Know Your 'Rafale'

Discussion in 'Indian Air Force' started by A.V., Mar 26, 2009.

  1. Kay

    Kay Regular Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2014
    Messages:
    759
    Likes Received:
    705
    Location:
    Delhi
    Here is Manu Pubby' article

    https://theprint.in/2017/12/01/rafale-deal-govt-passed-option-buy-e59-mln-unit-cheaper-eurofighter/
    [​IMG]
    "In fairness, the Eurofighter Typhoon offer was for the larger order of 126 jets involving better economies of scale. The price for 36 flyaway jets was not discussed as India did not engage in detailed talks with the consortium."

    It seems GOI and IAF favored Rafale for many reasons - they were familiar and happy with French aircraft. GOI wanted negotiations to end, support for Kaveri and as per process Rafale was the lowest bidder.
    I have doubts as Eurofighter's last minute bid was process compliant - but not sure if that. If it was compliant, there had been the possibility of another round of bidding - but India was probably already talking to France on offsets then.
    I never understood how Reliance came into picture replacing HAL though.
     
    aditya10r and prateikf like this.
  2. Kay

    Kay Regular Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2014
    Messages:
    759
    Likes Received:
    705
    Location:
    Delhi
  3. mayfair

    mayfair Elite Member Elite Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2010
    Messages:
    4,188
    Likes Received:
    6,116
    Location:
    India
    MoD rules under DPP forbid from simultaneously engaging with L1 and L2. Rafale was declared L1 in the MRCA contest. Of course, should these rules be amended? Yes, because it's to our benefit to get the best deal out of it.

    But then, it will open a whole new can of worms, because the party that won the right to negotiate the contract will cry foul. A limit could be included such that is the difference is less than 1-2% of the project cost, both maybe engaged..

    As Subramanyam Swamy pointed out, MRCA had turned into a mess and had to be scrapped.

    I find it quite interesting that all these hit jobs on Rafale started appearing soon after there were reports that GoI was scrapping the SEF procurement programme.

    Arms lobbies are in full flow.
     
    Last edited: Dec 4, 2017
    aditya10r, Willy2, Screambowl and 5 others like this.
  4. WolfPack86

    WolfPack86 Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2015
    Messages:
    3,660
    Likes Received:
    2,803
    Euro Fighter Typhoon is the biggest head ache recently many Euro Fighter Typhoon have been crashed. So there is no questioning purchase of Euro Fighter Typhoon. Rafale is the best option for Govt of India. Only thing that Govt involved ambani so it is big problem for BJP. It is better to bring in Tata or Mahindra.
     
    Kay and prateikf like this.
  5. mayfair

    mayfair Elite Member Elite Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2010
    Messages:
    4,188
    Likes Received:
    6,116
    Location:
    India
    TATA are partnered with Boeing and also with Lockheed for the proposed F-16 as the SEF tie up. The partners were chosen by the foreign firms themselves.

    The issue to me appears clear as crystal- the deal was agreed in 2015, signed in 2016. Nary a peep from the "doubters", though all the data was available. Why? Because the SEF programme was likely.

    Once it became obvious that SEF was unlikely to materialise anytime soon, GoI decided to go for Tejas and probably a follow up order for Rafale, that all the lackeys were activated.

    Everyone has gotten involved in the mix- Amreekis, Russians, French and the Euros...
     
  6. Sancho

    Sancho Regular Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2011
    Messages:
    171
    Likes Received:
    131
    The fighter was, Dassault wasn't, since they rejected RFP rules, that they initially accepted, when they replied to the RFP. They tried to change things after they were selected as the winner, while they didn't complained about HAL or the performance guarantee and liquidated damages clauses of the RFP before.

    "Simultaneously" is the key here, because nobody says the government should had done that.
    But if Dassault is found not to comply to the RFP, their offer logically must be rejected and the L2 should be asked for an offer. I haven't seen any source or official so far, that can prove or state the section of the DPP, that prevents the MoD from talking to the L2, if the L1 is rejected.

    Also, since the PM went ahead and made a separate deal for 36 fighters, the L2 rule doesn't apply anymore and he should had asked both shortlisted candidates for a new offer, in a changed tender.

    That's not possible, if it's Dassault themselves that are responsible for the deadlock, by not following the Indian rules. So there was no issue if we had rejected them, the question is why didn't we?

    Let's not talk about him please, he even tried to get the NDA government to court for the Rafale deal, for absolutely bogus reasons, that only showed that he had no clue of the fighter.

    That had not much to do with the SE tender, but with the Congress being in election mode. They point was to show crony capitalism of the NDA government and they mainly aimed at cost issues and benefits for Reliance, while the real issue is, that there is that Dassault was not compliant and that the PM made a bad deal for 90 fighters below IAF requirements, without licence production, ToT and as we now know, without following MoD procedures. So ignore Congress and you still have plenty reasons to question the deal (not the fighter).
     
    Kay likes this.
  7. Kay

    Kay Regular Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2014
    Messages:
    759
    Likes Received:
    705
    Location:
    Delhi
    I think what Modi did was the prudent thing to do but difficult to justify.
    Dassault did not want to tie up with HAL saying HAL's quality control was inadequate and that their reputation might be tarnished. To me it seems more a ruse to avoid technology sharing.
    Consequently rules were made for 49 % foreign ownership of indian defence companies. Dassault chose Reliance as partner instead of HAL. Reliance did not break any rules but rules were tailor-made for private companies like Reliance, Tatas (partnering with Boeing/Lockheed Martin) and Adanis Aerospace (partnering with SAAB).
    The foreign companies got to choose the Indian partner and hence they could avoid HAL and possibly TOT.
    I think Modi understood that ToT would not be received, hence he cut the deal to minimum 36 necessary to revive Kaveri, cater to dwindling numbers and start private aerospace industry.
    It is difficult to state that Dassault deviated from RFP by refusing to partner with HAL. The RFP stated about an Indian partner - not HAL - AFAIK.
    HAL was the implied partner - but not stated in RFP. Dassault used that loophole without violating RFP.
    This is why Anthony did not sign the deal and kept delaying.
     
  8. mayfair

    mayfair Elite Member Elite Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2010
    Messages:
    4,188
    Likes Received:
    6,116
    Location:
    India
    Do read this excellent article by Nitin Gokhale to understand the full thing.

    https://swarajyamag.com/defence/eve...t-the-rafale-deal-but-didnt-know-where-to-ask

    That is exactly what the likes of Manu Pubby are claiming with Typhoon claims. But as I said above, this policy can be amended if necessary.

    Read this carefully

    The suggestion came from Parrikar, to scrap MRCA and negotiate directly with French on G2G basis

    Read above. The decision came from MoD.

     
    Kay likes this.
  9. Sancho

    Sancho Regular Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2011
    Messages:
    171
    Likes Received:
    131
    It's not India's concern what any foreign OEM wants, we haven to set the rules and get them either complying to them, or reject them. These clauses were implemented into the DPP, to protect the country, from OEMs that doesn't provide proper support or ToT, to have leverage and ask for penalties. Giving Dassault a free check on that was a major mistake and any foreign OEM will point to that as am example in future too.

    That's not correct, the rules of the tender left it up to the OEM to team up with any Indian industry partner, to divert production parts. So there is nothing wrong with choosing Reliance (except that they have no experience, were in deep debth and have a track record of being unsuccessful), but the final assembly was meant to be at HAL. Both UPA and NDA governments, just as IAF insisted on that, but Dassault tried to move more work to Reliance and that's where the issue started, while it ended in the deadlock, about not accepting guarantees and penalty clauses of the RFP.

    http://www.thehindu.com/news/nation...fecting-defence-priorities/article4385882.ece

    https://www.livefistdefence.com/2013/02/hope-to-sign-m-mrca-deal-by-year-end.html

    http://nitinagokhale.blogspot.de/2017/11/?m=1

    So the non compliance was more than evident and still we awarded Dassault with a billion dollar contract, that didn't got IAF or the Indian industry any of the benefits, the MMRCA was about.
     
  10. Sancho

    Sancho Regular Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2011
    Messages:
    171
    Likes Received:
    131
    He was trying to justify the costs and the deal as such, but had no answer when Saurabh Joshi pressed him on Twitter in the last few days, on the fact that the EF was shortlisted too and why it wasn't considered. While he confirmed, that Parrikar pointed towards Dassaults non compliance as the main reasons for the deadlock.

    If necessary, but where was the necessity? IAF wanted 126 fighters, not just 36 and the deal was done without MoD clearing it before the announcement and 1 of the 2 shortlisted. These are exactly the issues that makes the deal questionable and to which DM Sitharaman had no answers either. She confirmed that no ToT was part of the deal and that MoD was involved only after the deal was announced and the cost negotiations started.

    That's what Gokhale claims, but Ajay Shukla and other reports pointed out, that Parrikar had no clue of the deal, he neither had details about it and contradicted himself several times, while mainly pointing to it as the PMs deal:

    http://ajaishukla.blogspot.de/2017/11/rafael-deal-faces-turbulent-weather.html?m=0

    And as said before, the L2 issue was limited to the MMRCA tender alone, but had no importance for a separate flyaway order of 36 fighters. So you can justify not considering EF only for that tender, but not why it wasn't considered in the PMs deal.
     
  11. Kay

    Kay Regular Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2014
    Messages:
    759
    Likes Received:
    705
    Location:
    Delhi
    Why was the Kaveri engine partnership delinked from original MMRCA during UPA? What ToT can you talk about when you are giving up engine technology. Thankfully Modi got that back in the revised deal. No other ToT is worth the salt compared to engine technology.

    Also, Dassault took benefit of loopholes in the deal. Why were there loopholes? Why wasn't it properly analysed. Dragging feet and inordinate delays raised costs of the deal for the tax payers - all a price of sheer incompetence. You can't select a lowest bidder after 10 years of bidding and then ask them to prove that they are indeed the lowest bidder. That raises doubts on the entire process.

    After 10 years of indecision , now the question is why Midi did not keep tendering for eternity. Good thing he didn't. He made the best of a bad situation and taxpayers have to be thankful that they don't have to pay even more for fourth generation planes.
     
  12. IndiaRising

    IndiaRising Regular Member

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2014
    Messages:
    472
    Likes Received:
    1,143
    it is well known that ajai shukla is doing dalaali for eurofighter. his reports are questionable at best
     
  13. Wisemarko

    Wisemarko Regular Member

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2016
    Messages:
    43
    Likes Received:
    42
    What a ridiculous discussion! Rafale deal is similar to (one can say even better than) what Dassault offered to Egypt, Brazil and Qatar. Brazil did not go for it but read a detailed article on the offer and pricing on defenseindustrydaily.com.

    People who question this deal, I hope also question every G2G deals made with US through FMS route. Because in essence that is what Rafale deal is- a G2G deal for 1. a preferred product 2. for best available price for THAT item. 3. Decent offsets 4. Quick acquisition.

    Modi's deal was not about whether to get L1 or L2 from MMRCA tender but how to get a small fleet of Rafales as soon as possible and get some bargains in return. He definitely succeeded in achieving that.

    India could never afford 126 Rafales: it was a daydream sold to everyone by vested interests. Nor it could get any meaningful ToT- because no one gives away such trade secrets. 126 Rafales for $18 billion is the most laughable aspect. How could it ever be possible to get 126 Rafale with ToT and local manufacturing for that price?!

    Each Rafale with weapons and a 10 year maintenance costs almost $250 million. ($6 billion for 24 Rafales for Egypt for example) Adding 10% for local manufacturing would increase that by few more millions per plane. Some of these were fixed initial costs but there are many recurring costs that would not make this airplane cheap. Just see how expensive it is going to be to manage 36.

    Therefore, 126 plane deal was always a $30-35 billion plus affair that no one in MoD would have cleared for another decade.

    Eurofighter option is also not cheaper. Look at how much much EF cost to Kuwait, Saudis and Qatar! Kuwait signed a deal worth more than $9bn when it purchased 28 Typhoon jets! That is around $320 a plane. Not to mention, Leonardo is a part of EF consortium: isn't that a parent of a blacklisted company?!

    The point is that importing any defense items is a big loss to a taxpayers but singling out this deal as a bad deal is pretty silly. Hopefully, private players will benefit from this and develop into global defense players.
     
    Last edited: Dec 5, 2017 at 8:18 AM
  14. mayfair

    mayfair Elite Member Elite Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2010
    Messages:
    4,188
    Likes Received:
    6,116
    Location:
    India
    I wish I could respond to @Sancho here, but then I came across pearls of wisdom articulated by the peerless and irrepressible @bennedose at one of his regular haunts

    But I will say this...The Ajay Shukla article makes so many twists and turns that I wonder if he set out trying to make a jalebi from the onset or did he fashion himself one after running himself around in circles.

    Sample this

    Who are these aerospace industry executives? Any quotes, any names? Any comparable fighter deals where such have been included in the fly-away price at the onset?

    Then he claims that IAF is paying more than French Airforce.

    Then in another twist of jalebi he says

    So you see actually IAF is paying less than FrAF, but still we are paying more!!!

    Let's not get into subsidising the French Aerospace R&D. That would be like paying high prices for iPhone to subsidise Apple's R&D....oh wait...

    Finally, the magnum opus twist that finally tops off the jalebi. Comparison with other customers who are NOT France

    So bugger me!! IAF is paying 138.9 million Euros for a "fully loaded" fighter compared to Euro 160 million by France, Eur 217 million by Egypt and Euro 262 million by Qatar.

    As per Shukla it is a travesty that we are paying far less.. How dare Modi!!

    There is goes. I am too lazy to calculate how much effort I put in responding.. Must be 400% or thereabouts.
     
  15. hit&run

    hit&run Elite Member Elite Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2009
    Messages:
    6,173
    Likes Received:
    6,772
    He will add worms into anything that make sense to Modi government. His game is bigger than taking Dallali from foreign vendors but to serve the Cabal that is subservient to Sonia Gandhi.
     
    Akak likes this.
  16. Sancho

    Sancho Regular Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2011
    Messages:
    171
    Likes Received:
    131
    Kaveri engine had no relation to the MMRCA tender, the team up with Snecma was offered when we searched for a suitable engine for LCA MK2 and was rejected by IAF, which wanted DRDO to complete the engine development on their own, because they feared just using a foreign core won't get India much. Wrt to the PM, we should not forget that the Kaveri development got scrapped under his term.
    When you compare the ToT, we have fixing Kaveri now, as suppose to building RBE 2, FSO, M88 and SPECTRA under the initial MMRCA deal. Not to mention that apart from DRDO, only DRAL gets most of the offset work today, while under MMRCA, we would have seen wide spread benefits for Indian industry (DRDO, HAL, BEL, Samtel...).
    We might get Kaveri fixed, which is good, but it needs to be seen if the required thrust of 95kN for LCA MK2, or 110+ kN for AMCA can be achieved. But other than that, we have lost a huge chance to get an important push for our industrial capability!

    No they didn't, they outright rejected the terms of the tender and the RFP it was based on. They even agreed to HAL as the lead integrator later and the work share later, which also shows that they just made up issues for their own benefits, but till the end, they rejected the guarantee clauses in the RFP, which is something India can't or shouldn't support.

    No, one question is, why did he made such a bad deal, instead of doing what he did in the LUH tender?

    He cancelled it in favour for a G2G deal with Russia for Ka226, which however includes the same number of helicopters required by IA and IAF, includes as licence production in India and ToT.
    So if he cancelled the MMRCA, went to France to make a G2G deal for 126 x Rafales, with a licence production and ToT, only Congress would question him, but everyone else would understand, that we got what we wanted. That sadly didn't happend and he came back with just 36 fighters and no other benefits at all.
    That's why it's valid to question the outcome, the procedures, or possible alternatives.
     
  17. Tactical Frog

    Tactical Frog Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2016
    Messages:
    850
    Likes Received:
    713
    That would have been a strategic blunder to dump Rafale for Typhoon. Rafale road map is known, French cherished bird will get major technology boost with standard F4 in 2025. While Germans already think of buying F35s to replace their old Typhoons instead of upgrading them (or buying Rafale, so much for french friendship).
     
  18. Sancho

    Sancho Regular Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2011
    Messages:
    171
    Likes Received:
    131
    It's not about dumping Rafale, but an OEM that is not following Indian rules and getting the numbers and industrial advantage we always wanted.
    Hehe, French forumers keep pointing to the F4, even though it's not planned yet and 8 years away, because nobody wants to talk about the meager upgrades the F3R brings.
    And no, Germany is not planing to replace EFs with F35, but if at all Tornados. The EF is likely to be replaced by the Airbus stealth fighter, just as Rafale.
     
  19. srutayus

    srutayus New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2014
    Messages:
    6
    Likes Received:
    18
    Location:
    USA
    The 7.1 billion quoted for the price of the Rafale aircraft in that article includes the price of the weapons, India specific enhancements, base infrastructure etc. The price of the aircraft itself is about half of that amount and comes down to 100 million or less.
    The Eurofighter cost is the price of the aircraft as can be seen by reading their offer letter. At no time was the weapons and logistics packages negotiated with Eurofighter as they were the more expensive of the 2 downselects.
    This is not surprising as the Eurofighter has consistently been significantly more expensive than the Rafale in all procurements thus far.
    In short the article is not a honest presentation of the facts and this can be easily verified by the looking at the constituent parts of the deal that are easily accessed in the public domain.
     
    Last edited: Dec 6, 2017 at 12:23 AM
    Hemu Vikram Aditya likes this.
  20. Sancho

    Sancho Regular Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2011
    Messages:
    171
    Likes Received:
    131
    Comparing costs is always difficult, since it can include different things. The EF offer as the the print correctly explained was for the 126 x fighter MMRCA tender, which only included 18 in flyaway condition but also 108 under licence production with ToT.
    The Rafale deal was for lower numbers, which always increases the unit cost and was completely in flyaway condition, so even if you take out the weapons, it should had been higher.
    The customization cost is a hyped issue, since it includes upgrades of the Rafale, that would not had been needed for the EF. HMS, Litening LDP and possibly even the costs to get IRST for the Rafale, could had been saved with the EF.
    You are right that the EF in general is more costly than the Rafale, but an important point on the EF offer back than was, that the EF partners were able to reduce the price, by diverting their T3B (last batch of EF orders for the partner countries) orders to India. All 4 EF partners had cancelled T3B orders and would have to pay penalties to the industry, unless they can sell them off to other nations. So it was possible to offer a lower price, to not pay the large penalties.

    Either way, the main point of the article was the question, why the offer was not at least considered for the separate deal for 36 fighters?
     

Share This Page