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. randomradio

    randomradio Colonel REGISTERED

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2013
    Messages:
    11,206
    Likes Received:
    6,312
    Rafale already comes with hardened electronics.
     
  2. Sancho

    Sancho Lt. Colonel IDF NewBie

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    Messages:
    5,687
    Likes Received:
    3,461
    There are some things we know and some things we speculate about and I even think that we get customisations for the fighter, since that mainly requires money to be paid.
    But the speculation about SSN techs is pretty unrealistic, because they have no relations to the fighter deal, nor is the order of 36 in any way big enough to put France in the need to provide us these techs.

    With Brexit, UK has no value. Either they are allowed to join an EU project, or they do it alone. Germany and France will push for a joint project and in that field Germany might be the leading factor.
     
    Last edited: Apr 24, 2017
    Ankit Kumar 001 likes this.
  3. Sancho

    Sancho Lt. Colonel IDF NewBie

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    Messages:
    5,687
    Likes Received:
    3,461
    Both are the system costs and Brazil don't get a production, but assembly line, since they mainly get foreign stuff as kits. ToT is only high in their case, because the Gripen was still in development and Brazil was meant to participate in the development of the twin seater (similar to FGFA joint development) and the naval version. The latter however has no meaning now, since Brazil can't afford a carrier anymore, so that ToT part might be wasted.

    The fact however remains, that a Gripen E is not half the procurement costs of a Rafale and even the operational cost benefit, will be cut by adding another type. If we go for more Gripen E however and remain with 36 Rafale, it will be Rafale that will be the operational burden, as the air chiefs pointed out.

    Not really, since the Chinese threat was there all along and even if we had givin it a higher rating later, we can only buy what is offered to us and in the initial stages we were limited to specific fighters and specific capabilities only (btw, Chinese Flanker were countered with MKI, not MMRCA).

    The MMRCA change came because Dassault couldn't keep the M2K line open, while we suddenly had not only more capable techs available, but also EF and F18SH pushing in.
    So for the first time India was in the position to chose the best fighter for its needs and not only what others were ready to offer, but also compare what the best overall package was (industrial and technical benefits). Sadly, we missed out on this huge chance and so far ended with a bad compromise.
     
    Last edited: Apr 24, 2017
  4. Sancho

    Sancho Lt. Colonel IDF NewBie

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    Messages:
    5,687
    Likes Received:
    3,461
    We really have to stop viewing things with pride and get a more rational point of view!

    - IAF rejected K/S for LCA MK2 and already selected GE414
    - "we" rejected the K/S development and stopped Kaveri project
    - the only reason it comes back now, is because it's part of the Rafale offsets
    - ADA according to their own reports are considering only high thrust engines

    So neither the government, nor IAF and not even our scientist's are considering that engine for LCA or AMCA now. It's not a game changer, but "just" opens us a chance to fix a failed development. If that fix turns out to be useful needs to be seen at the end, not at the start, but at least it would provide India a working base for future engine developments, if there is a credible tech share involved (remember IAF conserns).
    .
     
    Last edited: Apr 24, 2017
    Bregs likes this.
  5. BON PLAN

    BON PLAN Major SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2015
    Messages:
    2,968
    Likes Received:
    1,461
    Country Flag:
    France
    No base accomodation for Brazil, far less indigenization, single engine near point defense only fighter versus medium, dual engine and long legs fighter.

    You can't compare. already said nearly 100x ....[/QUOTE]
     
    Abingdonboy likes this.
  6. Dark Lord

    Dark Lord FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2017
    Messages:
    21
    Likes Received:
    12
    Country Flag:
    India
    I agree with your argument 100% but isn't buying 36 Rafale is stupid when we really need 400+ birds. What other options do we have besides Rafale? f16, f18, Gripen are out of question because lack of trust on America. Eurofighter is mess between many euro states. So what real Rafale alternatives do we have? We are just wasting out time here. No, France won't give us engine tech on just 36 planes. We need to spend some hard money ASAP and buy more planes. This is the only option we have.
     
    DAC O DAC, PARIKRAMA and Bregs like this.
  7. Sancho

    Sancho Lt. Colonel IDF NewBie

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    Messages:
    5,687
    Likes Received:
    3,461
    We have ordered 120 LCA's with US engines + have sealed a deal for 99 more engines, not to mention all the US transport aircrafts and helicopters we bought. Things have changed don't you think?
     
  8. Dark Lord

    Dark Lord FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2017
    Messages:
    21
    Likes Received:
    12
    Country Flag:
    India
    Buying F404 was a mistake from our part. We can't let backbone of our airforce in the fickle hand of USA. Remember 65, 71, Kargil? USA never supported india or any of its ally in the time of need.
     
    Abingdonboy and PARIKRAMA like this.
  9. Dark Lord

    Dark Lord FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2017
    Messages:
    21
    Likes Received:
    12
    Country Flag:
    India
    Western countries made jet air plane without prior knowledge or access to computers. Today we live in information age. All complicated calculations and design can be done on computers. We also have successful western projects to take hints. Any country can easily make a Rafale or F35 clone with today's technology. Look at China, see how much they are progressing. It requires will power and faith in science which we lack.
     
    DAC O DAC likes this.
  10. Sancho

    Sancho Lt. Colonel IDF NewBie

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    Messages:
    5,687
    Likes Received:
    3,461
    Nope, it was a necessity because we dreamed too long about Kaveri. But we should have started the development with a non US engine, however, time has passed and things have changed.
     
  11. Dark Lord

    Dark Lord FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2017
    Messages:
    21
    Likes Received:
    12
    Country Flag:
    India
    f404 was never a necessity. We could've easily got Saturn from Russia (a reliable partner) and got some TOT too. This would've helped Kaveri program but instead our shortsighted leaders went with GE. Now tell me how much TOT we got from USA for engine deal?
     
  12. halloweene

    halloweene Major MILITARY STRATEGIST

    Joined:
    May 25, 2011
    Messages:
    4,346
    Likes Received:
    2,357
    For MBT France and Germany already launched new program. After Krauss/Nexter fusion.
     
    Last edited: Apr 24, 2017
    Ankit Kumar 001 likes this.
  13. randomradio

    randomradio Colonel REGISTERED

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2013
    Messages:
    11,206
    Likes Received:
    6,312
    Nothing's been wasted. Sea Gripen wasn't part of the first contract.

    The first contract was $4.68B.
    https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/brazil-finalises-468bn-gripen-ng-deal-416586/

    It later increased to $5.4B due to customization.
    http://www.reuters.com/article/us-brazil-sweden-fighter-probe-idUSKBN0N11K220150410

    But the development contract was for a Gripen F, not Sea Gripen. The Sea Gripen negotiations never happened.

    Regardless, the Swedes are currently training Brazilian technicians in production, not just assembly. The first deal also caters for a full production line. Just because a few jets are being assembled in the beginning doesn't mean Brazil won't be producing any jets. Their actual requirement is a 100 jets, no different from India's SE MII. In fact, Brazil will be a major Gripen production hub for global markets.

    So at just 150M a jet, the Brazilians got a production line, ToT, 100% offsets, weapons, crew training, spares and maintenance.

    We didn't get even half that with the Rafale. All we got was 50% offsets, spares, maintenance while we cheaped out on training. No production line, no ToT.

    You have given extremely poor arguments for that. Let's see you include a production line also, with ToT.

    An article quoted an IAF official saying they are expecting the SE MII to come at a unit price of $45M.
    http://www.defensenews.com/articles...tition-for-new-foreign-single-engine-fighters
    "We will submit a new acceptance of necessity proposal for new single engine fighters to Ministry of Defense in the next four months, and will request to fast-pace this new program," a senior IAF official said. "IAF will put up a demand for 200 new single engine fighters to be made in India, which will easily cost around $45 million apiece without weaponry."

    Let's not forget the initial deal for Gripen with a production line was $136M per jet. So the actual unit cost is about half that of the Rafale.

    This argument about another type is only restricted to super rich nations with tiny militaries. Not to countries like India, China, US, Russia etc. Once a type reaches 90 units, in India, there's no difference if you buy the same type or a new type of 90 more jets. The only advantage with a same type is training, but the manpower is so abundant and costs are so low that it doesn't matter. Infrastructure and spares costs are pretty much the same whether you have one or two types.

    No, the Chinese threat has been underestimated even as far as 2012. This was confirmed by Ajit Doval also. One of the principle reasons why Rafale GTG was fast tracked bypassing the MMRCA deal.

    Medium TE jets were specifically meant for combat over the Himalayas, single engines have no place there anymore except CAP or CAS over our own territory.

    And when the first RFP was released in 2001, we did not have access to the Rafale, EF or SH, twin engine jets, while Mig-29 had an extremely poor development history.

    The shutting down of the M-2000 production line played no part in the MMRCA tender. M-2000 line shut down in 2006. The tender RFP was laid out before 2004, when the SE RFP was withdrawn. That's also the reason why MRCA became MMRCA.

    The new threat was the reason why it was changed to MMRCA, and the need for a new aircraft was the reason why they kept Su-30MKI out of the competition. China was the reason why that extra "M" was added. Nothing else.
     
    lca-fan likes this.
  14. Sancho

    Sancho Lt. Colonel IDF NewBie

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    Messages:
    5,687
    Likes Received:
    3,461
    Which is logical, since the Gripen E wasn't developed. You can only develop the naval varient, when the land based version is done. The point however was, that participating in the Sea Gripen development was part of the ToT package. So now their ToT is limited to designing of the twin seat version and customisation.

    Wrong, since only 15 of the 36 are meant to be fully assembled in Brazil via parts from Sweden, other foreign countries, as well as sub production diverted to Brazil as offsets. They don't get ToT to produce all parts in Brazil, which is a key difference to MMRCA and Saab even confirms this:

    India:
    http://saab.com/region/india/about-...eases/saab-outlines-gripen-ng-plan-for-india/


    Brazil:
    http://saabgroup.com/Media/news-pre...pen-design-and-development-network-in-brazil/


    Again, that's logical, because Rafale is a fully developed and available fighter. That's why you can't participate in the development of the fighter, only in upgrades, but that's something that Dassault sadly doesn't offer. That makes consultancy work and production of available parts, the only option to divert offsets.

    Lol I gave facts based on your own figures. Both are the system costs including customisations as you stated yourself and both for the same number of fighters, the rest is simple math!
    And as long as we have no flyaway cost for the Gripen E, the system cost is the only reliable figure. But by the fact that the older Gripen C/D reportedly had a flyaway cost of 45 million, it's should be understandable that the Gripen E with that many changes can't come at the same costs and must be more expensive, less than Rafale though.


    The less commonality 2 fighters have, the higher the logistical burden. Our MKI for example can use the same weapon of older Mig 29s, but has different radar, engines or avionics. Therefor each fighter has it's own logistics. Same would be the case for Rafale and Gripen E, since the only commonality is METEOR. And the lower the numbers of a fighter, the higher the logistical burden, since it's specific spares and weapons can only be used at certain bases, while a Gripen E if procured in numbers, will be based all around the country, therefor can be supported at many bases.

    You are mixing up MRCA and MMRCA, the latter RFP was send out in 2006 and there was never a single engine tender, since the MRCA included the Mig 29SMT.
     
    Last edited: Apr 24, 2017
  15. PARIKRAMA

    PARIKRAMA Captain IDF NewBie

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2016
    Messages:
    1,562
    Likes Received:
    7,575
    Country Flag:
    India
    @Picdelamirand-oil @halloweene @BON PLAN @CNL-PN-AA @Vergennes and all other french men

    You heard the latest propaganda...

    Dassault Rafale was offered to Pakistan Airforce first.. and We Rejected it due to high costs..


    The second one is a bit more subtle

    Dassault Rafale was first offered to Pakistan and we could not complete the negotiations due to some issues


    LOL

    I like the way its being done.. seems there is a large number of online forumers who had bought this story and really believe it...

    I think nobody told them ever there is no French Coalition Support Funds .. But hearing this many guys are smiling to the heartburn felt by neighbourhood due to Rafale coming to India...
     
    Abingdonboy, lca-fan, Grevion and 2 others like this.

Share This Page