no IAF wanted Mirage 2000 after kargilNone of those.
IAF has always wanted Rafale. L1 is a disease created by the UPA.
EFT cleared the parameters so okay it can be considered if it is cheaper we should buy itEF fulfills all the MRCA requirements since the aircraft was shortlisted, just that Rafale is simply the better aircraft. As far as MRCA is concerned, IAF got the aircraft that they wanted at the cheapest price possible. So the program itself is a success as long as it is signed and delivered.
IAF got lucky that Rafale was cheaper than EF.
Rafale was cheaper due to hanky panky in calculation costs and keeping many items out of the calculationsAnd EF is more expensive. That was already established. There is no discount. And after we learned about the manufacturing defects, it seems like they are throwing their aircraft away. They are trying to cheat us. Are you that naive?
hahaha Rafale meant to penetrate air defences at 100 feetFGFA isn't meant to penetrate air defenses at 100 feet like Rafale is. FGFA/MKI/EF have different roles. Rafale/Jaguar/Mig-27 have different roles. The only difference being Rafale is capable of air superiority roles as well.
without puttiing them thru the tests how can you say they will fail ?Who said we only needed range? MRCA had 643 parameters, range is just one of them. Can you explain how Su-34 will fulfill all 643 parameters?
Indegenous products will give us second line - LCA / AMCAWe need a second supply line. How does MKI or Su-34 create a second supply line? Explain.
that was simply a condition built in so that Su30 Su34 could be kept out and Rafale can winMRCA came with a 30 tonnes MTOW limit. Su-30/34 was never a requirement. The first rule of the MRCA was, we don't want Su-30/34. So keep both aircraft out of the discussion.
by that time we will have our own AMCA / FGFAThe M-2000s will be out of service by 2030-35, Rafales will see service until 2050 or 2060.
Super Su30MKi are capable - rest can be configured not difficultMKI isn't capable of nuclear strike missions.
India needs Rafale specifically. India needed Mirage-2000 specifically, and that changed to Rafale since threat perceptions have changed. Requirements change every few years.no IAF wanted Mirage 2000 after kargil
rafale was not even in the fray till 2006
if IAf want Rafale That is IAF problem
what India needs a capable air craft - both EFT & rafel are capable
India needs capable AC not rafale specifically
EF wasn't cheaper. Why don't you try and understand that fact? Are you unable to understand simple sentences?EFT cleared the parameters so okay it can be considered if it is cheaper we should buy it
Where is the proof that EF is cheaper now? Go look at Germany's government audit. It is already worth 60 Billion Euros for 140 aircraft and you are complaining about $22 Billion for Rafale. Halloweene has already posted the link. And that 60 billion does not even cover day to day expenses in maintaining the aircraft. The Luftwaffe has to pay for all that out of their own pockets.India has selected France's Rafale combat jet as cheapest bidder in a competition to buy 126 fighters and will enter exclusive negotiations with manufacturer Dassault Aviation for a deal worth up to $15 billion, Indian government sources said.
Billions added to RAF typhoon costs - Home News - UK - The IndependentThe National Audit Office (NAO) estimates that each individual aircraft is now 75% more expensive than originally anticipated.
If you look at the sticker price, then for 160 aircraft at $60 Billion, that's $375 Million per jet.Altogether the National Audit Office estimates that each individual aircraft is 75% - or £55 million - more expensive than originally anticipated and the total programme cost will eventually hit £37 billion.
That's not how it works. Those 60+ items were not part of the initial bid. It is all part of the tender process.no IAF is not lucky they played hanky panky by keeping 60+ odd items out of the calculations
Money came into the picture only after Rafale and EF were shortlisted. If there was an objection, then only EADS can object to L1. Which other contender was shortlisted for them to object? Or did Dassault themselves object to their L1 bid? No research, nothing. Typical illiterate just braying away to glory.+ 2 member have already noted objection to the way of calculating the L1
Are you some kind of auction whore? What about the 3 years in contract negotiations? What about the cost of setting up numerous contracts for production? What about the numerous JVs that are being negotiated today? HAL has already started building infrastructure for Rafale.Now EFT has made a cheaper offer lets go for it
Su-34 isn't cheaper. It costs over $50 million for one sortie a day. Rafale costs $90 Million and can handle 2-3 sorties a day. Rafale is cheaper in operation.hahaha Rafale meant to penetrate air defences at 100 feet
the best out there is Su34 for that role again better than Rafale and again can handle Air superiority and CHEAPER
Su-34 will fail on the first parameter itself. It is over 30 tonnes MTOW. It is not even eligible for tests. IAF has no requirement for Su-34. It is pointless. IAF doesn't want another heavy aircraft.without puttiing them thru the tests how can you say they will fail ?
Learn what is the meaning of supply line before making sweeping statements that make no sense.Indegenous products will give us second line - LCA / AMCA
You create a second supply line by switching countries. Sukhoi is just one supply line. Dassault will be our second.also we can create 2nd line in Su34 - different engines than those used on Su30MKI
Different radars
Yeah, yeah.I am damn sure that if this Govt signs Rafale deal ignoring the EFT discount it can kiss goodbye to 2019 elections
12G..Now thats surprising to me. Wikipedia and Source provided by casper also states that maximum of 9g can pulled by a well trained pilot and that too with G suite.Can you prove your point through any reference.Yes. Well trained pilots can pull up to 12G. Astronauts pull 17G when the rocket escape system is activated. When pilots eject from aircraft, they are pulling close to 25G.
Pic of Rafale pulling 10G.
I already posted a pic of a Rafale pilot pulling 10G on Rafale. That's 1G more than the "supposed" limit.12G..Now thats surprising to me. Wikipedia and Source provided by casper also states that maximum of 9g can pulled by a well trained pilot and that too with G suite.Can you prove your point through any reference.
I still re-iterate,anything above 9G is certified waste for a fighter jet simply because pilots cannot endure it.
according to IAF both EFT and Rafale meet their requirementsIndia needs Rafale specifically. India needed Mirage-2000 specifically, and that changed to Rafale since threat perceptions have changed. Requirements change every few years.
The Chinese have become the third country in the world to have an operationally deployed AESA radar on a fighter jet. J-10 is operationally deployed with AESA. Both J-11 and J-16 will have AESA radars. We were ahead of the Chinese just two years ago, and now they beat us by a few years.
that was then in 2012EF wasn't cheaper. Why don't you try and understand that fact? Are you unable to understand simple sentences?
Expert View - French Rafale lowest bidder in India | Reuters
Where is the proof that EF is cheaper now? Go look at Germany's government audit. It is already worth 60 Billion Euros for 140 aircraft and you are complaining about $22 Billion for Rafale. Halloweene has already posted the link. And that 60 billion does not even cover day to day expenses in maintaining the aircraft. The Luftwaffe has to pay for all that out of their own pockets.
According to UK's NAO, the cost of Typhoon will be 37 Billion Pounds or $60 Billion for just 160 aircraft. And this price was from 2011.
2011:
BBC News - Raf Typhoon: 'Bad planning' added billions to jet costs
Billions added to RAF typhoon costs - Home News - UK - The Independent
If you look at the sticker price, then for 160 aircraft at $60 Billion, that's $375 Million per jet.
Rafale's latest price was revealed by the French Senate only last year. Halloweene posted the link in the previous page. The cost will be around 46 Billion Euros for 286 jets, that's $60 Billion or $209 Million per jet.
In every single tender, Typhoon was exceedingly more expensive than Rafale. Rafale's unit price was actually quite close to Gripen's costs. So that demonstrates how well the French have controlled prices while still delivering better capability.
If we buy the Typhoon, then it will cost us something like $40 or $50 billion just to buy and operate them, while Rafale will cost just half that. The Typhoon program is a major failure in terms of costs involved. And you want to be part of it.
You have to be utterly stupid to believe Typhoon is cheaper. Typhoon's costs almost rival the F-22 now. In a few years, it may even exceed the F-22 considering the Typhoon is still not fully developed.
why were they not part of the bid ?That's not how it works. Those 60+ items were not part of the initial bid. It is all part of the tender process.
The surprising part isYou all keep claiming IAF keeps changing requirements. And here you actually get surprised when requirement changes suddenly become part of Rafale also. Changing requirements obviously costs more money, and IAF is willing to pay for it, be it a foreign program or a homegrown program.
And that 60 billion does not even cover day to day expenses in maintaining the aircraft. The Luftwaffe has to pay for all that out of their own pockets.
2 members of the Costs Negotiations Committee have made notations on the file that they DO NOT AGREE to the formula used and the components of the formula used to calculate the LCC based on which rafale has emerged L1Money came into the picture only after Rafale and EF were shortlisted. If there was an objection, then only EADS can object to L1. Which other contender was shortlisted for them to object? Or did Dassault themselves object to their L1 bid? No research, nothing. Typical illiterate just braying away to glory.
That's BS. And I'm not replying to the other posts because not even a single one of them make sense.2 members of the Costs Negotiations Committee have made notations on the file that they DO NOT AGREE to the formula used and the components of the formula used to calculate the LCC based on which rafale has emerged L1
also they have said that IAF and Rafale has not provided many of the data required to arrive at the correct costs and that many variables value had to be assumed
which clearly means a deliberate HANKY PANKY from dasault and IAF
Are you some kind of auction whore? What about the 3 years in contract negotiations? What about the cost of setting up numerous contracts for production? What about the numerous JVs that are being negotiated today? HAL has already started building infrastructure for Rafale.
Who says that - you and only youSu-34 isn't cheaper. It costs over $50 million for one sortie a day. Rafale costs $90 Million and can handle 2-3 sorties a day. Rafale is cheaper in operation.
why is it pointless. IAF should be selecting aircraftSu-34 will fail on the first parameter itself. It is over 30 tonnes MTOW. It is not even eligible for tests. IAF has no requirement for Su-34. It is pointless. IAF doesn't want another heavy aircraft.
LCA is high end enoughLearn what is the meaning of supply line before making sweeping statements that make no sense.
LCA is not high end. It is far from ready. Mk2 is yet to have its first flight. AMCA is meant for post 2030. What about the period between 2015 and 2030?
Forget DasautYou create a second supply line by switching countries. Sukhoi is just one supply line. Dassault will be our second.
You need to read more before making such statements.If everything was put on paper in initial bid very clearly then there would not have been any negotiations - if IAF had put it on paper everything on paper why would there be negotiaations ?
The infrastructure can be utiised for other projects such as AMCA etc
Who says that - you and only you
Su34 can be operated on multi sorties / day and there is nothing which says otherwise
why is it pointless. IAF should be selecting aircraft
they should be selecting capabiities (aircraft based on certain capabilites )
IF the IAF knew thier business and has good record of selecting Aircrafts - they wouldnt have been found wanting during Kargil
The IAF ----ers top brass was found wanting during KArgil was found hoding Mirages 2000 who couldnt bomb at those heights until and unless they were modified with the help of Israel ?
Why were the IAF top brass not ready for that challenge or that scenario?
Why were strike aircraft Miurage 2000 not ready for such strike missions ?
LCA is high end enough
for the cost of 1 rafale we can fly 4 LCAs
or 3 SUper Su30MKI
or 3 Super SU34MKI
Or 1 Super Su30MI + 1 Super Su34MKi + 2 LCA
From 2015 to 2030 we have Su30MKI + LCA + Mirage 2000 (surely mirage upgarde has just begun they can serve 10-12 years after upgrade )
ANd if we back LCAmk2 and AMCA with full might from Today and hand them over to Navy to bring it online Then we can have LCA mk2 by 2018 and AMCA by 2024
If given to IAF they will Kill the projects
Forget Dasaut
Make INDIA - Home Grown products our primary supply line and Russia our Second Supply line
Rafale FCS limitaitions are +9 -3.5 g.I already posted a pic of a Rafale pilot pulling 10G on Rafale. That's 1G more than the "supposed" limit.
yesYou need to read more before making such statements.
Even though i find your entire post irrelevant, i find your Infra statement most funny.
Can you please elaborate how you plan to use infrastructure meant for Rafale for AMCA?
sorry to say, you dont know anything about infrastructure.yes
what do you understand by INFRA
infra means -
setting up production plant & lines
very small line but what it involves ?
it involves -
Marking the land for the plant
Levelling the land fillinf the land
allowing it to setle by watering it
laying foundations
RCC carpeting
Plant structure
Cladding etc
laying Air compressor lines (for powering pneumatic tools ) power lines etc
ordering lift / stairways platforms etc
building of ramps apron
ordering of general purpose VMC CNC etc drills pneumatic tools machines will be done
these are basics which takes time also before signing of the contract only these or such activities can happen, as the necessary special machine which are needed for rafale will be ordered only after signing the contract
right now only general purpose machinary will be ordered
now if the Rafale contract doesnt go thru then these infra can be easily used for other AC such as AMCA
AMCA too will require plant & lines
It too will require work stations
it too will require pneumatic tools
So what do you think INFRA really is for productionsorry to say, you dont know anything about infrastructure.
What you propose by saying we should scrap Rafale and go for ET is nothing less than suicidal for IAF.
Let me put it this way-
After signing, The first Rafale will roll off from production line in 2017. Now, if we ASSUME ET is cheaper and better than Rafale,
and scrap Rafale deal, the first ET would arrive by 2019-20. So the nearly entire fleet modernization plan will be stalled till 2020, as even Tejas Mk2 will arrive in 2019-20 and AMCA will arrive around 2025 or later than that.
So, IAF's current plan to retire MiG27 by 2020 will be pushed to 2025, and to retire MiG21 by 2022 will be pushed to 2027. This is pretty darn suicidal.
Thread starter | Similar threads | Forum | Replies | Date |
---|---|---|---|---|
Rafale in Croatian Air Force | Military Aviation | 10 | ||
W | Rafale and F 18 super hornet shortlisted by Indian navy | Indian Navy | 21 | |
Indian Navy more likely to select F 18 than rafales | Indian Navy | 164 | ||
Greek Rafale vs Turkish EF 2000 Who has the Technolocal Edge | Military Aviation | 5 |