Know Your 'Rafale'

[asianobserve]

Cost of development is not what India pays. French tax payer already covered that bill.

It struck me as odd that the French seem so desperate to sell Rafale when it's already paid for. For a technologically sensitive country such as France, who wants to keep its technological superiority over all potential threats and emerging threats, why would it expose its most sensitive military fighter technology - with TOT to boot - to other countries when it does not have to recoup cost of development anymore (who knows Rafale tech may end up with the Iranians in the future since India has an amicable relations with them).

Since it's actually already paid for by the French people don't you think it would make more sense for the French government to develop and produce new fighter (I understand the need to maintain the technological capacity as well is industrial base) than sell existing ones to other countries and share cutting edge techs in the process?

 

[arundo]

Cost of development is not what India pays. French tax payer already covered that bill.

Armand, I am sure that export customers will have to contribute to the dvpt. costs. This is a cost factor that is included in most products. Of course it will reduce the bill for ALA and MN. It will be the same at Cassidian.

Can you tell us which cost factors the 43 billion € for the program include?
According to Senate and media reports they include
- R & D
- Fly Away
- Operating costs (at least a part of them)

Is that right?

 

[Indianboy]

Hope these aren't uploaded on DFI yet..

 

[Armand2REP]

Fly away cost of Rafale is €64 million. The programme cost includes everything France ever spent on Rafale appropriations.

 

[Indianboy]

Switzerland, Evaluation report quick analysis

As the Armasuisse report is not always perfectly readable I've reproduced the charts and compiled the general appreciations for both evaluations. (NWA1 and NWA2)


NWA phase I is the first 2008 evaluation with real flight trials:

* The results show a sharp advandage for the Rafale especially for Escort, Srike and Recce missions.
* The Rafale is also the only aircraft that was able to engage multiple ground targets simultaneously in one pass.
* The only mission where the Eurofighter almost catches up with the Rafale is Air Policing. The Gripen is definitively not in the same leage as far as Air to Air missions are concerned. However, we note that it is ranked slightly above the Eurofighter for Air to Ground and Recce missions.

See the Swiss Air Force appreciations in the table below. Their final recommandation in all missions is the Rafale with the Eurofighter as a possible alternative.

NWA phase II is the second evaluation conduced in 2009 based on technical data of 2015 scheduled capabilities provided by the 3 manufacturers. (see upgrades below)

The results and appreciations below :
Again the ranking remain the same with the Rafale clearly in front especially for Strike and Recce missions.

See the Swiss Air Force appreciations when the upgrades are taken into account in the table below. Their final recommandation in all missions is still the Rafale with the Eurofighter as a possible alternative.

Each mission effectiveness is an average a several sub-taks effectiveness relevant to the given mission.

The detail sub-task ranking is only available for the Air policing mission (see below)

This is the mission where the Typhoon is ranked almost as good as the Rafale due to superior aircraft performance (apparently mainly related to its high climb rate and capabiliy to supercruise at mach1.4), slightly better pilot workload (Direct voice Input for recurrent basic tasks would explain that) and slighly better engagement (which could be explained by higher altidute/speed/missile max range)

It is worth noting that the Air Policing mission, although important, is a quite low risk mission. In more challenging Air to Air task such as OCA or DCA missions where the target can be highly dangerous and where ECM/RCS become of primary relevance, the Rafale seems to prevail with a more comfortable margin.

 

[Godless-Kafir]

Cost of development is not what India pays. French tax payer already covered that bill.

How do they make profit if we they dont cover the development cost in the Bill is this another aid program from?

Profit=fighter+development cost. Even for BEP(break even point) you have to take some part of production cost.

 

[Armand2REP]

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

I know, Rafale wan't competing in half those listed and is going to win a third. It always scores higher than EF and only loses to the US when they start forking over massive military aid.

 

[arundo]

Fly away cost of Rafale is €64 million. The programme cost includes everything France ever spent on Rafale appropriations.

Thanks for confirmation. And there are some future costs included...:
La cible du programme est de 286 appareils avec leurs équipements de mission et leur stock de rechange initial. Il comprend également certains moyens de maintenance et deux centres de simulation au standard F2[". That has been calculated for a duration of 40 years.
http://www.senat.fr/rap/a11-108-6/a11-108-612.html

152 million per unit program cost:
64 million unit fly away
88 million for R & D and the other budgeted costs (maintenance etc.)

Do we know the amount of R & D as of today? It was about 10,6 billion € in 2005. I cannot imagine it almost doubled by 2011/12.

 

[JAISWAL]

MMRCA: Counter Point | Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses
++
IDSA COMMENT MMRCA: Counter Point
by- Ramesh Phadke
February 13, 2012
.
.
Since the announcement of the French Rafale as a
possible winner (possible because serious
negotiations on the final price based on life cycle
costs and Transfer of Technology (ToT) are yet to
be concluded) on January 31, 2012, a number of
very strong views against the decision have been
published. Academics, strategic affairs analysts
and journalists have generally highlighted two
major points. Firstly, that the Rafale is too
expensive; India could have purchased a larger
number of less expensive fighters because, with
the threat of a 'two front war', India needs
numbers rather than technology. Secondly, that
the choice of the USD 10 to 20 billion worth
contract should have been based more on
consideration of strategic gains instead of
technology alone. While at first glance, there
appears some substance in these arguments, a
deeper analysis of the various associated issues
and the long history of India's choices in defence
procurement would lead us to different
conclusions.
A brief overview of India's past decisions would
show that until the current buy, all defence
purchases were made without an 'open tender'
process. As such, why the IAF chose a particular
piece of equipment or why the then government
gave it the green signal is shrouded in secrecy.
But, it is evident that there were many weighty
security and foreign policy issues behind such
decisions.
In 1948, India decided to buy an unspecified
number of Vampire jet fighters from Britain
because at the time Britain was the only country
that was ready to sell defence equipment to non-
aligned India. India also had a sizeable 'sterling
balance' or credit with the UK and did not have to
pay cash. That this sterling balance was very
quickly exhausted is another matter. In 1950-51,
tensions mounted following the issue of refugee
influx from the erstwhile East Pakistan. The then
Prime Minister of Pakistan Liaqat Ali Khan showed
increasing belligerence as time passed. Nehru, as
a precautionary measure, alerted the Indian
armed forces and even moved an armoured
brigade closer to the borders in the Punjab. To its
surprise, the IAF found that while it had plenty of
spares of all types, the vital 'firing mechanism' for
the Vampire guns was nowhere to be found.
Whether by design or default, the British
appeared to have placed the IAF in great difficulty.
The senior officers of the IAF then felt that India
needed to diversify her sources of defence supply
in the event one or the other supplier decided to
impose sanctions, as happened later during the
1965 Indo-Pak War. The IAF then chose the
Dassault Ouragon (called Toofani in India) instead
of the British Meteor, even though at that time a
senior British Officer Air Marshal Gibbs was the
Chief of the Air Staff of the IAF.
.
......................For full article please visit above link

 

[JAISWAL]

HAL prepares to manufacture Rafale combat jet in India

State-run Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) is getting ready to progressively manufacture the Dassault Rafale combat jet that has apparently been chosen by the Indian Air Force (IAF) for its $10.4 billion order for 126 planes.

HAL officiating Chairman and Managing Director P.V. Deshmukh told India Strategic defence magazine (..:: India Strategic ::.. Home Page: The authoritative monthly on Defence and Strategic Affairs.) that the company had already earmarked its own land near Bangalore, where it is headquartered, to produce some of the aircraft's major components and integrate the overall aircraft and systems.

The first 18 aircraft would come in fly-away condition, within three years of signing of the contract and meanwhile, HAL would get the production tooling, expertise and technical know-how under transfer of technology from the French.

The remaining 108 aircraft would initially be progressively manufactured from SKD (semi-knocked-down) and CKD (completely knocked-down) kits. Gradually, HAL would start producing the fuselage and other parts from the raw materials. Dassault engineers would assist in technology transfer and production plants.

HAL has been preparing for the medium multi-role combat aircraft (MMRCA) project in terms of allocation of funds and organisational changes needed to launch and deliver the targets on time. Three phases have been earmarked for HAL's goalposts in manufacturing this highly-sophisticated aircraft.

Deshmukh, who was earlier managing director of HAL's MiG complex at Nasik, said that over the next 10 years, the Rafale project should generate business approximating $4-5 billion. "It is a huge project for us," he observed.

He disclosed that HAL already had Memorandums of Understanding (MoUs) with Dassault and engine-maker Snecma to produce some of the designated parts. "HAL has been preparing for the MMRCA project in terms of allocation of funds and organizational changes needed to launch and deliver the MMRCA project targets on time."

Separate divisions have been planned for the aircraft and engine of the MMRCA at Bangalore, and two locations have been shortlisted within the HAL estate there for setting up the airframe and engine divisions.

Pre-planning activities with respect to conceptual design of plant layout for the aircraft and engine production units are under progress. Accessory production has been planned at HAL divisions at Hyderabad, Lucknow and Korwa (Uttar Pradesh).

Deshmukh described the Rafale as a state-of-the-art multi-role combat aircraft capable of a wide range of missions such as air defence, air superiority, close air support, air-to-ground precision strikes, interdiction, maritime roles and nuclear strikes. It has an integrated suite of avionics, electronic sensors, AESA Radar and active/passive counter measures.

"HAL is the designated lead production agency for the airframe, aero-engine and systems integration of the aircraft. Out of the 126 aircraft,, 18 aircraft will be directly supplied by Dassault Aviation and 108 aircraft will be built at HAL in three phases. In the next four years, the Rafale aircraft deliveries would commence from HAL to the Indian Air Force as per the agreed schedule. HAL envisages a business volume of about Rs.20,000 to Rs.25,000 crores ($4-5 billion) in the MMRCA project over the next 10 years."

Deshmukh said that the offset requirement of the MMRCA programme being 50 percent of the foreign exchange content, HAL is also looking forward to active participation in this industrial effort up to around 30 per cent of the offset value.
.
.
HAL prepares to manufacture Rafale combat jet in India | Deccan Chronicle

 

[JAISWAL]

Britain again raises the pitch for Typhoon for fighter deal- News - IBNLive Mobile
.
Britain again raises the pitch for Typhoon for fighter deal
---Press Trust Of India.
06:02 PM,Feb 13,2012

 

[Armand2REP]

152 million per unit program cost:

That is total costs divided per airframe. That goes down drastically the more aircraft you produce. That number covers costs until 2018 and doesn't include export orders.

 

[vanadium]

Cost of development is not what India pays. French tax payer already covered that bill.

France or any other exporter might elect to charge a royalty fee to recoup some of the R&D expenses.

The debate on the total system price is therefore of little interest in India. Export buyers do now care about the sunken R&D costs, how they have escalated against the initial budget and all that kind of stuff. That is a subject for librarians or propaganda men.

All we know is that the Rafale L1 was lower than Typhoon. There are rumors indicating this was quite substantive.

I understand L1 was defined as life cycle cost.

On the other hand the known flyaway prices of the two jets are pretty close (say around €60m).

One should also expect that contemporary projects and same class fighters do not differ substantially in Operations and Sustainment (O&S) costs.

So in theory also LCC should not differ too much.

So the real grey area is probably in the way the two bidders have quoted their premium costs for offsets and ToT. If the big difference in price is correct, I would suspect that Dassault´s quotation advantage is mainly due to ToT and offsets.

I guess that the ToT and offset premium costs are not part of the LCC, but I may be wrong here.

 

[anoop_mig25]

who knows Rafale tech may end up with the Iranians in the future since India has an amicable relations with them).

name one country with which india has shared foreign ToT

 

[Godless-Kafir]

It would be so much easier if they mentioned the price of each aircraft.

Is it an secret just to keep the competition in the dark or something else?

What happens if the competition knows?

Wont it be better for IAF if everyone knows the price and they try to out bid it resulting in more competitive price?

 

[anoop_mig25]

ok now as dasault is sure to win mmrca contract (unless & untill they do some stupid ) and its chances of wining else where to have increase ,and if its wins then should Dassault should give some gifts/bonses to those indians who where involved in selecting dassaults rafale as mmrca aircraft as because of their decision rafale chances has increased

 

[vanadium]

I agree (except the above mentioned).

You mean this: Datei:BVR combat rating against Upgraded Su-27 Flanker (Core).PNG – Wikipedia

I guess you know that DERA was a part of UK MoD and dissolved in 2001. Therefore the study is quite old (I think it was even done in the 90's). It was based on computer simulation, not on real life evaluation and used data from aircraft in a very early stage of development. The study was only done on BvR. In my opinion it has no significance today.

The operational analyses conducted by DERA simulated hundreds of air combats starting from a BVR and in many cases (depending on initial formation numbers and survivals) coming to a merge and ending in WVR. The data input is the correct design data of the fighters represented in terms of mass, aerodynamic data sets, engine decks, sensors performance and weapon characteristics. The air vehicle data and engine data sets have not changed much so the results are by and large still valid today. Of course for Rafale the new AESA radar will improve a bit its air combat effectiveness, as will replacing the SRM Magic with a MICA IR.

Serious and highly reputable tools such as the one used by DERA, fed with a solid database of weapon systems parameters, allow designers and warfighters to study the behavior of a fighter in highly complex scenarios, exploring the whole flight envelope that are very difficult and costly to replicate in real. These tools, and the DERA in particular, are highly sophisticated and are accepted by the scientific community. The key caveat here is the usual: garbage in, garbage out. In the case quoted the UK MoD had very good dataset of the aircraft under examination.

The key scenarios under study were obviously the most stressing one for an air superiority fighter and typically a small section of air defenders versus a strike package protected by a fighter sweep section (Flanker) and close escort section (Flanker).

 

[Armand2REP]

I would be embarrassed trying to defend that obsolete and poorly defined report.

 

[vanadium]

I would be embarrassed trying to defend that obsolete and poorly defined report.

DERA is a highly respected scientific institute of the UK MoD.
The RAND Corporation report is defined to the level of disclosure allowed, i.e. not generous as one can imagine given the nature of the subject.

 

[Armand2REP]

They never stepped near the aircraft nor did they evaluate real world performance. The R-27 that arms the Su-27 is the worst performing BVRAAM in history. Its RCS gives it a major disadvantage. It is a complete joke.