Comparative detail of cost factor of the 6 MMRCA contenders

anoop_mig25

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2009
Messages
5,804
Likes
3,151
Country flag
True .. but lowest cost among the fighters IAF prefers/shortlisted. Not the whole bunch.

When tender started the rule was lowest cost will be chosen but IAF has already made clear that apart from low cost additional benefits will also be counted. Establishment wants geopolitcal advantage. So the question of low cost not out of the picture but given secondary importance.
"but lowest cost among the fighters IAF prefers/shortlisted" if we go by this condition then american f-18 might win because i think it is lowest among french RAFAEL and TYPHOON (the shortlisted ones by iaf)
 

neo29

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2009
Messages
1,284
Likes
30
http://www.stratpost.com/how-many-engines-for-the-mmrca

" The IAF has also said over the past year, that no aircraft would get extra credit for exceeding the SQRs. From all accounts, the IAF has been comparing the aircraft with the parameters laid down in the SQRs and not with each other. "
The IAF has said over the "past year" .... Lot of developments after that including EADS chief meeting with IAF officials and establishment on whether to spend more millions of dollars on trials when IAF is not considering brownie points on fighters and just low costs . They assured the EADS chief that it will be considered. Will try to get the link if possible. The report you posted is based on scenario over a year back.
 

luckyy

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2009
Messages
568
Likes
3
"but lowest cost among the fighters IAF prefers/shortlisted" if we go by this condition then american f-18 might win because i think it is lowest among french RAFAEL and TYPHOON (the shortlisted ones by iaf)
isn't f-18 failed the RoP requirements to have atleast 1:1 thrust to weight ration.....f-18 also pul at 7.5G where as the RoP requirements was for 9G......
 

luckyy

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2009
Messages
568
Likes
3
The IAF has said over the "past year" .... Lot of developments after that including EADS chief meeting with IAF officials and establishment on whether to spend more millions of dollars on trials when IAF is not considering brownie points on fighters and just low costs . They assured the EADS chief that it will be considered. Will try to get the link if possible. The report you posted is based on scenario over a year back.
every contender has spend money on trails......



latest news

"The MiG-35 is not leaving the tender, and I have no official information about this," said UAC First Vice-President Mikhail Pogosyan.

"The envelopes with the commercial proposals should be studied by the tender commission only this week," the source said.

http://theasiandefence.blogspot.com/...e-fighter.html
 
Last edited:

Yusuf

GUARDIAN
Super Mod
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
24,324
Likes
11,757
Country flag
I think all the contender have hired various media groups to come out with these reports every other day. Just to keep things hot and may be hope that some official somewhere might get sucked in and come out with the truth.
 

luckyy

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2009
Messages
568
Likes
3
all six manufacturers will be called and told which three of them have been shortlisted for the final round. The commercial bids of these three manufacturers will then be opened and negotiations conducted to decide on the eventual price.

"The cost will be a factor. Politics will also be a factor," the source said, adding: "We have not graded the aircraft but only stated the extent to which they are compliant with the parameters we laid down."
http://www.asianage.com/india/iaf-combat-jet-selection-will-be-political-decision-521
 
Last edited:

rakesh

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2009
Messages
115
Likes
1
A Big Fat MMRCA Update



Sick of hearsay and rumours? Well, here's some stuff that's confirmed true, authoritative, new, and potentially explosive for contenders in the Medium Multirole Combat Aircraft (MMRCA) competition. Let me just start by saying that the ball is squarely with the MoD now -- the field evaluation trial report has been submitted, but has not yet been approved by the MoD. There is likely to be a measure of back and forth between South Block and Vayu Bhawan before it is approved and passed on for the next stage. In the meanwhile, chew on this. No rumours here.

Point One, The Indian Air Force won't choose a twin-engine aircraft in the MMRCA, if a single-engine aircraft can "do the job", i.e, is satisfactorily compliant on all 643 test points that each of the six airplanes were tested for during the field evaluation trials (FETs). The IAF is of the view that both single and twin engine platforms have their own advantages, but that it will not discriminate between the two. If all six aircraft are compliant, the cheapest will be selected whether its twin or single-engined.

Point Two, and this is a biggie -- The model being used to gauge cost is not the lifecycle cost (LCC) model (American) as was previously thought. That model has been dumped since the IAF perceives it to have too many "indeterminables" (read, ambiguities), and not measured in precisely the same way across the six aircraft being offered, despite being specifically asked for. In other words, the MMRCA purchase model will fundamentally be based on unit flyaway cost of aircraft and financing options -- i.e, not quite overall cost of ownership. The IAF decided that it would only work with what is "determinable". In other words, no complex formulae on future savings on maintenance and overhaul. Do you see why I used the word bombshell in the post title? Click here to enlarge

Point Three, cost is going to be a big determinant. Out of the six aircraft that are judged compliant, the cheapest will be identified as L1, and will logically be the chosen aircraft.

Point Three-and-a-half, it emerges now that each vendor was extensively briefed on their performance once the trials were over, so they have a comprehensive sense of how they performed -- their function of compliance, if you will -- but they have nothing to compare it with. So unless you account for industrial espionage, none of the vendors know how the others have performed, but know exactly how well or badly their own platform performed during trials.

Point Four, the air force's trial report has been submitted to the MoD, but the latter hasn't approved it yet. The trial report strictly contains a tabulated representation of each contending platform's compliance or otherwise for each of 643 test points. Significantly, the trial report does not quantify the level of compliance of each airplane, but rather leaves this for the MoD to understand. In other words, the trial report has all the data and results, but no recommendations, no merit list, no explicit downselect, no stated eliminations, nothing. Yet, by virtue of the data it presents, everything is implicit. It provides the data. It provides the benchmarks for compliance. The MoD figures out who's in, who's not quite in, who's definitely out. The IAF hasn't put that down. The IAF has submitted a "factual report" -- the rest is upto the MoD. Again, there's been no ranking at any stage.

Point Five, there have been frequent attempts by various players to suggest that some of the non-US contenders will have trouble getting export licenses for subsystems that may be of American origin (like the Gripen's engines, weapons on some of the others etc). Let's lay that to rest for now -- the IAF extracted government-endorsed guarantees from each such contending vendor that there would be no problems in the supply of such equipment, and it was based on this guarantee certificate that the contender was allowed to participate in trials.

Finally, the option exists for the IAF to go for more than 126 aircraft, but a decision has not yet been taken on whether to club that option with the principal purchase. Having said that, chances are that the option will be exercised.

http://livefist.blogspot.com/2010/08/big-fat-mmrca-update.html
 

luckyy

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2009
Messages
568
Likes
3
The IAF has said over the "past year" .... Lot of developments after that including EADS chief meeting with IAF officials and establishment on whether to spend more millions of dollars on trials when IAF is not considering brownie points on fighters and just low costs . They assured the EADS chief that it will be considered. Will try to get the link if possible. The report you posted is based on scenario over a year back.
"We have gone exactly according to the Request for Proposals (RFP) and have set 643 parameters or Air Staff Qualitative Requirements (ASQRs) which the aircraft were evaluated against for compliance. We have submitted an objective report on the compliance and non-compliance of the six aircraft," the sources said.

The sources made it clear that the IAF had not created a "merit list" and had only given its reports evaluating each of the aircraft against the ASQRs.

Noting that none of the aircraft had complied fully with all the parameters set by the IAF, they said there were "varying degrees of compliance and non-compliance" by each of the contenders

http://www.zeenews.com/news647903.html
 

neo29

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2009
Messages
1,284
Likes
30
^^^^
Hundreds of news reported from news channels to defence magazines. Who are you gonna trust?? All we can do is analyze logically and practically and discuss about this and majority agree that EF is front runner, F-16 must be eliminated and cost is not the only thing that matters.
 

luckyy

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2009
Messages
568
Likes
3
no more rumors:

selection will be based on parameters lead by IAF .
ROP procuderal norms will be stricktly followed..
IAF/MoD not going to select the best but the one which meets the parameters at lowest cost..
 

neo29

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2009
Messages
1,284
Likes
30
no more rumors:

selection will be based on parameters lead by IAF .
ROP procuderal norms will be stricktly followed..
IAF/MoD not going to select the best but the one which meets the parameters at lowest cost..
IAF/MoD have nothing to do with cost. Specially IAF. MoD may choose a fighter based on cost but in the end its the CAG it has to convince. Even choosing a expensive figher and convincing its benefits to CAG works. CAG is the boss coz the buck stops there.
 

luckyy

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2009
Messages
568
Likes
3
IAF/MoD have nothing to do with cost. Specially IAF. MoD may choose a fighter based on cost but in the end its the CAG it has to convince. Even choosing a expensive figher and convincing its benefits to CAG works. CAG is the boss coz the buck stops there.
CAG only manage account books , .....they won't take policy decissions..



anyhow , my point is , IAF/MoD should be choosing a plane in mmrca which will cost less then SU-30MKI....no point spending more then what MKI costs..otherwise better buy more MKIs...
 

neo29

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2009
Messages
1,284
Likes
30
Apart from F-16 there is nothing else cheaper than su-30 mki. Besides why to compare Su-30 mki for mmrca. If u do so the first to go is bomb truck sh-18.

We love Su-30 mki becoz of its maneuverability, we would want something similar.
 

luckyy

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2009
Messages
568
Likes
3
Apart from F-16 there is nothing else cheaper than su-30 mki. Besides why to compare Su-30 mki for mmrca. If u do so the first to go is bomb truck sh-18.

We love Su-30 mki becoz of its maneuverability, we would want something similar.
only mig-35 is cheaper then MKI in mmrca.....

F-16 block 60 is a expansive plane...


F-16 costing pakistan US$ 100 million..including weapons..,
http://www.dawn.com/2008/04/23/top8.htm

F-16 costing Egypt US$ 134 million..including weapons and infrastructure....
http://in.reuters.com/article/idINIndia-45045820091229

18 F-16 to Oman for $3.5bn , including electronics warfare suites and APG-68(V)9 radar..
http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...6-sale-to.html
a whoping $190ml/plane............(could include a 10 year service contrect too ,)
 

luckyy

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2009
Messages
568
Likes
3
cost of technology

mig-35 been the lowest cost AC in mmrca but i doubt russians will offer anything in terms of duel use technology transfer ....

EFT & rafale been somehow appears costly but considering the technogy that india will get.....the deal is cheaper then mig-35
 

neo29

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2009
Messages
1,284
Likes
30
You guys obsessed with costs, the best fly away costs and life time maintenance costs will be reduced drastically if the engine of LCA and mmrca winner is the same coz it will be a bulk order of fighters with engines for LCA.
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top