Decision on $10 billion MMRCA deal soon

[p2prada]

What is the Tactical value of rolling in a dog fight? even dogs can roll.

You can't have an unstable aircraft turn without being able to roll.

 

[agentperry]

EF2000 is not capable of rolling. taking circular turns is not rolling and also the maneuvers it took is very near to roll and not exactly the roll. its combat worthiness is very low as compared to rafale. rafale is no doubt better option than ef2000. the problem with ef2000 is the problem with its design. its more or less a bomber with minimum fighting/dog fight capability.( just likt mig-27).
im relying on lockheed martin journal for my point.

regarding 4.75 gen. yes there are categorizations like 4++ and 4+ gen planes but 4++ gen are more or less 4.5 gen plane only. even for su-30 mki many countries ( as per their native standards) call it a 4++ gen plane.

hyper hornet is an upgrade of super hornet and comes into 4.5 gen category only. out of the two offered to India, f-16in and f/a-18, f-16 in was the only 4.5 gen planes while f.18 was 4+ gen planes means lying somewhere between 4 and 4.5 gen plane.

but what ever, we only have to choose between the available now.

regarding mig-35, its plan is in debate in south block and like mmrca replacing mig-27, they may replace mig-23/25 in future.

 

[p2prada]

EF2000 is not capable of rolling. taking circular turns is not rolling and also the maneuvers it took is very near to roll and not exactly the roll. its combat worthiness is very low as compared to rafale. rafale is no doubt better option than ef2000. the problem with ef2000 is the problem with its design. its more or less a bomber with minimum fighting/dog fight capability.( just likt mig-27).
im relying on lockheed martin journal for my point.

regarding 4.75 gen. yes there are categorizations like 4++ and 4+ gen planes but 4++ gen are more or less 4.5 gen plane only. even for su-30 mki many countries ( as per their native standards) call it a 4++ gen plane.

hyper hornet is an upgrade of super hornet and comes into 4.5 gen category only. out of the two offered to India, f-16in and f/a-18, f-16 in was the only 4.5 gen planes while f.18 was 4+ gen planes means lying somewhere between 4 and 4.5 gen plane.

but what ever, we only have to choose between the available now.

regarding mig-35, its plan is in debate in south block and like mmrca replacing mig-27, they may replace mig-23/25 in future.

Then do post the LM journal if you want to prove your point. According to me the EF-2000 does roll and uses flaperons for roll control. Anyway you are mixing up generation definitions of different countries into a single classification. It does not work that way but there is no point debating about it because every aircraft has something that others don't.

BTW, pilots have good things to say about EF capability in WVR combat. So, either the LM journal is flawed or your interpretation of the journal is wrong. There was an instance, actually two, in UK. A single EF-2000 beat 2 F-15Es in dog fights, both times coming out of a bad position where the F-15s had the upper hand.

Also your assertion that EF is a bomber and not a fighter is severely flawed. It is the exact opposite and the design specifications alone tell that. The EF-2000 gained the ability to bomb only last year and before that it was a full fledged air superiority fighter. The Austrian version cannot bomb at all. Heck it is not even rigged to drop regular dumb bombs let alone LGBs. For the record no EF today carries a SAR capable radar which is required for bombing. EF lost in Singapore simply because the EF-2000 cannot bomb. EF Tranche 1 is as much a bomber as the Su-30MKI is a submarine.

 

[agentperry]

eurofighter is said to have beaten f-22 raptor. so whats the point? moreover arent you yourself supporting my point and eventually the main point that IAF evaluation is rigged and this unworthy plane( not a multirole) shouldnt be bought by iaf.

 

[p2prada]

eurofighter is said to have beaten f-22 raptor. so whats the point? moreover arent you yourself supporting my point and eventually the main point that IAF evaluation is rigged and this unworthy plane( not a multirole) shouldnt be bought by iaf.

EF has beaten the F-22 in WVR then that obviously says something about it's capability in maneuvering.

Read between the lines, heck I even stated the obvious. Who ever said we are going to induct a EF-2000 Tranche 1 or 2? We will be getting our own version, something like a EF Tranche 3B or C or D. It will have everything the SH has and much more. The Tranche 3 is a true multirole fighter.

IAF evaluation wasn't rigged no matter what the losers say. Both the Russians and Americans said at least they had an AESA radar in their aircraft as compared to Rafale and EF and thus it was a political decision. But who cares about that? What we care about is what are we going to get when we are supposed to take deliveries. Bringing aerodynamics, ease of maintenance and the technology to match the IAF requirements the Rafale and EF promised more along with more perks.

Rafale and EF are the best 4th gen and beyond fighters available from the west with a planned technology road map for the next 40 years. Only the Flankers and Eagles exceed them in capability and are in turn exceeded by the F-35. We are getting what we want and not what others want us to buy. Luckily it is not a political decision else the US would have won it long time back, even without the trials. Dropping the American fighters is proof that it wasn't a political decision.

IAF loved the SH initially because the technology offered during the time was the best there was. But now even MKI's upgrade specifications surpass that of the SH. Heck we have IAF officers saying the MRCA fighters have become second rung to the MKI because of the long gestation period in executing the deal. Avionics was SH's primary advantage and that is slowly eroding as competitors are coming up with equivalent or better technology. Perhaps if the EPE was offered a bit earlier things may have been different for Boeing.

Personally I want the Rafale to win, it's been my choice since the day the French submitted Rafale for the bid, but EF is equally good if not better.

 

[agentperry]

if its about the cost in the last round then its rafale of course because its 33% cheaper than EF2000. else it will only validate political interference.
but still i will stick to my point that american planes had lots of advantage( except reliability in case of war due to dubious nature of america itself)

 

[p2prada]

if its about the cost in the last round then its rafale of course because its 33% cheaper than EF2000. else it will only validate political interference.

Cost must not be overlooked so easily. When the engines bid for LCA was going on the EADS bid was cheaper than the GE bid. EADS fcked up in accounting and lost to GE in the process even though the EJ-200 was cheaper than F-414. EADS learnt a lessor there.

Now considering the EADS bid was cheaper than the American we cannot simply rubbish their jet to be more expensive. Even the British air chief came to the media saying the EF is not more expensive than other birds. EF may be a bit more expensive considering it is not yet at the development level of the Rafale when it comes to multirole, but it wont be as expensive as 33%.

but still i will stick to my point that american planes had lots of advantage( except reliability in case of war due to dubious nature of america itself)

To each his own.

 

[agentperry]

Cost must not be overlooked so easily. When the engines bid for LCA was going on the EADS bid was cheaper than the GE bid. EADS fcked up in accounting and lost to GE in the process even though the EJ-200 was cheaper than F-414. EADS learnt a lessor there.

Now considering the EADS bid was cheaper than the American we cannot simply rubbish their jet to be more expensive. Even the British air chief came to the media saying the EF is not more expensive than other birds. EF may be a bit more expensive considering it is not yet at the development level of the Rafale when it comes to multirole, but it wont be as expensive as 33%.



To each his own.

sir by cost i mean the over all cost.

the buying cost- one time payment, running cost and fuel consumption- life cycle cost.
the engine for mig-21, if any of the blade gets a minue crack needs to be replaced but in case of newer engines for jets, the engines' specific part can be replaced so the life increases adn over all cost decreases.

in the final round the overall cost will make impact.

that is sum of initial cost and life cycle cost.

and its less for rafale.

 

[p2prada]

Maybe so, but it is not as high as people try to make it out for EF too. I am guessing the real difference will come in tools and other equipment rather than the final bids on November 4th. It is possible we have to wait for a bit longer if that is the case.

Overall EADS is a bigger consortium and can handle a loss now to make a gain later as compared to Dassault. A large order will decrease costs for the entire program and will be lucrative to other countries who want to buy the EF. Don't underestimate the potential of these big corporations backed by entire Govts.

According to British air chief the cost of flying the EF is low as well. The problem is people got hooked on to program costs of $122million for EF and decided that was the actual cost of the bird. We can say F-35 costs over $200million in the same respect. But fly away costs will be brought down to less than $80million in the long run for either. Both aircraft have big orders.

 

[agentperry]

Maybe so, but it is not as high as people try to make it out for EF too. I am guessing the real difference will come in tools and other equipment rather than the final bids on November 4th. It is possible we have to wait for a bit longer if that is the case.

Overall EADS is a bigger consortium and can handle a loss now to make a gain later as compared to Dassault. A large order will decrease costs for the entire program and will be lucrative to other countries who want to buy the EF. Don't underestimate the potential of these big corporations backed by entire Govts.

According to British air chief the cost of flying the EF is low as well. The problem is people got hooked on to program costs of $122million for EF and decided that was the actual cost of the bird. We can say F-35 costs over $200million in the same respect. But fly away costs will be brought down to less than $80million in the long run for either. Both aircraft have big orders.

nobody is in mood of bearing losses. they do business with india to take as much as they can. the bids are extortion by both.

 

[p2prada]

nobody is in mood of bearing losses. they do business with india to take as much as they can. the bids are extortion by both.

Competitive bids aren't as simple. They won't make a loss, but they will look at bagging such a massive contract with lesser profits. It is a 40 year relation, they can always make their money later. Look at Mirage-2000 MLU. It is on the high side and we know that, but we went for it. When the MRCA bird comes up for MLU, the consortium can make their money there.

 

[agentperry]

Competitive bids aren't as simple. They won't make a loss, but they will look at bagging such a massive contract with lesser profits. It is a 40 year relation, they can always make their money later. Look at Mirage-2000 MLU. It is on the high side and we know that, but we went for it. When the MRCA bird comes up for MLU, the consortium can make their money there.

just hope this might b the case. but the price quoted by both( approx and speculated) are very high. we can buy more mki in same money

 

[p2prada]

Perhaps higher than the SH and definitely higher than the F-16 and Gripen. But cost wasn't considered for the first round.

 

[nrj]

just hope this might b the case. but the price quoted by both( approx and speculated) are very high. we can buy more mki in same money

Latest MKIs are touching 80+ millions. Its different story only if we setup another production line.

Its not about price, its about ToT & advantages of offset industrial investment.

 

[agentperry]

last round is all about price. read process given by IAF itself

 

[p2prada]

last round is all about price. read process given by IAF itself

NRJ is giving you the reason for the MRCA deal and not the way the aircraft will be picked.

Technology and new practices is what IAF wants HAL to have along with new capability for IAF. Price is not a consideration even though the MKI is cheaper.

 

[Zebra]

Tough bargaining ahead for India's MMRCA winner

Our Bureau
Sat, Oct 22, 2011 15:35 CET
The two finalists in India's Medium Multi Role Combat Aircraft (MMRCA) aircraft deal, Eurofighter and Dassault, will have to be prepared for tough bargaining at the price negotiation stage as a rise in the value of the Euro Vs the Indian currency has pushed up the Rupee value of their bid by an estimated 15% in the last one year.

Following the acceptance of the offsets proposals of the two bidders a fortnight ago, the only remaining formality is the opening of the envelopes containing the commercial bids and announcing the lowest bidder which will walk away with the estimated $1.2 billion prize.

The lowest bidder will then be called for further talks called price negotiations to be held by the price negotiations committee.

It is at this stage that the final price will be decided and tough bargaining will ensue. India has in the past let go of defence contracts as talks have broken down at the final price negotiation stage with the winning bidder. Cases to point are Airbus Industrie and Eurocopter both of which had to back off after being selected as winners, as the Indian Finance Ministry found their final price too expensive.

"Even after the final winner is announced, it is still touch and go", said an industry source to Defenseworld.net. "There is no finality that the lowest bidder will get the deal if India's Finance Ministry which holds the purse strings objects to any part of the financial commitment. The Euro value rise will be an important element to discuss as a 15%-18% rise in the last 18 months means that order price has increased by over a billion Euros".

It may be recalled that in mid-2009, the MMRCA bidders have had to submit fresh bids as the two year validity of their commercial bids had expired then and a couple of the bidders had told defenseworld.net then " the purpose of submitting fresh commercial bids is to take into account price escalation" adding that "the best value at current prices has been offered to India", which means that a price rise has been effected in the new bids.

Tough bargaining ahead for IndiaÂ’s MMRCA winner : Defense news

 

[ace009]

For F*cks sake - come out with it and let the 3 year long suspense end already!

 

[ganesh177]

"Even after the final winner is announced, it is still touch and go", said an industry source to Defenseworld.net. "There is no finality that the lowest bidder will get the deal if India's Finance Ministry which holds the purse strings objects to any part of the financial commitment.

Jeeez, after these many years they still have this to say.

 

[Immanuel]

well SH with EPE, full spec AESA, and considerable amounts of TOT without strings would have been the ideal aircraft. though i can see that the MKI upgrade will turn it into a whole different league, the SH still holds the most promise. EPE engines, new weight reductions in the engines, that killer AESA, CFTs, IRST, stealth weapons pods and USN's spiral upgrade program would have kept the SH beyond the Rafale and EF. the growler would allow for complete air supremacy over anything in all of asia. Furthermore, the life cycle costs were nearly half that of the Ef and Rafale. SH was the the most multirole of them all and with its state of the art tech and weapons, it stands to be the best we could have gone for. However IAF not taking into account the revised tech bids i think shut down the chance for SH.

The rafale and Ef are only begining to do what the SH did almost a decade ago. tech wise, there isn't a better choice. though i would love to see the EF win, deep inside i hope the price bids go above and beyond the limits set by the finance ministry and the whole deal with rafale and EF are scrapped. strategically buying either one don't give us any value.

however, between the two EF is the better option, has many more customers, safer option.