MRCA News & Discussions

[blain2]

---

---

Never say never..... Spectra is still classified...nobody knows what it does !

There must be some reason that cost to develop Spectra is almost half of the entire fighter development costs -- or something like that...you can google it.

Beyond the PR hoopla, Spectra is not leagues ahead of any of the other SPS being offered such as DASS/Pretorian, AIDEWS etc. They all offer the same level of self protection capabilities to the aircraft.

Its a matter of whose literature you are reading up on. An objective analysis will show that all of these systems are fairly capable and comparable.

[sancho]

This did not happen. No F-22s were defeated. The Rafales flew three DACT missions against the Raptors. Lost one and the two were called off after some maneuvering. Rafale certainly did not beat the F-22 in any way.

Secondly, the F-22s flew with AMAs which increased their radar signature for aircraft like the Rafale and others to see it on their radars.

Interestingly enough, the only aircraft that the F-22 pilots called out as interesting in their DACT missions were Pakistani F-7PGs for the asymmetric threat they represented.

The image you see above is from the targeting pod of the Rafale which can track other aircraft in formation. This is not a HUD/Pipper shot.

Many wrong points!

Rafale engaged the F22 six times in UAE and it was reported that it was killed only once, while 5 combats went to draw!
The interesting thing is, that these was WVR combats, limited to guns only, so the RCS of F22, be it higher than normal, or not doesn't matter here. It was only a dogfight and the Rafale impressed with very good performance against one of the best fighters at present.
Also the picture was taken from Rafales IRST (FSO), not a targeting pod!

In the scheme of things, I can tell you that IAF always had F/A-18 and F-16 as the top choices. F-16 will not be in the running for very many obvious reasons, however F/A-18 not only fulfills the IAF requirements, but also provides the best bang for the buck of the line-up available.

Wrong again! In the initial MRCA competition IAF clearly prefered additional Mirage 2000s and even the Gripen C/D had a better chance than the F16. The US even tried to influence MoD by Israel to not choose Gripen, but the same F16 Sufa that Israel uses.
When the deal gets bigger to MMRCA, IAF even criticised that such a heavy aircraft like the F18SH will be involved in the competition!

I think nobody says F18SH is a bad fighter, but compared to the other competitiors and the offers of European vendors without EUM and a lot ToT, it is clearly not a good choice. Where it has clear advantages are political benefits, as well as cost-effectivity (average unit and operational cost). If it wins and even I see good chances for that, it wins because of political reasons!

Beyond the PR hoopla, Spectra is not leagues ahead of any of the other SPS being offered such as DASS/Pretorian, AIDEWS etc. They all offer the same level of self protection capabilities to the aircraft.

Its a matter of whose literature you are reading up on. An objective analysis will show that all of these systems are fairly capable and comparable.

Possible for protection, but you are highly mistaken if you think that is the main advantage of Spectra!
Can you tell me which other EWS is able to detect, or track other fighters and ground targets, or even can be used to guide PGMs on them? It also offers these features in a field of 360° and the only fighter that will have similar capabilities is the F35 and the US calles it 5. gen avionics right?

[maithil]

^^^ yes and expect much more potent Spectra in next tranche...

[Sri]

Some more points from another forum

Because of complaints that came to my knowledge I went to check on the ground if there were changes in the report issued by the Navy regarding the use of the Rafale on board the Sampa [Sao Paulo aircraft carrier]. Monday afternoon, friends of MB [Brazilian Navy] and FAB gave me access to the document submitted to Defence Minister and which contains the explanatory memorandum which will be submitted to President Lula.

The signature of the commanders of the two forces certifies that they are original. Some points:

1. From the Sao Paulo, the Rafale can operate with only 40% of its capacity [payload], which could be minimized with a refueling after takeoff;
2. The F/A-18E/F Super Hornet is unable to operate our aircraft carrier. Its dry weight is beyond the capacity of the wiring, Its length is greater than that of elevators and catapults would not be able to launch it;
3. Even the Gripen navy, which exists only in theory, can only function with a capacity of 80%.

The document prepared by the Navy contains verbatim the explanatory memorandum and indicates that the 3 would operate smoothly with the future aircraft carrier class of 50000 tons to be operated by the Navy. This material, prepared by COPAC and reviewed by the High Command of Aeronautics has been valided. What has changed are the weights assigned to each element. A good example: in the original settings, established in 1995, the weight of technology transfer was 9%. In contrast, the weight of price and maintenance costs were 30 and 40%. No wonder the F/A-18E/F was the winners of the process. The generals have pushed the engineers to accept what they had established themselves as a rule! Jobim returned because that does not meet the assumptions of the new END [national defense strategy .. which favors technological independance]

In the new criteria established with the national defense strategy, the technology package is now worth 40%. It is worth noting that the recalculation of the scores have been prepared by COPAC. In the process, ended 75 days ago [!], the Rafale has emerged as the winner because it has scored regularly on all points.[...] Others competitors scored excellent on some points, but showed a weak performance [latimavel?] in others.

The Super Hornet has been heavily penalized by U.S. law, which prohibits the government from establishing compensation with other states. Everything depends only from the manufacturers, who can not afford the purchase of aircraft for the armed forces of Uncle Sam, for example. For its part, the Gripen present higher risks, according COPAC itself . The Swedes could not even show a spreadsheet about the costs of the F-414 because it was copyrighted by the U.S. Navy. Just to give you an idea, the volume of pages about this issue is equivalent to the amount of pages used to describe the risks of the two others competitors.
There are doubts about the performance of the radar, on the sustainability of the cell, on the implementation of the program and also some devastating certainties, like the fact that, with limited interior space and a lower capacity of energy production , the Gripen offers smaller developments than its competitors. Boys, I read it: written by Copac itself! Furthermore, it was rated slightly higher than the Rafale on the issue of technology transfer, but not enough to overcome its weaknesses and achieve trade compensation by france, which guarantees the purchase of 12 KC-390 and the participation of Dassault in the Embraer program.
About the explanatory memorandum, it is a masterpiece from a methodological point of view. Each phrase refers to an attached document, including the explanatory memorandum sent in December by the Air Force Command, which uses color coding to highlight the strengths, weaknesses, and the median for each unit ... [Exactly what said Istoe... some leaks were more credible than others ..]

For health reasons, I moved away from the forums. […] I hope I have been helpful to the debate.

Moreover, the Navy will operate 48 aircraft on its two units in the future.

Abracos

Pepe


Pedro Paulo Rezende is a well-know Brazilian Journalist (Correio Braziliense / Valor econômico / Jane’s defence weekly)


Fórum Defesa Brasil • Informação ... tart=41760

[flanker143]

Possible for protection, but you are highly mistaken if you think that is the main advantage of Spectra!
Can you tell me which other EWS is able to detect, track other fighters and ground targets, or even can be used to guide PGMs on them? It also offers these features in a field of 360° and the only fighter that will have similar capabilities is the F35 and the US calles it 5. gen avionics right?

spectra's active cancellation can also be used to jam/blind the active seeker on bvr missile if not the enemy's radar making it a very good defensive aid ......... ain't it ?

[calcutta]

ya....right . i missed that one

[calcutta]

Never say never..... Spectra is still classified...nobody knows what it does !

There must be some reason that cost to develop Spectra is almost half of the entire fighter development costs -- or something like that...you can google it.

don't want another jsf do we? we should learn from our mistakes.. at least others mistakes... i believe anything that isn't affordable...is as good as something that does not exists...don't give "In the long run ....." theories

[sancho]

spectra's active cancellation can also be used to jam/blind the active seeker on bvr missile if not the enemy's radar making it a very good defensive aid ......... ain't it ?

Active cancellation is only a possible future upgrade, it's not developed yet.

[anathema]

Hi anathema, the problem in this example is, that you compared an export and a national deal

F18SH for USN for example is expected between $49 to 55 millions each, the 24 that Australia bought costs around $190 millions each.
As you can see a huge difference huge difference and that's because higer costs for export customers, as well as lower numbers.

But if India goes for F16 or F18 then it would be through FMS route, right ? The cost would be pretty much same except for the additional pentagon charges ---

[Death.By.Chocolate]

Active cancellation is only a possible future upgrade, it's not developed yet.

Can you please be objective in your assessment of the Rafale? Active cancellation has gone no where since Pierre-Yves Chaltiel first talked about it in the mid 90's - he is probably retired long ago and spends most of his time playing pétanque in some corner of France.

[KEETARP]

that active cancellation thing is bullshit . still doing its rounds in the labs . i don't know the exact mechanism ... it sounds like the suite tracks down the signals from the radar and emits such a signal itself after passing it through a 90 degree phase shift .. thus leading to destructive interference..... the result : to the radar it would seem the signal has passed through ... ie there is nothing to worry about......well sounds difficult..........believe it is as difficult as it sounds............best of luck to the French people.

Correction ,
it has to be 180 out of phase for wavefront to be in destructive interference .
Wave-superposition to be precise to produce phase cancellation (phase cancellation) or destructive interaction (destructive
interference).





To add Active cancellation on SPECTRA is as hyped as Plasma stealth , impossible in reality .
Problems are many with SPECTRA active cancellation

First -
The incident electromagnetic radiation which reflects from each aircraft's surface back to the transmitter , comes from many different surfaces and geometry .
Any such point produces a reflected wave with its own particular charac-
These features including the phase and amplitude wave
The on- turning radiation from each point varies per- say like
-Depending on the angle of incidence,
-the geometry of point,
-density of material of reflecting surface
So to achieve the elimination of the signal , this requires a very precise order-processing receivers coupled with large computing capacity to be able through a complex process that can recognize the length and breadth of the incoming electromagnetic radiation + emitting
a signal 180 degrees out of phase, creating third wave with 0 output.

Second thing is
for Active cancellation to work , the receivers must sample a Radar Pulse train and keep track of Pulse repetition Freq+ Pulse jittering .
in dense Electronic environment of various radar formation and clutter noise .
Gambit discussed about SPECTRA+Pulse Jittering few months back , try to check that post

Below is wiki link for pulse train -
Radar signal characteristics - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The radar pulse train is a form of square wave, the pure form of which consists of the fundamental plus all of the odd harmonics. The exact composition of the pulse train will depend on the pulse width and PRF, but mathematical analysis can be used to calculate all of the frequencies in the spectrum. When the pulse train is used to modulate a radar carrier, the typical spectrum shown on the left will be obtained.

Basically transmitter transmits for few seconds and then listens , this constitutes a Radar pulse , Several pulses in a sequence make up a pulse train. Remember these Pulse train are specific for a Radar transmitter
like length , freq etc
Now the problem
'
Suppose above is the pulse train , if SPECTRA takes a very short sample of this the rest of the incident pulse train or next pulse train will reveal the aircraft
If the system take too long a sample ie longer than this sequence , then the aircraft will be revealed anyway by the current pulse train.
All this when Hostile AESA radar is changing its PRF with every cycle
Here is link for PRF - Radar signal characteristics - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Pulse repetition frequency (PRF)
In order to build up a discernible echo, most radar systems emit pulses continuously and the repetition rate of these pulses is determined by the role of the system. An echo from a target will therefore be 'painted' on the display or integrated within the signal processor every time a new pulse is transmitted, reinforcing the return and making detection easier. The higher the PRF that is used, then the more the target is painted. However with the higher PRF the range that the radar can "see" is reduced. Radar designers try to use the highest PRF possible commensurate with the other factors that constrain it, as described below.

Staggered PRF
Staggered PRF is where the time between interrogations from radar changes slightly. The change of repetition frequency allows the radar, on a pulse-to-pulse basis, to differentiate between returns from itself and returns from other radar systems with the same frequency. Without stagger any returns from another radar on the same frequency would appear stable in time and could be mistaken for the radar's own returns. With stagger the radar’s own targets appear stable in time in relation to the transmit pulse, whilst the 'jamming' echoes are moving around in time (uncorrelated), causing them to be rejected by the receiver.

Clutter
Clutter (also termed ground clutter) is a form of radar signal contamination. It occurs when fixed objects close to the transmitter—such as buildings, trees, or terrain (hills, ocean swells and waves)—obstruct a radar beam and produce echoes.

The hostile radar can change the PRF from one train to the next, forcing the SPECTRA-like system to constantly recalibrate and reprocess itself,
The hostile radar is employing the tactic called 'PRF jittering'. which is basically a method to remember the sequence of wave .
If the 'PRF jittering' sequence is known, this SPECTRA-like system will work as claimed
But how will you know Jittering sequence until you get hand on enemy's aircraft itself ????? , ELNIT/SIGNIT are not full-proof .
If the 'PRF jittering' sequence is not known, the system will create many echoes for the seeking radar, one moment the system successfully canceled the pulse train but with the new pulse train with a different pulse train characteristics the system must resample,in turn which will make the seeking radar operator suspicious .

[praveen007]

Just got news on times of india that iaf - may shortlist finilize 3 a/c with in a week. hope its true.

[soaringphnx]

Just got news on times of india that iaf - may shortlist finilize 3 a/c with in a week. hope its true.

Race for `mother of all deals' for 126 fighters gets hotter

The race for the "mother of all defence deals", the $10.4 billion project to acquire 126 medium multi-role combat aircraft (MMRCA) for IAF, is getting hotter.

Defence ministry sources said the technical evaluation report of the gruelling field trials, during which the six foreign fighters in contention were tested by IAF pilots both in India and abroad under different weather conditions, was "virtually ready" now.

"IAF is likely to submit the exhaustive report by next week. Subsequently, a shortlist of the fighters which have done well in the field evaluation test and the staff evaluation will be made," said a source.

The commercial bids submitted by the six aviation majors -- American F/A-18 `Super Hornet' (Boeing) and F-16 `Falcon' (Lockheed Martin), Swedish Gripen (Saab), French Rafale (Dassault), Russian MiG-35 (United Aircraft Corporation) and Eurofighter Typhoon (consortium of British, German, Spanish and Italian companies) -- will be opened, examined and compared only after that.

This will be the first time that "life-cycle costs" will be taken into account rather than just pitching for the lowest bidder. The "direct acquisition cost", the cost of operating the fighters over a 40-year period, with 6,000 hours of flying, and the cost of the ToT will all be taken into account to arrive at a "verifiable cost model" for the commercial evaluation.

Complex negotiations on the 50% offsets specified in the contract, under which the selected foreign vendor will be required to plough half of the contract forex value back into India, will also have to be conducted.

IAF is keeping its fingers crossed that the actual contract, under which 18 jets will be bought off-the-shelf and the rest will be manufactured in India under transfer of technology to Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd, is inked within a year.

IAF obviously wants to get the fighters as soon as possible, grappling as it is with a sharp fall in the number of its fighter squadrons (each has 12 to 18 jets), which is down to just 32 from even the "sanctioned" strength of 39.5.

Original article: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/i...ow/6111518.cms

[praveen007]

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/...ow/6112791.cms

[maithil]

---

---

link not working..praveen please paste the article..