Know Your 'Rafale'

[Armand2REP]

That is the Gripen NG demo... a modified Gripen D. There is no production version and no sale in India, hence no Gripen IN.

 

[Godless-Kafir]

That is the Gripen NG demo... a modified Gripen D. There is no production version and no sale in India, hence no Gripen IN.

It is the Gripen NG with the F-414 engine, since 2008 they did not use the D for demo. Yes it is not a production model but they where in talks with TATA on setting up installations.

Please go read or post a source that it is not. I have posted source to counter your claim.

 

[Armand2REP]

$11 bn in the balance, a no-show by Gripen fighter

Business Standard has learnt that the fighters that will touch down are not the ones Gripen International has offered: the JAS-39IN Gripen NG. Instead, two older-model Gripen-D fighters will arrive.

 

[p2prada]

Gripen NG demo never was at Leh or any other Indian trial. Gripen D was used.

Gripen NG matures and waits for India | Aviation International News

Following the end of official Phase 2 trials, the Gripen Demo aircraft continued development work, but in May was dispatched to India in support of Saab's entry in the country's MMRCA multi-role fighter competition.

Gripen Demo was evaluated all over again.

 

[Armand2REP]

So IAF evaluation was based on the Raven AESA.

 

[Cola]

Rafale cost could soar into Skies

 

[arundo]

Rafale cost could soar into Skies

EF's cost already did and could soar again. So let's face facts and not speculate too much. The position of most British media is well known.

Typhoon costs soar, upgrades not ready until 2018 | Reuters

 

[p2prada]

So IAF evaluation was based on the Raven AESA.

Yup. It was. The AESA prototype was tested in Sweden by IAF.

Rafale cost could soar into Skies

Useless speculation. I am sure both GoI and Dassault will know better.

From the article,

Talking about price, former Air Chief S. Krishnaswamy told this newspaper, "India may have identified the cheaper aircraft out of the two shortlisted, but it is India which is the loser as our own fighter, the LCA Tejas could not come on time, which is why we had to go for MMRCA. All the money to be spent on MMRCA could have been pumped into the LCA, our indigenous plane, for its development and production, but since we have already spent so much on the LCA and now all this additional money for the MMRCA, it makes the country a loser in the end."

Have to agree, but we have to suck it up and live with it. Care must be taken not to have AMCA end up like LCA.

 

[Godless-Kafir]

So IAF evaluation was based on the Raven AESA.

DR was dumped in 2010 because it failed technical evaluations and it was brought back into the fray after Sarkozy visit. Guess he must have gotten on his knees!

 

[arundo]

DF was dumped in 2010 because it failed technical evaluations and it was brought back into the fray after Sarkozy visit. Guess he must have gotten on his knees!

I do not think it failed technical evaluation, but French didn't provide technical info in time.

 

[Cola]

I don't think you understand...

http://www.ccomptes.fr/fr/CC/documents/RPA/1_conduite-des-programmes-armement.pdf
(page 68)

This is actual price of the Rafale the French payed for planes in 2009.
It's not a matter of speculation and is actually ~£1m more expensive than EF costs in Britain, in current exchange rates.

 

[Godless-Kafir]

I do not think it failed technical evaluation, but French didn't provide technical info in time.

Broadsword

In the second half of 2008, the IAF conducted a technical evaluating of these bids, to see whether the bids conformed to the RfP. What should have been an innocuous process turned dramatic when Dassault's bid was reportedly rejected as incomplete. While this was quickly resolved by diplomatic intervention, reportedly by President Sarkozy himself, other companies are now saying that the Rafale was done a favour by being allowed back into the contest.

It was the next stage of evaluation --- flight trials --- that has established the IAF's testing process in a league of its own. Conducted by the Directorate of Air Staff Requirements (ASR), and overseen by the quiet and unflappable Air Commodore (now Air Vice Marshal) RK Dhir, each of the six contenders were flight tested by IAF pilots who tested 660 separate performance aspects of each contender aircraft. For example, the RfP demanded that the fighter's engine should be replaced within one hour.

 

[arundo]

I don't think you understand...

http://www.ccomptes.fr/fr/CC/documents/RPA/1_conduite-des-programmes-armement.pdf
(page 68)
This is actual price of the Rafale the French payed for planes in 2009. It's not a matter of speculation.

Ok, we have a total increase of 16,5% per unit over many years (not only, but partially due to the reduction from 320 to 286 units or ~ 10%)
Needless to say that we are talking about nominal increases (not real).

I do not understand how you can conclude that (real) costs will soar. You always have to consider it relatively and not absolutely.

The 142 million € are the total life cycle cost including everything from purchase until phase-out. The 40,69 million could be the acquisition costs (fly away). You cannot compare the coût actuel and the PU actuel.

 

[arundo]

I forgot to mention: the prices include the French VAT (as stated on p. 66), which is 19,6%. I do not think that French VAT will be invoiced to India

Conclusion: Indian and French price cannot be compared

 

[Cola]

aroundo, you aren't very sharp, are you?

"coût actuel" was a total program cost in 2009 (in €m), meaning €40.69b (not million ).
"PU" (Unit price) of €142m was in 2009.
Today, as theSundayGuardian points out, that price (PU) is roughly €152.3m
At current exchange rate it's ~£1m more expensive per unit, then what Brits pay as per latest NAO report.

And on top Indians get to receive Rafale.

 

[arundo]

aroundo, you aren't very sharp, are you?

"coût actuel" was a total program cost in 2009 (in €m), meaning €40.69b (not million ).
"PU" (Unit price) of €142m was in 2009.
Today, as theSundayGuardian points out, that price (PU) is roughly €152.3m
At current exchange rate it's ~£1m more expensive cost per unit, then what Brits pay as per latest NAO report.

And on top Indians get to receive Rafale.

You are right, it is total program cost, but this doesn't change the facts (and the point I was trying to make). I just was paying attention to the right part of the chart, the unit life cycle costs and % increases.

In the 7th column you have the nominal increase by unit for the program, which is 16,5% (considering that quantity was reduced by 10%, that the price do not take into account inflation and include 19,6% VAT).
According to this chart, the total cost of the program is 40,7 billion € for 286 units. According to British NAO, "The MOD now estimates that, by the time the aircraft leaves service, some £37 billion will have been spent" this is not for 286, but only 160 aircraft.

 

[Godless-Kafir]

Irony or stupidity?

The Indian MMRCA is important for Dassault, considering the fact that the French government has spent more than $50 billion in developing the aircraft. The programme will create 10,000 jobs. The current production capacity of the company is that of 11 aircraft per year. Every year, the Rafale programme costs around 1 billion euro in the French defence budget.

India spent 2 billion USD on Tejas LCA development which included building test infrastructure from labs to test rigs and people where crying about what a huge waste it is, while France spent 50billion euros which becomes more when you convert to dollars!

India should just shut hell up and people should not comment on the Tejas, you throw peanuts and they give you a tiger. If we spent 50billion we would have stealth fighter.

Talking about price, former Air Chief S. Krishnaswamy told this newspaper, "India may have identified the cheaper aircraft out of the two shortlisted, but it is India which is the loser as our own fighter, the LCA Tejas could not come on time, which is why we had to go for MMRCA. All the money to be spent on MMRCA could have been pumped into the LCA, our indigenous plane, for its development and production, but since we have already spent so much on the LCA and now all this additional money for the MMRCA, it makes the country a loser in the end."

http://www.sunday-guardian.com/investigation/rafale-cost-could-soar-into-skies#.TzfCW9wBm1F.twitter

 

[Cola]

arundo,
£37b isn't program cost.
It's total over life-time exploitation cost.

Besides, where did you get the idea the India would pay British VAT?

 

[arundo]

arundo,
£37b isn't program cost.
It's total over life-time exploitation cost.

Besides, where did you get the idea the India would pay British VAT?

What is program cost according to you? The program includes everything from the first drawing, the purchase, the life time exploitation cost until the phase-out of the planes the French govt will have to pay for the Rafale. At the end of the day, 1 Rafale will have amounted for 152 million € per plane (as of today of course). So everything is included.
What could the English figure include more?? The French call it "coûts du programme" and the Brits "lifetime exploitation costs" (and I assume they include development and acquisition costs as well). In my opinion both figures can more or less (roughly) be compared.

I didn't write that Brits would invoice VAT, but you tried to compare the Indian Rafale price with the French one and this cannot be done. If you want to compare, you must at least deduct French VAT of 19,6% from the 152 million to have an idea. Without VAT the price would drop to 127 million Euro.

 

[arundo]

"Le coût moyen de fabrication d'un Rafale (toutes versions confondues) est de 101,1 millions d'euros par appareil en 2011 soit une hausse de 4,70 % par rapport au coût de fabrication initial, l'une des plus faibles hausses des programmes d'armements."

The average production cost were 101,1 million € in 2011, which is an increase of 4,7% vs. the initial budget (84,6 without VAT).
Of course those costs will decrease with the order from India and other upcoming orders