More Mig-29's and Mirage 2000's???

[p2prada]

Re: Second Hand Mirage 2000's and MIG-29 Fulcrums as stopgap ?

It makes sense to buy second hand weapons only if there is an existing model of the same in the inventory.

Used F-16s, Leopards, Frigates are a waste of time.

For the IAF, only Mirage-2000 makes sense and the ones who want to sell it will not sell it for cheap. If M-2000 upgrades came at $42Million a piece, I don't want to imagine how much an entire aircraft will cost.

 

[p2prada]

Re: Second Hand Mirage 2000's and MIG-29 Fulcrums as stopgap ?

Did you know my friend france before they closed down MIRAGE 2000 production they offered the entire production line including technology to india and India rejected....... do not know why they did reject it......

The Mirage was part of the MRCA tender. The French were willing to sell the assembly outside the tender if IAF goes for it. GoI wouldn't have allowed it.

The IAF was willing to buy Mirage-2000s since 1999. GoI allowed it in 2004. France was sure of winning it. Then the tender was withdrawn and France realized they lost their last chance. They made an attempt to sell the M-2000s outside the tender for a huge price. No sane person would buy that.

If we buy Rafales in a FMS type buy then there is no chance MoF would allow it because the price would be so high it would be better if we start a second PAKFA program instead.

The Americans and Israelis sell to India in single vendor situations at very high prices, say twice what it actually costs. This includes Phalcon, C-17s etc. C-17s cost nearly twice what USAF pays and 1.5 times what Australia paid. The French are the same too and the Russians, not yet, but are following suit.

 

[sob]

Re: Second Hand Mirage 2000's and MIG-29 Fulcrums as stopgap ?

p2p, I guess this is the price to pay for an opaque and cumbersome system, where rules change at a drop of the hat and not taking a decision is most of the times the preferred route.

 

[p2prada]

Re: Second Hand Mirage 2000's and MIG-29 Fulcrums as stopgap ?

p2p, I guess this is the price to pay for an opaque and cumbersome system, where rules change at a drop of the hat and not taking a decision is most of the times the preferred route.

I think it has less to do with us and more to do with them. If the seller jacks up prices, there is nothing we can do. Imagine buying Phalcons for $500Million or $600Million for what is actually a $300Million system. Since there is no competing vendor, we have to buy at the price quoted. The Israelis have openly said they sell to India at higher prices than normal. The Indians have openly said they buy at higher prices because there are no competing vendors and the stuff Israelis give is required.

The American FMS is a rip off. The contractor gives the price and there is no negotiation. The price quoted is the final price, take it or leave it. C-17s and C-130s were bought that way.

The French have always sold at bloated prices since the 80s. A hammer that costs $45 is sold at $1200.

The Russians have been way better, selling the MKI at $25-30Million a piece in the late 90s and then increasing the prices to $45million in 2007, mostly because of inflation. They sold it at the price MKI actually costs, the T-90 too. It is only in single vendor situations that they increase prices, but then the price increase is acceptable most of the times. It is not like 2 or 3 times of the actual costs that the west sells at.

That's why all the major deals being released nowadays are tenders where all the vendors need to compete. Even the Navy Chief recently said(I think last year) that they don't want to get into single vendor situations anymore and will avoid it whenever possible.

 

[Sunder singh]

Re: Second Hand Mirage 2000's and MIG-29 Fulcrums as stopgap ?

we can take them if they give us free