Know Your 'Rafale'

[Willy2]

It doesn't matter what you or me think about Saab, what counts is, that they got all the benefits they wanted, while we ended up with business jet production parts. The simple fact is, that their defence aviation industry, will benefit far more from their fighter deal.

U think it's beneficial because u literally take SAAB's words as "holy promise"....Which is not

SAAB-Brazil deal have nothing to do with our discussion ....but as u try to use it as benchmark for MMRCA deal , u can go through past posts here , 600+ pages not full of BS ....TOT is never as simple a sit look..companies don't literally just giveup their technologies ...so for many of us promise of technology transfer is not as lucrative as it for U.

 

[Sancho]

Isn't Kaveri deal more worth than the ToT of Gripen? Whatever Gripen can offer is already with India. Why should India pay more for it?

No it isn't, because it's limited to a single project and a single Indian industrial agency (DRDO), while the MMRCA deal or the Gripen deal for Brazil, benefited the whole defence aviation industry.
Not to mention that we had the Kaveri deal before, when we searched for an engine for LCA MK2 and IAF rejected it, because they prefer DRDO to fix the engine, as suppose to buy and integrate French off the shelf parts. So if we wanted that deal, we could have gotten it anyway, but key was the critical techs of Rafale and the French partners, to improve our industry.

 

[Armand2REP]

Not necessarily, because the Qatari deal seems to be an option deal, which should had been fixed in the initial deal.
Indias deal for 36 had no option clause, therfore any new order needs to be negotiated again. The only cost reductions, will be customisation and infrastructure costs, that don't need to be added. Flyaway + spares + weapons will still put it around 5 billion and if licence production cost will be included, it gets costlier of course.

That is untrue, India got a 36+18 option. You also already paid for two bases that supports twice as many aircraft as ordered.

 

[Sancho]

That is untrue, India got a 36+18 option. You also already paid for two bases that supports twice as many aircraft as ordered.

=>

Excl Parrikar interview: Ready for any eventuality with Pak; Rafale an export bonanza
MoneyControl • Oct 03, 2016

...Q: But there is no optional clause as part of the Rafael agreement.

A: In this there is no optional clause.

Q: So, if we want more then we cannot get them at the same price?

A: No, this problem is we have not decided but the question you have asked me if you want more, no one stops us from going for more, but this decision is Prime Minister's decision in lieu of urgency of the requirement to equip Air Force with two squadrons that is 36, it ends there. Our quest for two engine additionality to the Air Force will be decided based on the merit of various issues in which Rafael may also figure.

Q: But you would not have liked to put in an optional clause that you could have gotten the same agreement pretty much if you chose to exercise the possibilities of bringing in more?

A: When you sign with government to government in later stage if something has to be decided you can always extent the agreements, there are no big problems in that. But since we have not taken any decision on this and this decision was restricted to 36, we have completed the negotiation and purchase for 36 now...

http://www.moneycontrol.com/news/tr...alitypak-rafaleexport-bonanza-959919.html/amp


Yes we made the stupid decision to pay for infrastructure for 2 more Rafale squads, without really planing to buy them in the near term, because the government already took plans for the SE MMRCA tender at the same time, when they were fixing the 36 Rafale deal. So either we buy 2 more squads at some point, or that money for the infrastructure was a loss.

 

[Sancho]

U think it's beneficial because u literally take SAAB's words as "holy promise"....

As I said before, it doesn't matter which fighter we are talking about, the issue is that we only got a deal for flyaway fighters with no credible ToT share and therefore no benefits for the improvement of our defence industry. So either we should have gotten a deal like Brazil, or we should had fixed the MMRCA deal.

 

[Kshithij]

No it isn't, because it's limited to a single project and a single Indian industrial agency (DRDO), while the MMRCA deal or the Gripen deal for Brazil, benefited the whole defence aviation industry.
Not to mention that we had the Kaveri deal before, when we searched for an engine for LCA MK2 and IAF rejected it, because they prefer DRDO to fix the engine, as suppose to buy and integrate French off the shelf parts. So if we wanted that deal, we could have gotten it anyway, but key was the critical techs of Rafale and the French partners, to improve our industry.

I am speaking of Kaveri consultancy, not french parts assembly. Snecma has agreed to give consultancy to help India fine tune Kaveri.

I still don't understand why are you recommending Gripen. Why not recommend Su30 instead? SAAB has NOTHING TO OFFER as India has all technology that SAAB has.

 

[Kshithij]

Not necessarily, because the Qatari deal seems to be an option deal, which should had been fixed in the initial deal.
Indias deal for 36 had no option clause, therfore any new order needs to be negotiated again. The only cost reductions, will be customisation and infrastructure costs, that don't need to be added. Flyaway + spares + weapons will still put it around 5 billion and if licence production cost will be included, it gets costlier of course.

Where did you get your numbers of 5 billion come from?

 

[Armand2REP]

=>


http://www.moneycontrol.com/news/tr...alitypak-rafaleexport-bonanza-959919.html/amp


Yes we made the stupid decision to pay for infrastructure for 2 more Rafale squads, without really planing to buy them in the near term, because the government already took plans for the SE MMRCA tender at the same time, when they were fixing the 36 Rafale deal. So either we buy 2 more squads at some point, or that money for the infrastructure was a loss.

Any idiot that spells it Rafael has no clue.

India also has an option for 18 more aircraft which can be exercised in the future.

http://www.deccanchronicle.com/nation/current-affairs/110217/aero-india-2017-all-eyes-on-rafale.html

You paid for the infrastructure because IAF demands more.

 

[Willy2]

As I said before, it doesn't matter which fighter we are talking about, the issue is that we only got a deal for flyaway fighters with no credible ToT share and therefore no benefits for the improvement of our defence industry. So either we should have gotten a deal like Brazil, or we should had fixed the MMRCA deal.

Because thats the deal..it's not like Dessault rob us after making other promises ...

The point u are making already discussed here ...and already countered....what u ignore all the way through 5/6 page that the fate of our indigenous engine and future of all our nextgen fighter depend on this deal...

U are just spamming pages after pages with "lost chance of TOT" ...everyone give u suitable answer why Kaveri deal is more important that screwdriver TOT..but u cry foul

Either u are a obsessed guy or fangirl of ET ...and want them to win the deal

or ,want IAF to trap yet another stupid decade long bid-battle and watch our squadron no. to gone down below 20.

MMRCA when begun at 2007 it have different objectives and mission ...after a decade we induct more that 100 MKI , solve many crucial technologies ( these we can't get from TOT) ...and our Tejas now in production .

Are't u in fight with Mod @Kunal Biswas that why we need more tejas type jet and less MMRCA aircraft ...as in our doctrine medium aircraft have far less role than heavy MRCA and small interceptor...u should check that battle there and realize that this deal carry completely different purpose than old MMRCA...and pl..it's matter what deal and what aircraft we are discussing..everything is different

 

[Sancho]

Any idiot that spells it Rafael has no clue.

It's up to you if you believe the Indian defence minister, that negotiated the Rafale contract.

I am speaking of Kaveri consultancy, not french parts assembly. Snecma has agreed to give consultancy to help India fine tune Kaveri.

Then you haven't understood what the Kaveri team up means, because they plan to use the M88 ECO core in the Kaveri engine, to deliver at least 90kN thrust. It's

I still don't understand why are you recommending Gripen. Why not recommend Su30 instead? SAAB has NOTHING TO OFFER as India has all technology that SAAB has.

Because IAF don't want more heavy class fighters (see Air Chief Raha's statement in the Su 30 thread).
Because the only MMRCAs GoI are considering in a large order for IAF, are F16 or Gripen and there should be no doubt that F16s are a no go.
Because Su 30s won't get us the industrial advantages any MMRCAS deal with a licence production deal would get us.
Because we need alternative weapons and techs to the Indo/Russian we already have with 270 MKIs on order, to effectively fight China.
I already showed what Saab can offer in the SE thread, so anything on that there please.

Where did you get your numbers of 5 billion come from?

The flyaway cost of 36 Rafales for us was 3.42 billion Euros and that doesn't change.
Same goes for the weapon pack for 36 more fighters, which adds 710 million Euros.
That alone means 4.12 billion Euros / 4.8 billion Dollars!
Spares, training and the performance based logistic contract will be added as well, but that's a part that needs to be re-negotiated and where some parts can be cheaper.
The only part of the first deal, that might be left out completely, are the customization costs (1.7 billion Euros).

The 5 billion dollar therefore are pretty conservative even if we are talking about 36 more produced in France, licence production or assembly in India requires ToT, which increase the costs again.

 

[Sancho]

Because thats the deal..it's not like Dessault rob us after making other promises ...

That's exactly what they did, because they knew about the clauses in the RFP since 2007, when they replied to the tender and they knew about HAL beeing lead integrator since the tender started. So going back from their word to comply to the RFP, ended in a huge loss for India!

You might not like it, but that's the reality, that as shown UPA and NDA DMs, as well as IAF agree on, just as DM Seetharaman confirmed the lack of ToT in the deal for 36.

And since you earlier claimed that I support Gripen and now EF, it's evident that you have no understanding about the issue anyway, so let's leave it at that.

 

[Kay]

From an old article

https://www.google.co.in/amp/s/bharatkarnad.com/2017/03/20/why-parrikar-failed-in-defence/amp/
The entire MMRCA category is a hoax - there is a concept of Hi-Lo mix, but high-medium-low is not necessary.

"He started out promisingly. The MMRCA race was decided by the time Manmohan Singh demitted office. It only remained for the incoming BJP government to sign on the dotted line of a contract for the Rafale aircraft that would enrich France, the French economy, the French aerospace sector, and specifically, Dassault Avions, without doing much for IAF’s fighting ability. He did the unexpected, showing the greatest reluctance to sign a contract, Parrikar pondered more economical options in lieu of the Rafale. He came to the obvious conclusion that the entire ‘medium’ category in combat aircraft is bit of a hoax perpetrated by IAF. This may be seen in his exploring a Hi-lo solution revolving around the Su-30 MKI license-produced by HAL in Nasik as the high end fighting platform, and the indigenous Tejas as the low end bulk combat component. His publicly observing that the price of a single Rafale can fetch the IAF three Su-30s, arguably the best multi-role fighter plane currently flying barring the F-22 Raptor, and his refuting the IAF’s charge propagated through the media that the Sukhois suffered from heavy downtime, by talking of its serviceability rate as comparable to any other aircraft in the fleet, suggested that here was a defence minister who was prepared to take Air HQrs head-on."

 

[Project Dharma]

From an old article

https://www.google.co.in/amp/s/bharatkarnad.com/2017/03/20/why-parrikar-failed-in-defence/amp/
The entire MMRCA category is a hoax - there is a concept of Hi-Lo mix, but high-medium-low is not necessary.

"He started out promisingly. The MMRCA race was decided by the time Manmohan Singh demitted office. It only remained for the incoming BJP government to sign on the dotted line of a contract for the Rafale aircraft that would enrich France, the French economy, the French aerospace sector, and specifically, Dassault Avions, without doing much for IAF’s fighting ability. He did the unexpected, showing the greatest reluctance to sign a contract, Parrikar pondered more economical options in lieu of the Rafale. He came to the obvious conclusion that the entire ‘medium’ category in combat aircraft is bit of a hoax perpetrated by IAF. This may be seen in his exploring a Hi-lo solution revolving around the Su-30 MKI license-produced by HAL in Nasik as the high end fighting platform, and the indigenous Tejas as the low end bulk combat component. His publicly observing that the price of a single Rafale can fetch the IAF three Su-30s, arguably the best multi-role fighter plane currently flying barring the F-22 Raptor, and his refuting the IAF’s charge propagated through the media that the Sukhois suffered from heavy downtime, by talking of its serviceability rate as comparable to any other aircraft in the fleet, suggested that here was a defence minister who was prepared to take Air HQrs head-on."

Wow, that's a pretty depressing article overall.

 

[Kay]

Yeah...well we have a new DM at helm now...so far she is doing well...

Wow, that's a pretty depressing article overall.

 

[Project Dharma]

Yeah...well we have a new DM at helm now...so far she is doing well...

I meant Modi buying the Rafale, this paragraph specifically.

Then prime minister Narendra Modi’s Paris trip happened in April 2015 and, voila! just like that, there was the announcement of a buy of 36 Rafales — a ridiculous figure because it meant the IAF could do very little with it in terms of strengthening its force posture or warfighting capability. They were too few in number to operationally matter, and too costly to risk in hostilities, but may prove useful to Vayu Bhavan as a wedge to wangle the resources to get an additional 100-200 Rafales in the future. This decision marked Parrikar’s slide. He could not in good conscience act gung-ho about Rafale, equally he couldn’t be seen,or even politically afford, to oppose the PM.

This is a sidebar– but why Modi made this decision remains a mystery, considering the Rafale makes little military, political, or economic sense. If, as is being alleged, President Francois Hollande lubricated the Rafale deal by promising Indian nuclear weapons designers access to the French inertial confinement fusion (ICF) chamber in Bordeaux

 

[mayfair]

the price of a single Rafale can fetch the IAF three Su-30s, arguably the best multi-role fighter plane currently flying barring the F-22 Raptor

Let us examine this from Defence minister Parrikar's statement

Giving an idea of Rafale's price, the Defence Minister, in an interview to All India Radio, said one fighter may cost India in the range of Rs 700 to 750 crore while a Su-30 cost is about Rs 475 crore, Compare to these planes India's Tejas is in the range of Rs 200 to 250 crore only. "

At the most the price paid for ONE Rafale will fetch ONE Su-30 MKI and ONE Tejas each.

Of course it must be added that the money we use for Tejas will be used in our economy and this is true for MKI to an extent as well.

 

[sthf]

You are asking the wrong question, because it's not important how much ToT you own, but how much you are willing to share!

I don't think I am. You can't provide TOT for things whose IP you don't own. Rest depends on your negotiation prowess and how much are you willing to pay for the said TOT. Mind you, please do confuse TOT with license assembly.

India too can offer "100% TOT" for Tejas to any nation but you and I both know that it is nothing but hogwash.

Most of the Rafale techs are owned by French companies and still their ToT offer in Brazil was far lower than what Saab offered, because they were not willing to share as much. We see the same with US ToT as well.

Once again that is a Brazil specific offer. It's none of my business what French and Americans did or didn't do in Brazil.

Saab did not only ToT to assemble or maintain the fighter, but also included Brazil into the design stage of the twin seat version. And as shown in the SE MMRCA thread, Saab owns plenty of state of the art technology in terms of radar, EW, data links...,

Would you care to enlighten me on Brazil's contribution in the said designing process? Rafale deal includes maintainence and guaranteed availability of 75%. Let's take a look at the state of the art technologies.

1. Radar - Edit: AESA for Gripen E belongs to Selex. Its GaN radar is not even in prototype stage.
2. EW - Yes but does not even comes close to SPECTRA.
3. Datalinks - Yes, but last I checked IAF was trying to standardize ODL.

None of it benefits India in any way.

They are offering Brazil naval vessels in a similar deal as with the Gripen now too.

So purely in a comparison of the industrial benfits of the Brazilian deal and our deal, it's clear that we hardly gained anything.

How come? Snecma is helping in ironing out the kinks in the Kaveri programme. This alone trumps any benefit Brazil is getting out of its deal.

If you consider what we could have gained in the larger MMRCA deal, it gets even worse.

Please elaborate.

Edit: Above all why should IAF gets to buy an aircraft they rejected purely on technical grounds? Either their requirements changed overnight or they are trying to be too clever by half.

 

[Kshithij]

Then you haven't understood what the Kaveri team up means, because they plan to use the M88 ECO core in the Kaveri engine, to deliver at least 90kN thrust. It's

Kaveri is not using French parts. Who gave you this hoax news? Why assume that Kaveri can't fly as Indian engine? Do France have monopoly in engine technology? Are all others just bunch of retards who have genetic defects and hence unable to make the same thing despite having access to the French, US, Russian engines which can be extensively studied and most parts reverse engineered. Only some aspects are to be mastered. Why would you keep insisting that India can never fly Kaveri engine on its own and will always need foreign ToT forever? Do you have proper reasoning to offer?

Because IAF don't want more heavy class fighters (see Air Chief Raha's statement in the Su 30 thread).
Because the only MMRCAs GoI are considering in a large order for IAF, are F16 or Gripen and there should be no doubt that F16s are a no go.
Because Su 30s won't get us the industrial advantages any MMRCAS deal with a licence production deal would get us.
Because we need alternative weapons and techs to the Indo/Russian we already have with 270 MKIs on order, to effectively fight China.
I already showed what Saab can offer in the SE thread, so anything on that there please.

What is the difference between heavy class and medium class that it is worth paying twice the price?

Why won't Su30 not offer the same industry as MMRCA? Both are planes that can move long distances. It is probably more advantageous to have a heavy plane than a medium one as more payload can be carried. In this case, since heavy plane is much cheaper than medium, it makes it a definite case for heavy class fighter

The flyaway cost of 36 Rafales for us was 3.42 billion Euros and that doesn't change.
Same goes for the weapon pack for 36 more fighters, which adds 710 million Euros.
That alone means 4.12 billion Euros / 4.8 billion Dollars!
Spares, training and the performance based logistic contract will be added as well, but that's a part that needs to be re-negotiated and where some parts can be cheaper.
The only part of the first deal, that might be left out completely, are the customization costs (1.7 billion Euros).

The 5 billion dollar therefore are pretty conservative even if we are talking about 36 more produced in France, licence production or assembly in India requires ToT, which increase the costs again.

If Qatar can buy 12 planes for 1.1 billion Euros, so can India just pay 3.4 billion Euros for 36 more jets. There is no reason to say India will pay more than Qatar.

Let us examine this from Defence minister Parrikar's statement



At the most the price paid for ONE Rafale will fetch ONE Su-30 MKI and ONE Tejas each.

Of course it must be added that the money we use for Tejas will be used in our economy and this is true for MKI to an extent as well.

Su30 has 75% parts Indian made and the value is 55% Indian. Some items like Radar and critical parts of engine is Russian. So, the forex cost is significantly reduced.

That's exactly what they did, because they knew about the clauses in the RFP since 2007, when they replied to the tender and they knew about HAL beeing lead integrator since the tender started. So going back from their word to comply to the RFP, ended in a huge loss for India!

You might not like it, but that's the reality, that as shown UPA and NDA DMs, as well as IAF agree on, just as DM Seetharaman confirmed the lack of ToT in the deal for 36.

And since you earlier claimed that I support Gripen and now EF, it's evident that you have no understanding about the issue anyway, so let's leave it at that.

If Rafale was bought arbitrarily, then it is definitely a big crime. But, the question comes about 50% offset that France is offering. Why are you not considering this? Please give your details on this.

Your support for Gripen is the most retarded ones. It is better to jump in a well than to do business with SAAB. SAAB consistently lies. SAAB will speak big things but has nothing to offer. It is better to blacklist SAAB so that they will shut their bloody mouths and let others live in peace

 

[Wisemarko]

Because Dassault didn't complied to the RFP rules:
http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/threads/know-your-rafale.32861/page-631#post-1381120



Or compare to what other deals Dassault lost, like in Brazil and you will understand what rip off the Indian Rafale deal was.
They got the same number of fighters, at lower costs, with an assembly line and ToT.

Read my post first: Doesn't matter what MMRCA was and why it wasn't signed. India cannot buy 126 EF/ F-18 or Rafale or even F-16I with weapons, ToT and maintenance for $12 billion. Period. India wasn't planning to pay $30-40 billion that such a deal would have cost - that too for a 4.5 generation airplane at the best. So stop whining about what went wrong with MMRCA.

Dassault offered the same deal to Brazil as they did to Egypt, Qatar and India. If Brazil wanted Gripen that's their choice, three others chose Rafale- India even got some discount. How is that rip off? There is no comparison between Gripen and Rafale in terms of cost per plane and performance. Read up on Swiss AF analysis on both.

Now stop these nonsense arguments...

 

[smestarz]

The MMRCA deal was fixed and thats how Rafale was declared L1.
but now its thing of the past

As I said before, it doesn't matter which fighter we are talking about, the issue is that we only got a deal for flyaway fighters with no credible ToT share and therefore no benefits for the improvement of our defence industry. So either we should have gotten a deal like Brazil, or we should had fixed the MMRCA deal.