased sensitivity, adding functionalities; in short, they want we push up the current technologies. Of course, to improve the electronic warfare of our Rafale faster than originally planned could be an additional operational advantage for the Air force. However, our current approach is to consolidate the features implemented in SPECTRA, to make them more robust and make it easier for operators and programmers before wanting to go further into addition of new capabilities. The current SPECTRA is working well and even very good. In sum, what separates us, about Spectra, is a matter of timing and calendar. In a more general way, we share the same wishes about capabilities, but with very different maturities calendar sometimes. Budgetary constraints remain a dimensioning factor. Et maintenant les caractéristiques de F4 Citation Radar and Spectra upgrades The current Thales RBE2 AESA radar will be further improved. It will benefit from the introduction of two new air-tosurface modes: a ground moving target indicator (GMTI), to detect and track moving targets over land, and a UHR (ultra high resolution) mode, to replace the current HR functionality for synthetic aperture radar (SAR) imagery, offering superior radar image quality at very long distances. The ability to interleave radar modes will be enhanced, thus helping provide aircrews with even better situational awareness. The Spectra electronic warfare/selfprotection suite produced by Thales and MBDA is fully integrated. It is composed of a wide range of systems: a Détecteur d’Alerte Radar (DAR, or radar warning receiver), a Détecteur d’Alerte Laser (DAL, or laser warner), a Détecteur de Départ Missile (DDM or DDM NG, or missile launch detector), a high-power radar jammer, and decoy dispensers that can launch a range of flares and chaff. Over the coming months, Spectra will be improved, with bandwidth extensions for the detectors and jammers to cover lower and higher frequency bands, thus providing an instantaneous reaction against any type of pop-up threat. “Our objective here is to obtain extremely accurate RF emitter geolocation and 3D tracking, including of airborne radars,” said the programme director. “The capabilities of a single Rafale to locate and track a threat without resorting to traditional, but timeconsuming, methods of triangulation or of bearing measurements along the aircraft’s flight path will be significantly improved. It is a very important step forward, and the recent progresses made by Spectra will boost the capabilities of the Rafale in that field.” [....] GaN technology Thales and the DGA are actively preparing the future radar developments that will be introduced on Standard F4.2, incorporating cutting-edge Gallium Nitride (GaN) technology for the radar and jammer antennas. Thanks to additional radar apertures, detection capabilities will be unmatched and electronic attack capabilities will become a reality. The programme director explained: “Even though we are entirely satisfied with the current RBE2 AESA radar, we are already working on the next generation scheduled to appear on new-build aircraft in 2025. “For the same volume, GaN technology will offer an expanded bandwidth, more radiated power and an even easier ability to switch from one mode to another, or from one functionality to another. With the same antenna, we will be capable of generating combined, interleaved radar, jamming and electronic warfare modes as part of an electronic attack mission. “GaN emitters will not be restricted to the radar and they will also equip the Spectra suite. For example, for the antennas in the wing apexes, ahead of the canard foreplanes, we could obtain a very quick emission/reception cycle, either saving some volume or augmenting radiated power. This is the reason why this GaN technological path is so important, especially for the development of additional emitting panels and apertures that will offer extended radar angular coverage. “It is not just an improvement; it is a real technological breakthrough in the field of detection. Jamming modes will not be left untouched and will push the Rafale’s electronic warfare capabilities to unprecedented levels thanks to the introduction of what we call ‘smart jamming’, with a wider band coverage and GaN emitters from 2025. These capabilities will be further expanded thanks to the adoption of MFAs [Multi-Function Arrays].” The Rafale’s Front Sector Optronics (FSO) will be fitted with a new-generation infrared search and track (IRST) sensor optimised for the tracking of air targets, either alone, or in conjunction with the RBE2 radar. Pour résumer que veulent les EAU: Un moteur plus puissant Un Radar qui porte plus loin Des améliorations de SPECTRA. Pour le moteur plus puissant on résiste encore, mais il y a un espoir: Citation M88 technology will gradually evolve in order to propel UCAVs [unmanned combat aerial vehicles], and the Rafale will eventually benefit from these technological advances, but not until the advent of the MLU [midlife upgrade] variant.” Ces améliorations de la partie sans post combustion, ce sont peut être elles qui peuvent améliorer la poussée à 8.3 t. Et même si les Français n'en voient pas l'utilité, c'est peut être disponible à l'export. Pour le Radar on a déjà fait une grande partie du chemin avec le RBE2 AESA qui a amélioré les performances en portée de 100% alors qu'on attendait 40 à 50%, et en plus il y aura une antenne AESA GaN pour F4.2 qui doublera la puissance émise et devrait donc améliorer la portée de 20%. Au total si la portée du PESA est 100, les EAU demandaient 160, on est déjà à 200 et on sera à 240. En plus les fonctions GMTT GMTI sont prévues. Donc pour moi pas de problème de ce coté là. Pour les amélioration de SPECTRA , l'extension des fréquences vers le haut et vers le bas est prévue ainsi que l'augmentation de la sensibilité qui est un résultat naturel de l'utilisation de GaN du fait de leur meilleur rendement. On peut penser que les autres améliorations ne sont pas en contradiction avec ce que veulent les EAU puisque le général Silvy dit que les Français et les EAU ont les mêmes besoins, mais pas avec le même calendrier. Donc on a une convergence qui doit pouvoir être exploitée. Et tout cela pourquoi? Pour avoir un avion dit de 5ème génération !!! C'est le point de vue des EAU : Citation UAE authorities have been negotiating with the French government and industry a potential co-development of a more capable "fifth-generation" model of the Rafale. http://www.emirates247.com/news/emirates/uae-may-ditch-france-to-award-10bn-jet-deal-to-us-2010-09-23-1.294435 C'est le point de vue de l'Egypte Le Caire qui veut disposer d'avion capables de se mesurer au JSF F-35 Et c'est le point de vue de l'IAF qui compare favorablement le Rafale "NV" au Pak Fa. Citation Pour commencer la communication dit que l'IAF est sceptique sur le PAK-FA De nouvelles contre mesures améliorées rendent le Rafale "N.V." aussi bon que le T-50 planifié. L' IAF recommande d'acheter plus de Rafale ou d'améliorer le PAK-FA pour le rendre meilleur que Rafale "N.V." On ne sait pas en détail ce qu'il y a dans le Rafale F4.2 mais ça semble le rapprocher beaucoup d'un avion de cinquième génération qui intéresserait les EAU. Edited September 30, 2017 by Picdelamirand-oil 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Picdelamirand-oil Posted September 30, 2017 Author Popular Post Share Posted September 30, 2017 30th September has come and its time for an updated buzz in the corridors of power. Lot of focus has been on SE so will start with the other competitor in SE Jet fighter planGripen E Update Last Saab news in the main SE thread was herehttp://indiandefence.com/threads/f1...-and-possibilities.56222/page-256#post-595296 As of today Gripen E is in 2nd position but its an open option. The deal structure and the whole program offered inclusive of all direct technology, licencing and integration is more complicated and highly expensive IAF evaluation based on responses in MMRCA and as of new documents submitted by Saab shows Gripen E/F has drawbacks with engine power to weight in straight line. The second problem is Gripen E fully eating out the program of LCA. Contrary to the belief that Gripen E will might be renamed as LCA Mk2 or position itself as Mk2, its threat is actually directly to MK1A. There were two papers about Gripen internally and if Gripen comes the Tejas Mk1/Mk1A "All" orders will be certainly reduced. The reduction will be based on non performance of HAL - Inability to deliver the aircraft on time and unable to meet certain quality parameters+ performance specifications. There is a report submitted from HAL as well which has opposed Gripen E in similar language and has expressed great concern for LCA Mk1/Mk1A program curtailment scope. Tech Integration from 5th Gen platform To a direct query of a possibility of integration of F35 sub systems into Gripen, James Mattis has formally declined any chances. In a candid view, he expresses strong reservation against continuing USA support for Gripen for long time and has said if a threat comes to US MIC and figher ecosystem, preferential treatment will be given to American companies only. There is another challenge of Saab offer comprising of future integration of systems bought off teh shelf which are basically part of 5th gen systems research. Its on paper as of now and would take a long time (at least a decade plus) before any successful integration and matured 5th gen tech from 3rd party system will be available for Gripen Integration of Indian Engine - the Safranised Kaveri option The SE fighter has a clear cut one agenda point - integration of Safransied Kaveri and its variants Beyond a particular number, there is a clear understanding that Safranised Kaveri will be the preferred option for the Fighter In MLU, the more powerful version of Safranised Kaveri will be used to upgrade the planes further. Dimensions will remain same with only metallurgy and components/ compression/ stages change. Teh core is M88 core only for all these engines The aim is to increase Dry thrust to 6x-7x-8x and AB to 9x-10x-11x-12x Emphasis is on Dry thrust of course and a regime for max SFC around 0.8M-1.2M The chief challenge here is Gripen E will need re designing for the engine. F16 needs no such changes LCA Mk1A/Mk1X also no changes Rafale (all variants) also no changes This is a big let down for Saab and Gripen E and internal studies have revealed any such fitment comes at a much higher cost, and re certification much beyond just engine and flight performance and goes deeper into the airframe and entire EW + systems Talks were still held for the fitment and a solution has already been proposed and for all intensive purposes it would be easier to take out the engine in all other crafts mentioned above as per the internal study than in Gripen E. Chances of Gripen - Tough chance inspite of Gripen E being far more newer aircraft program In terms of assessment it has reached almost 60-65% of its potential as part of program development. In terms of maturity versus F16 which is almost 100% of program development and integrating further newer tech from F-35, the assessment of overall proposal of Saab is weaker as detailed above. Especially the Engine thing is a big let down inspite of being talked about many times on this by indian officials Meteor integration and 5 meteor config is a big hit among the IAF people who already are over the moon with Meteors in Rafales (max 4 as of now but study underway to make it 6 under a deep upgrade proposed later in F4/4.2 - not sure if the cost is practical as it will involve heavy modifications). Commonality of Meteor and ability to take out HV targets right from FW bases and taking out AWACS /AARs /Force Multipliers without extra mobilization is a big advantage. There is another reason for Gripen E to be still in race as explained below in threats to F16 and its regarding software codes F16 and USA The points have been made before in the main thread AIM 120D and a new variant is proposed All the top missiles which can go in F35 will be available. A new program under Raytheon and analogous to Meteor is also proposed as Future AMRAAM. Its a necessity as detailed above in case of Meteor integration in F35 as well as in Gripen E In A2G - AGM-65 Maverick/laser Maverick, AGM 142B - HaveLite, AGM-88 HARM is offered. IN A2A- Iris-T, AIM 7F/M Sparrow, AIM 120 A/B/C/D AMRAAM, AIM 9 N/P/ L/ M/ S/ XSidewinder are proposed. The A2G General weapons - 500lb and 2000lb bombs and Mk82,83,84 and GBU - 15/22/24/27/32/31/38 - JDAM is also on offer. In Decoys - MALD and towed Decoy is offered In ECM - ALQ 131 ECM Pod/ ALQ-211 AIDEWS POD and ALQ 119/184 ECM POD is there. In Targeting systems - Sniper, Litening, HARM targeting system R7 and Integrated FLIR targeting systems is offered. CFT in wings and 1100L center tank + 1400L under wing tank+ 2200L under wing tank options are there. JHMCS 2 is offerred as well with GPS integration to local Indian system. Threat to F16 / American political deal USA- India relation is on upswing post Bush and Obama and now mainly due to Trump who is taking it forward with a greater emphasis on powering up India Militarily for the USA-India-Israel-Japan-Australia axis creation. But there are certain deals where we dont see eye to eye like Climate Agreement deal Also there are Information warfare and hacking issues in USA planes which have been bought by some of the countries who sabotaged and changed teh source codes to modify and better certain specs Sub system hacks for F16 are still present and are mostly denied by USA people but they are there only very few can review it. India has a powerful software community so that might be uncovered and reversed any threat and potential damage But USA wants a "user agreement" to be agreed on before any MII absolving of any such damage caused which is why Gripen E is not already off the table. There is also a sizable cost of sharing F16 line+ ecosystem completely to India and thats going to play a decisive role with overall costs budgeting. FGFA status As mentioned before there has been numerous points pointed by LM and Boeing about PAKFA program. FGFA is stuck because the USA has shown several problems in stealth and engine output with framework issues for higher mach speed. Right now its being noted as very low probability to make such extensive changes under the price given by Russia MOD believes the price offered to us is a bait when compared to other such projects R&D costs. The report says cost to be too low and is certainly a ploy as in to bait and then ask for money again in future. The report also says based on experience and post MKI deal, the tech share status is better in Russia than in USA but the linking of missile system and the the new Nuclear link which has come up is a problem Rafale - More orders and the biggest threat to come - F35 after 2020 + Main thread - http://indiandefence.com/threads/rafale-deal-signed.56201/ The next tranche of 36 is progressing well but it seems a strong idea is mooted by MOD to see if Dassault and France is serious about MII or not right at this stage. There is a strong view of assembling these 36 at DRAL facility to showcase their real commitment for MII with standard localisation as possible under present deal offset conditions If they accept such a proposition, it becomes easier for more orders with better localisation phase wise and is much easier than minimum 90 Rafales order. The chief problem being TE MII is seen with Mig 35 as a competitor owing to the Russian offer in the hands of MOD The chances of Rafale order curtailment is growing ground for one bigger reason -F35 The political side of the SE USA deal and with a possibility of buying out support from overall F35 consortium with the help of USA is gaining at a rapid pace. With priority delivery from USA line for India its becoming extremely lucrative for New Delhi 2020 or afterwards is said to be when India can get a taste of the F35 if India chooses too and with certain pre conditions. Thus team Dassault needs to move in pretty quick. The USA ally and F-35 scope has actually put the ball back in France's court. Will they move in and accept assembling 36 at DRAL India - thats the big question. Overall comment- GOI needs a showcase MII program which can show tangible results and can be used as poster presentation for 2019 elections. As of now no program has a head start except DRAL implementing offsets but it more hinges on Safranised Kaveri and its success A successful Kaveri powering Rafale to be made/assembled in India will go a long way forward compared to other SE deals. A successful Kaveri powering LCA MK1A is also highly needed to safeguard our own MIC. It would be wise to see which LRUs and parts/systems can be made in DRAL as part of HAL outsourcing if French side seriously wishes to help LCA program as LCA ecosystem is struggling to make enough numbers for 24/year production limit. About USA jets well, there are lots of pros and cons..But a political deal is what PM NM is looking at and it makes sense to be on USA side versus Sweden side especially if the deal leads to the consortium of countries under F-35 program As usual, the headaches are way too many for GOI. MOD and IAF. But modernization is highly needed and its not just LCA but many other places as well. Like it or not we have to import for next decade. Even if we cry a lot and make noises , the fact remains present MIC is not in a stage to deliver whats needed. Its better if we focus on getting the jets and upgrade our MIC ecosystem to support LCA program first and then think about other programs and say no completely to Imports. http://indiandefence.com/threads/source-based-iaf-update-as-on-30-09-2017.65172/ 2 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
herciv Posted September 30, 2017 Share Posted September 30, 2017 @Picdelamirand-oil ET encore le f-35 qui va tuer le rafale ? D'après toi Dassault pourrait accepter des compensations aussi importantes pour les autres Batch ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Picdelamirand-oil Posted September 30, 2017 Author Share Posted September 30, 2017 à l’instant, herciv a dit : @Picdelamirand-oil ET encore le f-35 qui va tuer le rafale ? D'après toi Dassault pourrait accepter des compensations aussi importantes pour les autres Batch ? Il a 49% de DRAL, mais c'est difficile d'aller plus vite que la musique, une spécialité indienne qui fait qu'ils sont toujours en retard. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
herciv Posted September 30, 2017 Share Posted September 30, 2017 ET toute la a fabrication pour DRAL, si c'est pas déjà proposé ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Picdelamirand-oil Posted September 30, 2017 Author Share Posted September 30, 2017 à l’instant, herciv a dit : ET toute la a fabrication pour DRAL, si c'est pas déjà proposé ? La France ne l'accepterait pas, le Rafale est considéré comme stratégique. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
herciv Posted September 30, 2017 Share Posted September 30, 2017 à l’instant, Picdelamirand-oil a dit : La France ne l'accepterait pas, le Rafale est considéré comme stratégique. Par contre ils acceptent que les f-35 soient fabriqués au US ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Picdelamirand-oil Posted September 30, 2017 Author Share Posted September 30, 2017 à l’instant, herciv a dit : Par contre ils acceptent que les f-35 soient fabriqués au US ? Tu rigole? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
herciv Posted September 30, 2017 Share Posted September 30, 2017 Ok donc le Kaveri reste au centre du jeux mais le jeux politique est à fond. Là où je comprend moins c'est que la discussion sur le F-16 laisse doucement la place à celle sur le F-35 ? Il y a un an voir deux j'avais dit que ce qui était cruciale dans le Kaveri ce n'était pas le défis technique mais celui de la communication. Il fallait mettre des étoiles dans els yeux des indiens pour leur éviter de regarder ailleurs. On en est loin. J'espère que SAFRAN va enfin annoncer des résultats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mgtstrategy Posted September 30, 2017 Share Posted September 30, 2017 2 hours ago, Picdelamirand-oil said: Also there are Information warfare and hacking issues in USA planes which have been bought by some of the countries who sabotaged and changed teh source codes to modify and better certain specs Sub system hacks for F16 are still present and are mostly denied by USA people but they are there only very few can review it. India has a powerful software community so that might be uncovered and reversed any threat and potential damage c'est ouf! En gros, il y a des backdoors dans le F16, et certains pays les ont fait sauté. Purée, je savais que ca existait sur certains matos mais sur le F16? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Picdelamirand-oil Posted September 30, 2017 Author Share Posted September 30, 2017 il y a 19 minutes, herciv a dit : Ok donc le Kaveri reste au centre du jeux mais le jeux politique est à fond. Là où je comprend moins c'est que la discussion sur le F-16 laisse doucement la place à celle sur le F-35 ? Il y a un an voir deux j'avais dit que ce qui était cruciale dans le Kaveri ce n'était pas le défis technique mais celui de la communication. Il fallait mettre des étoiles dans els yeux des indiens pour leur éviter de regarder ailleurs. On en est loin. J'espère que SAFRAN va enfin annoncer des résultats. Pour l'instant c'est l'IAF qui annonce des résultats ! En disant qu'ils sont très satisfait de la façon dont le Kaveri et le LCA avance maintenant. C'est fou qu'on ait jamais rien entendu sauf avec les fuites de Parikrama. Pourtant on a avertit Dassault sur ce sujet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
herciv Posted September 30, 2017 Share Posted September 30, 2017 il y a 23 minutes, Picdelamirand-oil a dit : Pour l'instant c'est l'IAF qui annonce des résultats ! En disant qu'ils sont très satisfait de la façon dont le Kaveri et le LCA avance maintenant. C'est fou qu'on ait jamais rien entendu sauf avec les fuites de Parikrama. Pourtant on a avertit Dassault sur ce sujet. Le but était de faire en sorte que l'indien de la rue croit en son indépendance, à la capacité de son industrie à développer et produire le top de la techno. La pression de la rue aurait fait réfléchir à deux fois le PM. @Picdelamirand-oil C''est pas bon pour le rafale là. On en restera à 36 ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teenytoon Posted September 30, 2017 Share Posted September 30, 2017 J'arrive pas à comprendre ce qu'il se passe. Quelqu'un peut résumer. Je croyais qu'on partait pour 200+ Rafale en Inde ??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Picdelamirand-oil Posted September 30, 2017 Author Share Posted September 30, 2017 il y a 11 minutes, herciv a dit : Le but était de faire en sorte que l'indien de la rue croit en son indépendance, à la capacité de son industrie à développer et produire le top de la techno. La pression de la rue aurait fait réfléchir à deux fois le PM. @Picdelamirand-oil C''est pas bon pour le rafale là. On en restera à 36 ? Je pense que dans ce post Parikrama a mélangé des faits comme d'habitude mais aussi des réflexion personnelles. C'est évident pour les commentaires de la fin mais aussi pour la menace F-35 aux environs de 2020. Dans des posts précédent on a appris que les US n'acceptaient de parler de F-35 que lorsqu'ils auraient produit 200 SE, et en 2020 ils ne seront pas produit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
herciv Posted September 30, 2017 Share Posted September 30, 2017 à l’instant, Picdelamirand-oil a dit : Je pense que dans ce post Parikrama a mélangé des faits comme d'habitude mais aussi des réflexion personnelles. C'est évident pour les commentaires de la fin mais aussi pour la menace F-35 aux environs de 2020. Dans des posts précédent on a appris que les US n'acceptaient de parler de F-35 que lorsqu'ils auraient produit 200 SE, et en 2020 ils ne seront pas produit. Ce que tu évoques c'est juste un problème de planning ou ... Ca veut dire que les indiens doivent d'abord commander 200 f-16 pour avoir du f-35 ? Pourquoi ne pas demander de suite du f-35 ? Bon là au niveau du planning indien ça risque de ne pas rentrer avant les élections. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Picdelamirand-oil Posted September 30, 2017 Author Share Posted September 30, 2017 à l’instant, herciv a dit : Ce que tu évoques c'est juste un problème de planning ou ... Ca veut dire que les indiens doivent d'abord commander 200 f-16 pour avoir du f-35 ? Pourquoi ne pas demander de suite du f-35 ? Bon là au niveau du planning indien ça risque de ne pas rentrer avant les élections. Lis les posts c'est Trump qui a expliqué à MODI qu'il fallait d'abord commander les F-16, il paraît que c'est Gagnant/gagnant! Mais il a promis que dans ce cas les Indiens auraient leur F-35 à temps pour contrer les menaces Chinoises. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
herciv Posted September 30, 2017 Share Posted September 30, 2017 il y a 1 minute, Picdelamirand-oil a dit : Lis les posts c'est Trump qui a expliqué à MODI qu'il fallait d'abord commander les F-16, il paraît que c'est Gagnant/gagnant! Mais il a promis que dans ce cas les Indiens auraient leur F-35 à temps pour contrer les menaces Chinoises. Ah j'avais pas suivi. Je comprend mieux pourquoi les Indiens hésitent. Là ils sont pris pour des vaches à lait et ça leur plaira peut-être moyen. Rafale f4 + en trouble fêtes ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
herciv Posted September 30, 2017 Share Posted September 30, 2017 il y a 38 minutes, Picdelamirand-oil a dit : Lis les posts c'est Trump qui a expliqué à MODI qu'il fallait d'abord commander les F-16, il paraît que c'est Gagnant/gagnant! Mais il a promis que dans ce cas les Indiens auraient leur F-35 à temps pour contrer les menaces Chinoises. C'est un truc de commercial ce que vient de faire TRUMP. Si on discute de quelque chose et que le client commence à partir sur un autre truc c'est pas bon pour la suite. TRUMP a juste fait son commercial et remettant le client dans le bon cap. EN gros il faut comprendre "le f-35 plus tard". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now