India opens bids in $10.4-bn combat plane tender.

[sukhish]

You asked a question. I gave you two key engineering ratios and you call it marketing pitch! These are numbers: go and get them, crunch them and then talk.
The Eurojet partners are recognized worldwide as leaders in the indicated disciplines. Rolls-Royce, with GE and P&W, belongs to the triad of first-tier engine makers mastering the whole propulsion domain, from highest thrust fighter engines to advanced turbofan for civil airliners, in every thrust class. SNECMA belongs to the second tier I am afraid. These are facts not marketing! You may not like them, but that´s a different matter!




The UAE does not agree with your analysis. Also the French recognize that the engine is under powered for top end threat scenarios. The debate between the French and UAE is not about the necessity of the extra thrust, but on who has to pay to squeeze it out. And I tell you, that extra thrust--if it is ever extracted--will come at the expense of the engine life and duration.

snecma is no comparison to rolls royce. rolls royce is a freaking GEM. what the hell is snecma. GOI has been negotiating with snecma for kaveri for last two to three years and they are yet to settle down, the reason is french wants the MMRCA deal to be able to to give engine know how. french are greedy to there core. it is only because of Britain refusal that EURO is not selling weapons to china, otherwise french are more than willing to sell even there mother
to china//pakistan. I just don't trust the french.

 

[sukhish]

it's a good looking plane, may we should have one in our aero musems, no wonder nobody has ever bought this.09[8'/

 

[arundo]

No reference and lazy to go and look for it, I guess. I have anyhow an amazing memory and I recall pretty well the narrative I described succinctly.
As a matter of fact the Hellenic Air Force has a strong bias towards US fighters as testified by a Force with some 130 F-16, some 90 A-7, more than 50 F-4 Phantom and F-5, F-104, F-86 in the past. They also fly some Mirage 2000. So the Typhoon victory in Greece was a breakthrough in US procurement pattern.

It seems to me you find hard to swallow the fact that Typhoon can be selected for technical-operational reasons. Of course also political, economical, industrial considerations enter the complex selection process matrix.

Not at all. There's no pill to swallow, as your claims lack of conclusive evidence. I do not prefer the one or the other (and do not work for the one or the other ), but so far Rafale seems to be the more mature and field proven concept and aircraft.
You will find many claims by many different people or sources. Depending on which aircraft they like or which of both companies people work for, you will read 100% convincing argumentations for the one or for the other. Some say the Rafale has a technical-operational edge, some say it's the Typhoon. Each side will tend to highlight some points which make appear its aircraft superior while sweeping other, less favorable points under the carpet. According to the aircraft you prefer, you will be able to built your own reality. So far for the claims and theory.
What speaks for Rafale are hard facts. Rafale has an impressive record in terms of technical-operational evaluations and in terms of practice in the field as well (vs. Typhoon). What speaks for Typhoon are only claims of EADS and some people / sources, but facts have not spoken the same language so far. I miss technical evaluations putting Typhoon ahead. It could be hard to swallow for some seeing the Rafale steal the show in real operations and perform better in both older and recent technical-operational evaluations. I think this is much harder to swallow than one-sided postings or claims which could be directly extracted from corporate official argumentation guidelines (in both cases). Especially the Swiss A2A conclusion could be sobering.



In my opinion, you are not telling us the whole story and you failed to give a credible explanation why Rafale performed better in so many technical evaluations and recently in CH. Brazil South Korea, NL, Singapore, CH – that's a lot.
According to your statements, it should be the other way araound: Typhoon should not only have outperformed Rafale in every single meeting (ATLC, Solenzara), but in every single technical evaluation by far as well. This is not the case and I wonder, why the Swiss came to the conclusion, that the Rafale is superior even in A2A missions and by far the better MRCA aircraft. This was only 2 years ago and of course the Typhoon tested was not the Tranche 1... In NL the Typhoon Tranche 3 came close to the Rafale F3, but not entirely.


In general there is almost no real difference between Rafale and Typhoon when it comes to speed performance, de facto. Furthermore, it is not excluded that SNECMA will develop a new, more powerful version of the M88 (M88-3). However, the Emiratis were the only prospect asking for modifications, but are now convinced that the engines perform well. The reasons why contract was not signed are mainly price-related.


Concerning the radar, range is important for sure, but not the only criteria and we do not know if there is a big or just a slight difference.. In practice, the difference doesn't seem to be that big, as Rafale outperformed Typhoon in at least 2 meetings and also was the first to shoot in bvr (ATLC). According to most sources Rafale has lower RCS and outstanding passive detection capabilities which can easily make up the inferior radar range.


BTW, I think that EF will get the contract, but not for technical-operational reasons. Europe as able to offer more possibilities to India than France.

 

[vanadium]

Touche-if the UAE didn't agree with my analysis-why were their reports in mid-2011 that they had decided against pursuing a higher thrust M-88 variant. If the French felt that the engine was underpowered, then they would have included a thrust upgrade for the improved F-3 variant coming out by 2013. But they haven't-either they have no money or they don't think its urgent for their needs.

There is no money for what looks like a rather expensive a risky enterprise. The penalty on the LCC due to shorter life and more maintenance would also raise many question marks to the wisdom of the enterprise. You would of course also run out of any spare capacity to grow. So you keep what you have.

 

[arundo]

snecma is no comparison to rolls royce. rolls royce is a freaking GEM. what the hell is snecma. GOI has been negotiating with snecma for kaveri for last two to three years and they are yet to settle down, the reason is french wants the MMRCA deal to be able to to give engine know how. french are greedy to there core. it is only because of Britain refusal that EURO is not selling weapons to china, otherwise french are more than willing to sell even there mother
to china//pakistan. I just don't trust the french.

SNECMA is known to belong to the leading engine manufacturers with a long tradition in engineering, whether you like it or not. The success of the Mirage series (much more successful than the Tornados) is reference enough. You will hardly find a serious reference saying that this is not true or that SNECMA does not belong to the leaders.
You're a little too biased.

 

[vanadium]

Not at all. There's no pill to swallow, as your claims lack of conclusive evidence. I do not prefer the one or the other (and do not work for the one or the other ), but so far Rafale seems to be the more mature and field proven concept and aircraft.
You will find many claims by many different people or sources. Depending on which aircraft they like or which of both companies people work for, you will read 100% convincing argumentations for the one or for the other. Some say the Rafale has a technical-operational edge, some say it's the Typhoon. Each side will tend to highlight some points which make appear its aircraft superior while sweeping other, less favorable points under the carpet. According to the aircraft you prefer, you will be able to built your own reality. So far for the claims and theory.
What speaks for Rafale are hard facts. Rafale has an impressive record in terms of technical-operational evaluations and in terms of practice in the field as well (vs. Typhoon). What speaks for Typhoon are only claims of EADS and some people / sources, but facts have not spoken the same language so far. I miss technical evaluations putting Typhoon ahead. It could be hard to swallow for some seeing the Rafale steal the show in real operations and perform better in both older and recent technical-operational evaluations. I think this is much harder to swallow than one-sided postings or claims which could be directly extracted from corporate official argumentation guidelines (in both cases). Especially the Swiss A2A conclusion could be sobering.



In my opinion, you are not telling us the whole story and you failed to give a credible explanation why Rafale performed better in so many technical evaluations and recently in CH. Brazil South Korea, NL, Singapore, CH – that's a lot.
According to your statements, it should be the other way araound: Typhoon should not only have outperformed Rafale in every single meeting (ATLC, Solenzara), but in every single technical evaluation by far as well. This is not the case and I wonder, why the Swiss came to the conclusion, that the Rafale is superior even in A2A missions and by far the better MRCA aircraft. This was only 2 years ago and of course the Typhoon tested was not the Tranche 1... In NL the Typhoon Tranche 3 came close to the Rafale F3, but not entirely.


In general there is almost no real difference between Rafale and Typhoon when it comes to speed performance, de facto. Furthermore, it is not excluded that SNECMA will develop a new, more powerful version of the M88 (M88-3). However, the Emiratis were the only prospect asking for modifications, but are now convinced that the engines perform well. The reasons why contract was not signed are mainly price-related.


Concerning the radar, range is important for sure, but not the only criteria and we do not know if there is a big or just a slight difference.. In practice, the difference doesn't seem to be that big, as Rafale outperformed Typhoon in at least 2 meetings and also was the first to shoot in bvr (ATLC). According to most sources Rafale has lower RCS and outstanding passive detection capabilities which can easily make up the inferior radar range.


BTW, I think that EF will get the contract, but not for technical-operational reasons. Europe as able to offer more possibilities to India than France.

I gave quite a few explanations but I am not an insider so I have to use my engineering and operational judgement. Assessing complex systems in complex scenarios is a difficult task (I do not envy the IAF eval team that so far has conducted a brilliant assessment which should become a world benchmark), especially when weapon systems are pretty close in overall performance.

I have no idea who will win this very close competition. A couple of things anyhow emerge from the highly competent and thorough technical - operational evaluation carried out by the IAF. First, Typhoon and Rafale are the best multirole fighters on the market when a high threat scenario is taken in due consideration. And no political pressure is exercised by the Super Powers or indeed, if exercised, is politely discarded and binned. So another kudo for India in conducting an exemplary assessment. If I compare it with the recent conclusions of the FX competition in Japan, you understand what I mean. The same comment may apply for previous competitions in the Asia - Pacific region. Think of the Australian sudden selection of the JSF a few years ago...So again compliments to India for conducting a serious competition and not a charade!
Second point emerged so far: for the IAF both fighters satisfy their requirements. One will be better for certain things while the other will excel in other areas, but in broad terms both will fit the future order of battle of the Air Force.
So now the ball is with the financial guys and then the politician will have to wrap it all up, taking into considerations the geopolitical context and aspects of this nature.

 

[arundo]

You asked a question. I gave you two key engineering ratios and you call it marketing pitch! These are numbers: go and get them, crunch them and then talk.
The Eurojet partners are recognized worldwide as leaders in the indicated disciplines. Rolls-Royce, with GE and P&W, belongs to the triad of first-tier engine makers mastering the whole propulsion domain, from highest thrust fighter engines to advanced turbofan for civil airliners, in every thrust class. SNECMA belongs to the second tier I am afraid. These are facts not marketing! You may not like them, but that´s a different matter!

The UAE does not agree with your analysis. Also the French recognize that the engine is under powered for top end threat scenarios. The debate between the French and UAE is not about the necessity of the extra thrust, but on who has to pay to squeeze it out. And I tell you, that extra thrust--if it is ever extracted--will come at the expense of the engine life and duration.

I just can repeat it: your posts read like a EADS sales argumentary. You will find enough sources putting SNECMA to the leading manufacturers. Claims are plentiful and I am not surprised that EADS will claim sthg else and can find references for each claim I make.
In the segment of military engines SNECMA can compete with Rolls Royce and easily with MTU or Fiat.

 

[Bhadra]

I gave quite a few explanations but I am not an insider so I have to use my engineering and operational judgement. Assessing complex systems in complex scenarios is a difficult task (I do not envy the IAF eval team that so far has conducted a brilliant assessment which should become a world benchmark), especially when weapon systems are pretty close in overall performance.

I have no idea who will win this very close competition. A couple of things anyhow emerge from the highly competent and thorough technical - operational evaluation carried out by the IAF. First, Typhoon and Rafale are the best multirole fighters on the market when a high threat scenario is taken in due consideration. And no political pressure is exercised by the Super Powers or indeed, if exercised, is politely discarded and binned. So another kudo for India in conducting an exemplary assessment. If I compare it with the recent conclusions of the FX competition in Japan, you understand what I mean. The same comment may apply for previous competitions in the Asia - Pacific region. Think of the Australian sudden selection of the JSF a few years ago...So again compliments to India for conducting a serious competition and not a charade!
Second point emerged so far: for the IAF both fighters satisfy their requirements. One will be better for certain things while the other will excel in other areas, but in broad terms both will fit the future order of battle of the Air Force.
So now the ball is with the financial guys and then the politician will have to wrap it all up, taking into considerations the geopolitical context and aspects of this nature.

Very Very well said. The financial judgement means who is paying how much to decision makers and political decision encompassed political needs of the country in terms of what the other side is willing to offer in strategic of crucial terms for the deal. If the decision is financial the French would win (Sonia and Rahul) and in Strategic terms the French win.

So the French win over erstwhile East India Company. Do the French have it in them!! Are they willing to win and produce their pieces in India !!

 

[vanadium]

SNECMA is known to belong to the leading engine manufacturers with a long tradition in engineering, whether you like it or not. The success of the Mirage series (much more successful than the Tornados) is reference enough. You will hardly find a serious reference saying that this is not true or that SNECMA does not belong to the leaders.
You're a little too biased.

Let's be serious for once!

The Olympus of engine makers is made up of three powerhouses: Rolls-Royce, General Electric and Pratt & Whitney. Full stop.
SNECMA is a few notches below, in the second-tier manufacturers.

The long tradition of SNECMA engineering starts in 1946 when they started working (with hundreds of German engineers) around the BMW 003 jet engine developed by the Bavarian company for the Luftwaffe! The ATAR engine serie so successful in the Mirage is basically the fruit of the BMW genius and skills!

 

[p2prada]

In terms of accomplishment, Snecma has not achieved as much as Rolls Royce let alone the other giants in aero engines. Snecma has the technology to compete though. Once the M88-4 comes into production we will know Snecma has arrived in 5th gen engine technology. Kaveri II will also help achieve that benchmark.

Saturn is in the race only because of the 117 which is 5th gen. EJ-200 is 5th gen. P&W's F-119 and F-135 are 5th gen.

M88-3 is 4th gen while the next variants are going to be 5th gen. P&W and Saturn are the closest to 6th gen tech and Type-30 may very well be the first 6th gen engine unless P&W comes out with a bomb. GE has the tech, but no real accomplishment because of competition form P&W.

5th and 6th gen are really Russian designations. You can say the F-135 is near 6th gen because of the T/W ratio.

 

[bhramos]

Why Bangalore should look forward to 2012 - Bangalore - DNA

 

[arundo]

SNECMA belongs to the second tier I am afraid. These are facts not marketing! You may not like them, but that´s a different matter!

I hardly miss confirmation of that by independent sources. SNECMA has always been an established and recongnized manufacturer of leading engines for decades, as the success (in terms of export as well in operational terms) of the Mirage is a good indicator. The only thing is, that SNECMA is a smaller manufacturer than RR and both American companies. I couldn't find any source confirming that the EJ200 is the benchmark.

The UAE does not agree with your analysis. Also the French recognize that the engine is under powered for top end threat scenarios. The debate between the French and UAE is not about the necessity of the extra thrust, but on who has to pay to squeeze it out. And I tell you, that extra thrust--if it is ever extracted--will come at the expense of the engine life and duration.

This is wrong. I couldn't find any statement that the French recognize that the engine is underpowered. The M-88 was designed in close coordination with the French airforce and there never was any request for a stronger engine by French airforce.
On the contrary, the French were surprised by the initial request of the Emiratis. They were suprised, that the Emiratis could not consider enough what is absolutely enough for the French airforce. The debate WAS on who has to pay the development costs, but it is a matter of a fact, that now they do not consider necessary a stronger engine. Gérard Longuet, French Defense Minister, told Liberation in November, that "l'armée de l'air des Emirats n'insistait plus pour que le chasseur soit équipé de réacteurs plus puissants, assurant que les Emiratis avaient vu à l'usage que ceux dont il est équipé ne l'empêchaient pas de remplir ses missions de reconnaissance, de combat aérien ou d'appui au sol" (Emiratis do not insist on a stronger engine anymore, as they have seen that Rafale performs well all missions..), an information which was confirmed by Dassault CEO Charles Edelstenne in another Newspaper and by a couple of other sources.
The major problem with the UAE are the costs and in particular what is going to happen to the 63 Mirage 2000-9 (estimated unit value ~ 20 million USD). The Emiratis want the French to find a solution. Apparently, Dassault, which's defense division is the smaller one compared to the domestic division, is not willing to cut prices or to make too many concessions.

Of course, I agree with you that this is a very close competition an that each of the two competitors has its strenghts. I am convinced, that the winner, which one of the copetitors it is, will not be determined on a technical basis, as both have already managed this important step earlier.

Finally, even experts disagree and you will find expert statements in favor of the one or the other aircraft, engine, avionics and electronics.
Collins, former RAF Pilot had the opportunity to pilot the Rafale and reported in "Flight":
"The classic definitions of aircraft combat roles really do not do justice to this aircraft; the Rafale is Europe's force-multiplying "war-fighter" par excellence. It is simply the best and most complete combat aircraft that I have ever flown. Its operational deployments speak for themselves. If I had to go into combat, on any mission, against anyone, I would, without question, choose the Rafale."
FLIGHT TEST: Dassault Rafale - Rampant Rafale

Of course some people will say that this is just Dassault lobbying, but there is no evidence and then you have to suspect each statement.

 

[vanadium]

I hardly miss confirmation of that by independent sources. SNECMA has always been an established and recongnized manufacturer of leading engines for decades, as the success (in terms of export as well in operational terms) of the Mirage is a good indicator. The only thing is, that SNECMA is a smaller manufacturer than RR and both American companies. I couldn't find any source confirming that the EJ200 is the benchmark.

This is wrong. I couldn't find any statement that the French recognize that the engine is underpowered. The M-88 was designed in close coordination with the French airforce and there never was any request for a stronger engine by French airforce.
On the contrary, the French were surprised by the initial request of the Emiratis. They were suprised, that the Emiratis could not consider enough what is absolutely enough for the French airforce. The debate WAS on who has to pay the development costs, but it is a matter of a fact, that now they do not consider necessary a stronger engine. Gérard Longuet, French Defense Minister, told Liberation in November, that "l'armée de l'air des Emirats n'insistait plus pour que le chasseur soit équipé de réacteurs plus puissants, assurant que les Emiratis avaient vu à l'usage que ceux dont il est équipé ne l'empêchaient pas de remplir ses missions de reconnaissance, de combat aérien ou d'appui au sol" (Emiratis do not insist on a stronger engine anymore, as they have seen that Rafale performs well all missions..), an information which was confirmed by Dassault CEO Charles Edelstenne in another Newspaper and by a couple of other sources.
The major problem with the UAE are the costs and in particular what is going to happen to the 63 Mirage 2000-9 (estimated unit value ~ 20 million USD). The Emiratis want the French to find a solution. Apparently, Dassault, which's defense division is the smaller one compared to the domestic division, is not willing to cut prices or to make too many concessions.

Of course, I agree with you that this is a very close competition an that each of the two competitors has its strenghts. I am convinced, that the winner, which one of the copetitors it is, will not be determined on a technical basis, as both have already managed this important step earlier.

Finally, even experts disagree and you will find expert statements in favor of the one or the other aircraft, engine, avionics and electronics.
Collins, former RAF Pilot had the opportunity to pilot the Rafale and reported in "Flight":
"The classic definitions of aircraft combat roles really do not do justice to this aircraft; the Rafale is Europe's force-multiplying "war-fighter" par excellence. It is simply the best and most complete combat aircraft that I have ever flown. Its operational deployments speak for themselves. If I had to go into combat, on any mission, against anyone, I would, without question, choose the Rafale."
FLIGHT TEST: Dassault Rafale - Rampant Rafale

Of course some people will say that this is just Dassault lobbying, but there is no evidence and then you have to suspect each statement.

Keep on googling and chase quotations around the web and looking for confirmations from some so-called neutral sources.

With reference to Mr. Collins can you please tell us what other modern combat aircraft the former RAF pilot has flown beside that one ride in the Rafale courtesy of the Sales Dept. of Dassault Aviation?
My guess is that you will find out he has not flown much beyond that marketing ride...

 

[arundo]

A few comments...

* First of all, it is an official evaluation which led to the final decision in the NL. It seems that Dutch have done extrapolations from the existing on the future performances of the fighters, based on information they had from the manufacturers. As we know, the JSF won and this aircraft didn't exist either. The Rafale F3 and even the F2 version didn't exist and it is the same for EF Tranche 3 and 2.

The Swiss, finally, did the same by chosing the Saab Gripen NG, which only exists on paper.
Downplaying the evaluations where Rafale performed much better while overrating Saudi deal (where no technical evaluation was released and which was rigged in advance), the Austrian case (where Rafale was not in the competition) or the Greek one (not really confirmed and probably even canceled) doesn't make sense.



* In Austria, Dassault decided to withdraw the Mirage from the competition. Mirage was never eliminated. Official Austrian source (Defense Ministry): "žDie US-Regierung ließ bereits im November 2001 wissen, sie werde nicht mit der F-18 ins "Rennen" gehen und Dassault Aviation teilte im darauf folgenden Dezember mit, kein Angebot legen zu können. Bis 23. Jänner 2002 trafen drei Angebote (Eurofighter Jagdflugzeug GmbH, Saab AB, Regierungsoffert der USA für F-16) fristgerecht beim BMLV ein. "ž

Österreichs Bundesheer - Abfangjäger Nachbeschaffung - Die Chronologie(According to the quite EF-friendly Austrian webpage Airpower.at a few years ago, Dassault refused to play the role of a "pro forma contender")

* I couldn't find any source reporting that the Greek decision was based on technical considerations or that Typhoon won the technical-operational evaluation in Greece (on the contrary, sources reporting about evaluations in CH, Brazil, South Korea, Singapore, NL are easy to find..).

* If Rafale performed better in the majority of technical-operational evaluations in countries with different requirements, the conclusion of (btw non proved and not at all confirmed by the Swiss) EF air superiority seems to be obsolete. Explaining it by a specific profile of requirements in one single case can be plausible, but in every single case it is not credible. It just means, that Rafale is more suited to today's requirements.



* The reasons why France left the European fighter project are sufficiently documented.
First, they disagreed on the concept of the future fighter and French didn't accept any compromise, second, there were disagreements on the specifications of the future engine as well, third, SNECMA and Rolls Royce disagreed on many points and did not really want to co-operate, as they were competitors, fourth, French, as a European leader in aircraft technology, wanted leadership or at least a bigger stake in the project. BTW the last point also was the case between the other 4 countries and one of the reasons for delays and cost explosions.

You can read the details from page 104 ff: http://www.chear.defense.gouv.fr/fr/pdef/histoire/6_moteurs_lasserre.pdf


Many more sources confirm those informations.

* France would not sell their mother more than UK or others: UK sold the EF to a dictatorship with unknown future like Saudi Arabia, the German do the same with Leopard, Austria has sold weapons to Iran etc.

 

[anoop_mig25]

* The reasons why France left the European fighter project are sufficiently documented.
First, they disagreed on the concept of the future fighter and French didn't accept any compromise, second, there were disagreements on the specifications of the future engine as well, third, SNECMA and Rolls Royce disagreed on many points and did not really want to co-operate, as they were competitors, fourth, French, as a European leader in aircraft technology, wanted leadership or at least a bigger stake in the project. BTW the last point also was the case between the other 4 countries and one of the reasons for delays and cost explosions.

You can read the details from page 104 ff: http://www.chear.defense.gouv.fr/fr/pdef/histoire/6_moteurs_lasserre.pdf


Many more sources confirm those informations.

* France would not sell their mother more than UK or others: UK sold the EF to a dictatorship with unknown future like Saudi Arabia, the German do the same with Leopard, Austria has sold weapons to Iran etc.

well can u post what in details of which point did france and other disagreed. is an humble request

 

[p2prada]

All these evaluations boils down to one thing. Rafale is expensive as compared to others, no matter how good an aircraft it is. Both Dassault and EADS are lucky in India as both aircraft are similarly priced. Anywhere else and it wouldn't be the same as is being proved in other competitions.

There are two polls in the forum about MRCA. One says,

1) Who do you think should Win?

The other says,

2)Which aircraft will win the MMRCA competition?

For 1st I went with Rafale and for the 2nd I went with EF-2000. We should not forget that getting to the top does not mean it is a better aircraft. The aircraft aren't competing based on tech specs. The evaluation is meant to determine whether the aircraft conforms to requirements. Rafale should be able to beat the F-22 in tech specs, but that does not mean it is better than the F-22 in A2A.

The Swiss evaluation which put the Rafale on top for A2A may have taken their Rules of Engagement into picture. If you are looking at their perspective, the Rafale, in the F4 version, provides as much and a bit more capability as the Bars PESA does. The EF-2000 will exceed the Bars PESA. So, it depends on what the Swiss wanted. IAF wants the MRCA aircraft to track a 3m2 target at 130Km while both competitors provided ~200Km(Rafale) and ~300Km(EF) for the same. So, the EF advantage of a bigger radar is nullified as IAF's requirement is smaller. This would mean both aircraft would get similar points for this parameter. Considering the Rafale is technically more advanced, it is obvious the tech points will be greater.

Both aircraft are good. But considering Rafale is the Jack of all trades, like the MKI, we should go for it.

 

[asianobserve]

Both aircraft are good. But considering Rafale is the Jack of all trades, like the MKI, we should go for it.

Why not go solely for the MKI instead? It's more capable than the Rafale, already indigenised, full TOT, cheaper, and as it already share a lot of commonality with PAKFA, the IAF can easily transition to the latter. Save on practically everything, money, training requirements, logistics, and more importantly, India can build indigenous accessories for this aircraft... (of course this matter is already passe)

 

[Yawn]

There is no money for what looks like a rather expensive a risky enterprise. The penalty on the LCC due to shorter life and more maintenance would also raise many question marks to the wisdom of the enterprise. You would of course also run out of any spare capacity to grow. So you keep what you have.

So the French don't have any money to spend on upgunning the engines (which could be easily be shared with prospective partners like the UAE) but have enough to splurge on new sensors, weapons integration and everything else. There's something seriously wrong with that logic. About shorter life/higher maintenance costs, there is hardly any confirmation that it is significantly behind or ahead of the EJ-2000.

 

[Yawn]

snecma is no comparison to rolls royce. rolls royce is a freaking GEM. what the hell is snecma. GOI has been negotiating with snecma for kaveri for last two to three years and they are yet to settle down, the reason is french wants the MMRCA deal to be able to to give engine know how. french are greedy to there core. it is only because of Britain refusal that EURO is not selling weapons to china, otherwise french are more than willing to sell even there mother
to china//pakistan. I just don't trust the french.

Can you name one manufacturer which isn't greedy when it comes to arms sales-we negotiated the Hawk deal for ages-so that implies that BAE is greedy? Britain will also jump into the boat to sell arms to China once the flood gates open-they were deeply involved prior to Tiannammen. If you want to buy from a country which won't sell to the Chicoms, you only have the US and Japan (which doesn't really sell) to consider.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Rafale : Analysis of the indian tender
Knowckers.org, Dec 30
​

[...]
One must note the specificity of the tender Indian: for reasons of domestic politics, the fight against corruption, it is sequenced in two phases clearly separated, the first purely technical and the second about the global offer. This decoupling ,also criticized by some Indian experts, implied that only the choice of the IAF has prevailed. To demonstrate the involvement of non-policy at this stage, the United States were informed of their misfortune by their military attaché in New Delhi, himself informed by the Indian military.

Omnirole fighter of 4th generation, Rafale's versatility is its major asset and perfectly fulfills the operational needs of the Indian Air Force, given the vastness of the Indian airspace. Able to fill all the roles of a fighter aircraft in one mission, it can ensure the safety of the national airspace and conduct missions outside. A trump card that could prove decisive when the withdrawal of Western forces from Afghanistan will allow Pakistan to recover the strategic depth it dreams in front of its big rival. On the other hand, planned from its conception to operate aboard aircraft carriers, it will allow India to take a qualitative leap forward in securing its maritime areas, which have become vital to the supply of raw materials to a economy bordering on double-digit growth. Technologically successful, it can carry a full range of advanced weapons, with also strategic nuclear strike thanxs to the F3 standard. Finally, its upgrade capabilities are unmatched to meet the challenge of reducing the technology gap with potential adversaries .Moreover, the Rafale has almost always been technically and operationally ranked first in the previous tender, but it was not yet "battle proven", a label now earned by its commitments in Afghanistan and especially Libya, operation also more publicized. On the other hand, cooperation with Dassault is old: with the purchase of Mirage 2000 in the 80's [1], India was the first export customer of Mirage 2000 and the modernization of this fleet was finalized between the two governments. The life of an aircraft like the Rafale is 40 years, New Delhi will have the same upgrade security than with the Mirage, which could be less guaranteed with the Eurofighter, the final EADS business plan presaging a medium-term withdrawal of the combat aircraft.

India at the Crossroads

Finally, bilateral relations between France and India are excellent: the strategic partnership concluded in 1998 was reiterated during the visit of Alain Juppé in October[2]. France has consistently supported India's aspirations to a seat on the UN Security council and to a better participation in international forums like G8, G20 ...

Given these strengths, the denigration of the Rafale, at a crucial time when occurs the global trade negotiation, is truly amazing [she's talking of the leftist critics in France]. Talking about its past export failure provides sterile and unjustified criticism. The image of a France with a Gaullist anachronistic pride producing technology so sophisticated that nobody wants, and preferably within a national framework to be sure it's even more expensive, is totally wrong. France has not built Rafale in a European framework because its operational requirements, particularly for its aircraft carrier, were different. The Eurofighter is a money pit and has been referred bythe UK Court of Auditors with a 75% increase of its unit cost. It is currently more expensive than the Rafale! For countries like Korea and Singapore, France could not fight against the military protection that guaranteed them the power of the United States. The Anglo-Saxon influence has been pregnant for Saudi Arabia which has replaced its Tornado with Eurofighter. Let's Hope that the Indians will understand themselves important political benefit at the image of the power of their country that would symbolize the Rafale.

Full article:
http://www.knowckers.org/2011/12/le-...offre-en-inde/