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.

The Flying White Elephant

Discussion in 'The Americas' started by Picdelamirand-oil, Feb 13, 2013.

  1. Picdelamirand-oil

    Picdelamirand-oil Lt. Colonel MILITARY STRATEGIST

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2012
    Messages:
    7,389
    Likes Received:
    4,827
    Country Flag:
    France
    Siberia is empty, China is full, it will be some demographic pressure...
     
  2. YarS

    YarS Lieutenant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2017
    Messages:
    502
    Likes Received:
    260
    Country Flag:
    Russian Federation
    Really not. China is full in warm and coastal regions, North-East regions are low populated too. Most of Chinese don't want permanently live in Siberia or even in Mongolia.
    [​IMG]

    And yes, we shall fight for Siberia and we can easily capture Beijing, but for Chinese it will be very hard to capture Moscow.
     
    Last edited: Mar 17, 2017
    HariPrasad likes this.
  3. Picdelamirand-oil

    Picdelamirand-oil Lt. Colonel MILITARY STRATEGIST

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2012
    Messages:
    7,389
    Likes Received:
    4,827
    Country Flag:
    France
    OK.
     
  4. Proxy1234

    Proxy1234 FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2017
    Messages:
    94
    Likes Received:
    87
    Country Flag:
    India
    China is a communist state not democracy. Majority of Han Chinese don't want to live in Tibet too. Yet, there is an increasing Han population in Tibet.
    Why do you think Siberia will be different?
     
  5. halloweene

    halloweene Major MILITARY STRATEGIST

    Joined:
    May 25, 2011
    Messages:
    4,164
    Likes Received:
    2,059
    Agree. Everything you say is garbage.

    si fueris Romae, Romano vivito more
     
  6. halloweene

    halloweene Major MILITARY STRATEGIST

    Joined:
    May 25, 2011
    Messages:
    4,164
    Likes Received:
    2,059
    It is not. Except in advertised numbers. Which do not take into account hundreds of items.
     
  7. BMD

    BMD Lt. Colonel ELITE MEMBER

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2012
    Messages:
    8,616
    Likes Received:
    2,268
    Country Flag:
    United Kingdom
    Pretty much this entire thread and every single French post or link in it is garbage. It's very evident that the sole purpose of this thread is butt hurt over having too few Rafale sales and the fact that Dassault has become dependent on them. Do you really think someone buying an F-35 is going to change their mind and buy something that's only marginally better than an F-18SH instead?

    Credat Judaeus Apella, non ego.
     
    Last edited: Mar 17, 2017
  8. BMD

    BMD Lt. Colonel ELITE MEMBER

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2012
    Messages:
    8,616
    Likes Received:
    2,268
    Country Flag:
    United Kingdom
    The cost of the plane is just that. Slightly under for F-35A, slightly over for B and C. Obviously that does not include every item, like spares, training, ground maintenance equipment, armament airbase etc., but neither does the headline price of the Rafale or Typhoon for that matter.

    For 36 Rafales and armament and India specific changes and logistics support, India paid €7.87bn, which at the time was ~$9bn, $250m/aircraft. The cost of the aircraft alone was €3.42bn, which was about $4bn at the time, giving a per aircraft cost of $111m. This is compares to a cost of $94.6m for the F-35A. Hope you got that. For 36 Rafales, you can buy 43 F-35s. In pace requiescat.

    http://www.defensenews.com/articles/india-inks-deal-with-france-for-36-rafale-fighter-jets
    http://breakingdefense.com/2017/02/...s-jobs/?_ga=1.202054929.1059215399.1481119033
     
    Last edited: Mar 17, 2017
  9. halloweene

    halloweene Major MILITARY STRATEGIST

    Joined:
    May 25, 2011
    Messages:
    4,164
    Likes Received:
    2,059
  10. halloweene

    halloweene Major MILITARY STRATEGIST

    Joined:
    May 25, 2011
    Messages:
    4,164
    Likes Received:
    2,059
    So basically you say that the official USA spending website is lying... In your dreams young padawan
     
  11. BMD

    BMD Lt. Colonel ELITE MEMBER

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2012
    Messages:
    8,616
    Likes Received:
    2,268
    Country Flag:
    United Kingdom
    Nice try, learn to read, lot of early development costs in there. The sub-$100m price is based on all the aircraft once the in-service standard is baselined, not the first 35 aircraft. LOL, the first 30 Rafales probably cost quarter of a billion if you cut-off at that point. Do you seriously think the US is selling these aircraft at a loss?

    E.g.
    Upgrades to lift fan system - you don't need to repeat that cost for all 3000 aircraft.
    Engineering change proposal upgrade kits - ditto.
    MOD to fulfill - ditto.
    Retrofits - ditto.
    Administrative changes - ditto.
    This modification increases - ditoo.

    All non-recurring crap.

    And note mention of lift fan, clearly not the A model.
     
    Last edited: Mar 17, 2017
  12. OnePunchMan

    OnePunchMan 2nd Lieutant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2017
    Messages:
    122
    Likes Received:
    108
    Country Flag:
    India
    dang Salt is real.
     
  13. Picdelamirand-oil

    Picdelamirand-oil Lt. Colonel MILITARY STRATEGIST

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2012
    Messages:
    7,389
    Likes Received:
    4,827
    Country Flag:
    France
    LRIP 7 is not the first LRIP and no development cost are included inside.
     
  14. BMD

    BMD Lt. Colonel ELITE MEMBER

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2012
    Messages:
    8,616
    Likes Received:
    2,268
    Country Flag:
    United Kingdom
    Read the damn thing. Changes, retrofits and mods are not recurring costs. Seriously, would you include the cost of fitting DDM, removing DDM and retrofitting DDM-NG in the unit cost of each Rafale? Or the cost of fitting RBE2, removing RBE2 and fitting RBE2-AA?

    JFC, have you even looked up what LRIP stands for?!

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low_rate_initial_production

    Low rate initial production (LRIP) is a term commonly used in military weapon projects/programs to designate the phase of initial, small-quantity production. The prospective first buyer and operator (i.e., a country's defense authorities and the relevant military units) gets to thoroughly test the weapons system over some protracted amount of time—in order to gain a reasonable degree of confidence as to whether the system actually performs to the agreed-upon requirements before contracts for mass production are signed. At the same time, manufacturers can use the LRIP as a production test-phase where they develop the assembly line models that would eventually be used in mass production. Therefore, the LRIP is commonly the first step in transitioning from highly customized, hand-built prototypes to the final mass-produced end product.[1] In practice, either the production capability or the weapons system itself can be unready during the LRIP phase. This can mean that systems produced during LRIP are built significantly differently both in terms of technique and cost owing to the immaturity of the production line or changes in the weapons system's design, necessitating a large degree of hand-assembly and trial-and-error typically associated with the prototyping stage. Furthermore, the cost of each LRIP system can be much greater than the final mass production unit cost, since the LRIP cost can include both the R&D and setup cost for production, although the goal is that this additional cost is spread out over future production carried out by the assembly capacity developed during LRIP.

    :facepalm:

    Now if it wasn't for your background, you could be forgiven for having made a simple error, but given your CV there are only two possibilities:

    1. Your CV is bullshit.

    2. You're deliberately trying to mislead people.
     
    Last edited: Mar 17, 2017
  15. YarS

    YarS Lieutenant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2017
    Messages:
    502
    Likes Received:
    260
    Country Flag:
    Russian Federation
    Because we have nukes, and Tibet separatists - have not.
     
    BMD likes this.

Share This Page