Rafale & MMRCA News and Discussions-9 August, 2014

GeorgeWelch · Post by **GeorgeWelch** » 19 Feb 2015 03:16

India is saying there are no problems, Dassault is saying there are no problems.

The only people saying there are problems are some media who read WAY too much into events. (Oh noes! The PM denied he was going to fly in it during the airshow! The Rafale is DOOOOMED!)

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 19 Feb 2015 03:51

GeorgeWelch wrote:India is saying there are no problems, Dassault is saying there are no problems.

Obviously.

India NOW has got the plane she wanted (the one that was tested) at a price she had bargained for ($11 billion or so). So, why would there be problems .................. any longer?

Dassault will say everything is fine ..................... having licked her wounds, when in actuality Dassault would have LOVED to sell the F2 at $20 billion (now the French alone have to pay for the F3).

Problems have been solved by this DefMin.

But, it is great that everyone thinks and says there are no problems. It should continue that a way. And, it will.

The only people saying there are problems are some media who read WAY too much into events. (Oh noes! The PM denied he was going to fly in it during the airshow! The Rafale is DOOOOMED!)

Nope.

Dassault said it too.

And, GoI said it too.

That there were problems.

And, there were. $20+ billion was a problem - even for the F3. Now that Dassault has been straight jacketed into the $11 billion jacket Dassault also better smile and say everything-iz-gut.

As I had posted earlier, Dassault has to let the GoI (not the IAF) win.

(BTW, even snecma seems to have found a smile + hand shake + an agreement. Was it not about a year ago that they were considered a gone case?

Make in India or there is the door.)

GeorgeWelch · Post by **GeorgeWelch** » 19 Feb 2015 04:00

NRao wrote:Nope.

Dassault said it too.

And, GoI said it too.

That there were problems.

Ok, I didn't phrase that correctly. Clearly there were (and may still be) problems, but I was thinking more of the whole 'Deal is Dead' histrionics.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 19 Feb 2015 04:10

whole 'Deal is Dead' histrionics

Well it would been history if Dassault had still insisted on selling a paper plane (F3) (granted Dassault is terrific at delivering stuff - even then) for $20+ billion.

The story that emerged recently that the Rafale is not the L1 is true. IF one were to draw a timeline and mark off the price for the Rafale there has to be a price creep - as the plane went from "f2" (what it was when tested) to the F3 (to come out in 2018). The plane being peddled by Dassault in 2014 (ostensibly with the support of the French Government nonetheless) could never have been L1. And, at L1 Dassault would have never sold the F3.

So, there was a problem - no two ways about it.

RoyG · Post by **RoyG** » 19 Feb 2015 04:44

haha, seriously people are reading into this too much. If dassault screws this up they know we'll just go to the russians. it's simple. adhere to L1 and terms of agreement or f*ck off. i highly doubt they'll let this one go.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 19 Feb 2015 05:17

Well, there is something to be said about the F3. If dassault had waited for the right time things would have gone much smoother.

The deal would have been signed years ago and the upgrade could perhaps been folded in perhaps half way thorough, something like that.

But that would have meant a different set of fiscal dynamics. But now the French will have to go it alone, the worst alternative.

Not sure how it is structured, but perhaps India can upgrade it by her herself?

member_28640 · Post by **member_28640** » 19 Feb 2015 12:53

Eric Trappier insists that the price of the rafale has not inflated, leave aside the typical DDMitis. The CEO of Dassault still thinks Indians are so for the Rafale.

"We are exactly in line with our answer to (Request for Proposal (RFP). This answer led the government of India to select L1 which was Rafale. And we have stuck to the same commitment which is totally in line and compliant with the RFP," he told PTI here.

It also said an empowered team has already arrived in India and carried forward the talks as decided by the Defence Ministers of the two countries in December.

Click here for more info

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 19 Feb 2015 12:59

Interesting that the buyer insists that the prices are inflated.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 19 Feb 2015 14:01

NRao wrote:
whole 'Deal is Dead' histrionics
Well it would been history if Dassault had still insisted on selling a paper plane (F3) (granted Dassault is terrific at delivering stuff - even then) for $20+ billion.

The story that emerged recently that the Rafale is not the L1 is true. IF one were to draw a timeline and mark off the price for the Rafale there has to be a price creep - as the plane went from "f2" (what it was when tested) to the F3 (to come out in 2018). The plane being peddled by Dassault in 2014 (ostensibly with the support of the French Government nonetheless) could never have been L1. And, at L1 Dassault would have never sold the F3.

So, there was a problem - no two ways about it.

I think above is the best explanation of the whole saga (barring the quality angle @HAL aspect)

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 19 Feb 2015 14:19

I think eventually Rafale would make it to MMRCA , The current talk is mostly about hard bargaining

arthuro · Post by **arthuro** » 19 Feb 2015 14:30

Rafale deal: Dassault says no change in pricing

Bengaluru: Confident of signing the much delayed USD 10 billion contract for Rafale fighter jets with India "soon", French Defence major Dassault Thursday said its pricing remains the same from day one and it has not wavered from the request for proposal (RPF).
It also said an empowered team has already arrived in India and carried forward the talks as decided by the Defence Ministers of the two countries in December.
"The pricing issue is very clear. Our pricing remains the same from day one of LI (Lowest bidder). So there has been no change on that front," Dassault Aviation CEO Eric Trappier said.
Asked about claims that Dassault is not willing to stand guarantee for the 108 jets to be made by state-run HAL here, Trappier denied there was any deviation from what the RFP said.
"We are exactly in line with our answer to (Request for Proposal (RFP). This answer led the government of India to select L1 which was Rafale. And we have stuck to the same commitment which is totally in line and compliant with the RFP," he told PTI here.
Trappier, who is here to take part in the Aero India air show, stressed that his firm is convinced that it is totally in line with the RFP.
[...]
Egypt deal
Dassault had this week signed a $5.9 billion deal with Egypt for 24 Rafale jets. This pricing is much higher than the $10 billion for the 126 jets that it has to provide India.
This increased fears in Indian defence circles that the cost of Rafale deal with India will also go high.
Asked about the price hike, Trappier said, “There is none. Don’t forget what has been published in regard to Egypt contracts for 24 aircraft, frigates and missiles for the frigates. It is not only aircraft,” he said.
When Dassault was first selected in 2012, India was to be Dassault’s first country of export.
Each country has its own way of negotiating. There was a very strong requirement from Egypt and we were able to make quickly to their strong requirement,” The Dassault CEO said.
“As far as India is concerned, we have been committed to IAF and Indian government for a very long time,” he said adding that negotiations are always a difficult job.
He said Dassault and HAL have had good negotiations and both now have a “good understanding” about the work share and who is manufacturing what.
Asked how soon he hoped the deal would be inked, Trappier said it was up to the Indian government.
“It is their time schedule. We are totally committed to speed up the process if we can. We are working totally transparent with the MOD,” he said.
The Dassault CEO said work is going on in the right direction.
“We are very fond of getting the deal itself so we start investing in India and begin work on the project in tune with Make in India policy of the government here,” he said.
"We understand it is taking time because it is a huge deal to negotiate.... I am confident that we should see the deal to be on very soon,” the CEO said

arthuro · Post by **arthuro** » 19 Feb 2015 15:49

]Rafale & Sukhoi Can't Replace Each Other: IAF Chief

Amidst swirling speculation that India's M-MRCA jet deal with Rafale is shuddering through final lap turbulence, and suggestions (including by Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar himself) that the India could buy more Su-30 MKI jets if the Rafale deal didn't work out, Indian Air Force chief Arup Raha today publicly declared that the Rafale and Su-30 were different aircraft and that one couldn't replace the other.
"There's M-MRCA and there's Sukhoi-30. The requirements are slightly different. And they have their own capabilities. They compliment each other but do not replace each other," Raha said at his press conference at the Aero India show in Bengaluru.
Making clear the IAF's own thoughts on open suggestions that 'other options' existed in the event of a deal collapse, Raha said, "No, we don’t have a Plan-B as of now. We are only working on Plan-A."
The IAF chief also stated, in what could be perceived as a sense of resignation over the turbulence negotiations have seen over the last 18 months, "Rafale has been selected as L1. It is a replacement. It is important that we have the MMRCA, I would not say Rafale. But we need to have it in the quickest possible time because the draw-down is true. Everyone is aware of the draw-down of combat squadrons of the IAF. Every air force faces this in its cycle of operations. It is not new or specific to IAF."

member_27581 · Post by **member_27581** » 19 Feb 2015 15:57

Is it just me who thinks there's a good cop bad cop thing going on with Govt pressuring Dassault whereas IAF keeping them hopeful.

arthuro wrote:
]Rafale & Sukhoi Can't Replace Each Other: IAF Chief

Amidst swirling speculation that India's M-MRCA jet deal with Rafale is shuddering through final lap turbulence, and suggestions (including by Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar himself) that the India could buy more Su-30 MKI jets if the Rafale deal didn't work out, Indian Air Force chief Arup Raha today publicly declared that the Rafale and Su-30 were different aircraft and that one couldn't replace the other.
"There's M-MRCA and there's Sukhoi-30. The requirements are slightly different. And they have their own capabilities. They compliment each other but do not replace each other," Raha said at his press conference at the Aero India show in Bengaluru.
Making clear the IAF's own thoughts on open suggestions that 'other options' existed in the event of a deal collapse, Raha said, "No, we don’t have a Plan-B as of now. We are only working on Plan-A."
The IAF chief also stated, in what could be perceived as a sense of resignation over the turbulence negotiations have seen over the last 18 months, "Rafale has been selected as L1. It is a replacement. It is important that we have the MMRCA, I would not say Rafale. But we need to have it in the quickest possible time because the draw-down is true. Everyone is aware of the draw-down of combat squadrons of the IAF. Every air force faces this in its cycle of operations. It is not new or specific to IAF."

arthuro · Post by **arthuro** » 19 Feb 2015 16:06

Has the indian government criticized Dassault ? It Just said There are no issues.

Previous reports are merely rumors quoting unnamed sources which have been denied. And I don't even count Russian articles...

Articles crossquoting each others without verifying original sources added to the confusion.

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 19 Feb 2015 16:12

http://www.business-standard.com/articl ... 014_1.html
Parrikar outlines alternatives to Rafale - 15/Jan/2015

In an interview to a TV channel, Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar said the Su-30MKI offered a viable alternative

Speaking to a television channel, Headlines Today, on Monday, Parrikar said the Su-30MKI offered a viable alternative, especially given that Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL) was upgrading and overhauling the fighter and equipping it with state-of-the-art electronic warfare systems.

Said Parrikar: "Sukhoi-30 choice is always there. What I mean to say is: upgrade the Sukhoi-30, make it more capable." Dismissing concerns about the IAF's falling fighter numbers, Parrikar said the IAF could put more fighters into the sky by improving the serviceability rate of its current fleet of 35 squadrons.
....
Parrikar also voiced his concern at Dassault's reported reluctance to meet the terms of the IAF tender, which required the French company to guarantee the 108 fighters that HAL would build in India, after the first 18 were supplied fully-built in France. The defence minister said, "I have told (Dassault) to send a person to work out the (differences). You have to be clear that, irrespective of anything, the (tender's) terms have to be met. They cannot be diluted."

arthuro · Post by **arthuro** » 19 Feb 2015 16:22

Was this an issue ? This has been interpreted like something is going wrong when it Is Just common sense and most probably nothing alarming in a complex set of negotiations.

He was responding to a question and his response is normal. Who would not say That the supplier should not abidde to rfp ?

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 19 Feb 2015 16:28

The defense minister offering an alternative is par course in complex negotiation *after* choosing a winner?

arthuro · Post by **arthuro** » 19 Feb 2015 16:36

It Is not a winner until the final contract is signed. Isn't This trick appropriate and expected during negotiation ?

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 19 Feb 2015 16:42

So can we then agree that Rafale deal is still up in the air till the final contract is signed? Can we also agree that SU 30 MKI is a serious contender now that the defense minister has tagged it as an alternative and may be Rafale was a *trick* used to get a better deal with the Russians?

arthuro · Post by **arthuro** » 19 Feb 2015 16:46

Of course I agree. Nothing is certain until it Is signed.

member_20453 · Post by **member_20453** » 19 Feb 2015 16:52

Actually all the French sources are hog-wash, as far as India is concerned the price mentioned by DM is roughly the correct i.e. we can get 2 MKI for the price of 1 Rafale, i.e. the cost of the bird itself is north of 120 million, not taking into account LCC.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 19 Feb 2015 17:56

^^^^^

That depends on which "bird".

Is it the F3 @ $20+ billion (in which case the MKI does make financial sense, even though they are not the same) or the F2 @ $11-12 billion?

Dassault wasted a LOT of time arguing for MLU being incorporated into the MMRCA and sharing the associated costs. The IAF did not test the F3 (great as it is - granted).

I think this is perfect. Get the F2, rag it till 2035 and toss it out - no need to upgrade it then. Replace all of them with AAMCA.

Rafale Jet Deal: Final Decision Only After March, Says Indian Defence Minister

And it is outright silly to think some deal with ME countries will impact Indian decision.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 19 Feb 2015 20:33

CAS Arup Raha: "requirements for both aircraft are slightly different"

Dassault: Merde!!

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 19 Feb 2015 21:02

It seems to me, this whole "only Plan-A no Plan-B" model is threatening acquisition of three different fighters:

1. LCA
2. Su-30MKI
3. And now even the Su-50

in effect it is driving the air force into the ground.

The Big Su comes with an established ecosystem (weapons, maintenance, training, ground systems, brahmos etc), but relatively cheap and within our control. The successor PAK-FA will inherit that. I am not saying this ecosystem is perfect, but its supports half of our combat strength.

Rafale is a world-class capable platform which passed muster of our air force selection. It is proven in the battlefield and own experience with Mirages has been good. I am all for it, but I hope that this does not become the last fighter that we procure.

JTull · Post by **JTull** » 19 Feb 2015 21:11

Karan M wrote:CAS Arup Raha: "requirements for both aircraft are slightly different"

Dassault: Merde!!

"There's M-MRCA and there's Sukhoi-30. The requirements are slightly different. And they have their own capabilities. They compliment each other but do not replace each other"

Dassault would be celebrating these comments. If IAF, as a professional force, cannot have a Plan-B then there's something seriously wrong with it. While it might be politically important to keep pushing for Plan-A, I'd rather hear the ACM come out and say that they always have a Plan-B.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 19 Feb 2015 21:15

Yes it would for the IAF support ( on the face of it) but that slightly different thing is the real decider IMO because it admits how fine the line really is and why, all said and done, if the MOD says nothing doing, Su-30s will get the job done.

Earlier several of the French posters were pretty much saying nothing in common, Rafale is 100x superior, this, that. But as the CASs comments above show, M-MRCA apart (focus on first M), the overall capability requirements are now pretty similar. The AF may still want a hedge/peer for the Su-30, but price matters..

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 19 Feb 2015 22:14

JTull wrote:<SNIP>Dassault would be celebrating these comments. If IAF, as a professional force, cannot have a Plan-B then there's something seriously wrong with it. While it might be politically important to keep pushing for Plan-A, I'd rather hear the ACM come out and say that they always have a Plan-B.

It's pretty common-place on BRF to talk about this lack of Plan B for MMRCA.

Has anyone bothered to flesh out what is the purpose of MMRCA in present context and what Plan B could fill the requirement?

- From aircraft and technology perspective, people talk about Su-30 MKI being the fall-back option. Well, if Su-30 MKI suffices the requirement, why did we have the dog and pony show of MMRCA RFP and fly-offs? After all, Su-30 MKI was available when this episode of MMRCA was kicked-off and If I'm not terribly off the mark, the growth path of the platform was also well know. Could have simply ordered another 150+ aircraft and be done with it.

- Purely from numbers POV, buying second hand Mirage-2K/2K-5 or even ordering more Mig-29/35; cheap option people say and something which can be had easy. While Mig-29K/35 are available brand-new from Russia, can someone educate me how many countries would we need to approach to get 126 Mirage-2K/2K-5? Or, for that matter of fact, how may Mirage-2K/2K-5 are actually available which countries are wanting to sell?

Even if we take a mix of Mirage-2000-5/9 and new Mig-29K/35, how many Mirages and how many Mig-29K/35? And while we're at it, please do factor in the aspect about procurement cost for Mirage -2000 and Mig-29 and upgrade cost for Mirages.

- The most important question: Has anyone wondered what does it mean to have these aircraft form bulk of your inventory in 2020-2030 period? What it does to technological profile of the IAF? Especially, in a rapidly changing technology scenario in east?

- Also, what impact it will have on the roll-over requirement for IAF in another 15-year period in 2028-2030 period? Suddenly, bulk of your fleet will start facing the same scenario as Mig-21/27 as of now.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If the damn thing is too expensive, then let the GOI say so and can the whole thing; place the order for Su-30 and be done with it. MMRCA does not have Plan B; simply buying fighters to fill numbers has Su-30 as back-up.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 19 Feb 2015 23:29

>>> - From aircraft and technology perspective, people talk about Su-30 MKI being the fall-back option. Well, if Su-30 MKI suffices the requirement, why did we have the dog and pony show of MMRCA RFP and fly-offs? After all, Su-30 MKI was available when this episode of MMRCA was kicked-off and If I'm not terribly off the mark, the growth path of the platform was also well know. Could have simply ordered another 150+ aircraft and be done with it.

Theres a very simple answer for the above and one of the IAF folks mentioned it publicly. They wanted dual sourcing and wanted to prevent overreliance on one vendor/country who was getting a large say in IAF ORBAT, we both know which.

Coming to technology, Su-30 has been almost entirely an IAF led exercise to customize a jet. While we on BRF look at the good side (capability), the IAF simply wants an easy answer (most of their requirements met, with them having to do minimum lifting). We can disagree on this w/IAF (after all, much the same is visible with pet peeves like LCA etc) but IAF focus is always that they are air warriors first, and all the rest is somewhat a distraction (Navy differs in the "builders Navy" business so is more willing to put up with these pangs).

But from current IAF POV, if you see the amount of CFE - Customer Furnished Eqpt in Su-30, its truly large. With Rafale, IAF hoped to get a plane with most of the work already done, and technology/roadmap already decided upon by an OEM who would do 99% of the work, with IAF basically providing requirements (as needed).
With Su-30, its a very involved process. Currently, both RMAF and Algerian AF are still familiarizing themselves with the fighter & are not pushing for upgrades. The Russians are offering various options based on Su-35 and other options (radar upgrade based on Su-35 and future options from PAKFA program). IAF is also working with DARE for a new avionics display and mission computing architecture. In short, its not a simple exercise and many things have to be done at different places, even whilst making sure Russians agree to include Indian furnished items, guarantee proper workflow timings etc.

Su30 induction has also been a tough process. While numbers have been available to a degree, the spares and other aspects have been tough. Rosoboronexport found it tough to meet IAF demands and periodically some item or the other has been delayed. Past few years, overhaul and spares production at HAL was delayed by inability to transfer production drawings and kits timely manner, leading to greater indigenization attempts by HAL (partly by outsourcing to local vendors, MSME) but also IAF was very vocal with Sukhoi about serviceability, leading to Sukhoi finally getting its focus last year on the issue.

Su-30 upgrade I think has been affected by this as well. With declining numbers of overall fleet, IAF simply does not have enough Su-30 airframes to pull out of flightline and commit to this upgrade in a rapid fashion. On the plus side, the baseline platform even in MKI Mk3 config seems potent enough for threats in the short to medium term, so rapid upgrade is not that urgent. In comparison to say Mirage and MiG-29 whose avionics and weapons badly needed a refresh.

Rafale was supposed to hedge for all this.
IAF hope was that by getting Dassault to sign on dotted line, it would get proven fighters with state of art tech in timely fashion and also hedge against Su. In turn, they were willing to compromise on degree of customization and Indian/IAF specific CFE.

The whole issue is now stuck on two things, price and TOT to HAL. If they get resolved, Rafales would be a good addition to IAF.

JTull · Post by **JTull** » 19 Feb 2015 23:36

rohitvats, all the reasons are good to justify acquiring an MMRCA. But do you mean to say at any price and under any conditions.

So I ask again, if there's no MMRCA then what's the plan-B? My answer would be a bird in hand is better than 2 in the bush.

Cosmo_R · Post by **Cosmo_R** » 19 Feb 2015 23:37

@KaranM ^^: "why did we have the dog and pony show of MMRCA RFP and fly-offs? After all, Su-30 MKI was available when this episode of MMRCA was kicked-off..."

All the IAF wanted was 126 Mirages as a follow on order. Thanks to the dramabazi that must be part of any decision in India, the EF/SH/LM lobby kicked in against a single vendor.

At that time (early 2000s), the question was why 2 engined fighters were being lumped in with a requirement for a single engined plane. Therefore Gripen jumped in. The whole thing became "we'll support you on Kashmir/UNSC if you...." By that time Dassault closed the Mirage 2K line and offered the twin engined Rafale

Thus was born the MMRCA rfp on 240 facets to ensure no political favoritism.

The rest is today's news.

Sid · Post by **Sid** » 19 Feb 2015 23:37

^^^ Rohitvats, Although you have a very big soft-spot for armed forces (we all do), but do you really think -

1. Can India afford MMRCA "now"?
2. When negotiating price for a contract, should a service chief put his weight behind seller? Thereby empowering seller's position? A thought of loosing a tender, almost as big as French air-force order, should have shaken their management. But... with chief clarifying his preference no shaking seems to be happening.

I am just asking for your personal opinion here.

Cosmo_R · Post by **Cosmo_R** » 19 Feb 2015 23:38

JTull wrote:rohitvats, all the reasons are good to justify acquiring an MMRCA. But do you mean to say at any price and under any conditions.

So I ask again, if there's no MMRCA then what's the plan-B?

Qatari Mirages

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 19 Feb 2015 23:40

>>> - The most important question: Has anyone wondered what does it mean to have these aircraft form bulk of your inventory in 2020-2030 period? What it does to technological profile of the IAF? Especially, in a rapidly changing technology scenario in east?

The basic thing here is that these aircraft will definitely not be cutting edge. Keep off MiG-29s no matter what. Philip et al's whimsy apart, these aircraft come with such teething issues (Navy facing their share now) that its definitely easier to go through the pain with local programs like the LCA than rely on the Russians for a fighter even they are not investing in. Mirage 2000's from France/UAE/Qatar wherever are ok - but again, you will have to invest in bringing them to a common standard. That is not going to be fun, given how much Dassault charges. Next issue, spares. We will face the same issue as we have in past, with IAF forced to commit to large numbers of spares orders in advance and build up stock as production ceases. Indigenization won't be easy or fast either.

But is it worth it? Perhaps... if the cost differential was truly humongous. One thing is that even with the latest Rafales, they will have limitations. These are not fighters which can operate alone & will require AEW&C support. If PLAAF truly deploys J-20s & they achieve good LO, then a Rafale can't expect to have proper BVR range capability viz these planes and will need AEW&C/AWACS for cueing. Which is where IMHO, shooters apart, IAF needs to focus as much on sensors and weapons. Basically all its platforms (shooters) need backup from AWACS operating in LBand & above, non conventional radars, fighters need to get IRST & investment needs to be done into missiles with IIR seekers & of course sensor networking. Some bits and pieces have come out, but there doesn't seem to any public emphasis by IAF on how to face upto (say) a USAF level PLAAF (in specific areas) because that's the capability we should hit for & then even if we get partially there, hopefully we'd still be in somewhat of a decent situation against netted IADS & LO fighters.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 19 Feb 2015 23:42

http://www.oneindia.com/india/we-have-n ... 59076.html

We have no doubts on Tejas’ capabilities: IAF Chief

Bengaluru, Feb 19: Chief of Air Staff Air Chief Marshal Arup Raha said on Thursday that the Indian Air Force (IAF) would begin the Squadron formation of the Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) Tejas after receiving third series production (SP) variant. It was for the first time that an IAF Chief spoke comprehensively about the home-grown fighter jet's squadron formation. "We have no doubt about the capability of the aircraft," Raha said.

"The first two series production aircraft (SP-1 and SP-2) have some slight variations and from SP-3 onwards we will have them entering into the Squadron. The first squadron will consist of aircraft from SP-3 to SP-6," the Air Chief said.

As reported by this Correspondent earlier, the IAF will form the No 45 Squadron (Flying Daggers for Tejas. The same squadron last flew the MiG 21 Bison aircraft operating from Naliya in Gujarat. The Tejas Squadron will be first raised in Bengaluru and later will be positioned at the Sulur Air Force base, near Coimbatore.

Full squadron strength by end of 14 5 year plan

Raha said the IAF would achieve the status of having required total operational squadron of 42 by the end of the 14th Five Year Plan. "We will form the second Tejas squadron when we receive the aircraft from the Final Operational Clearance block," he said.

The Air Chief said confirmed that in addition to the first order of 40 Tejas aircraft, 80 more will be ordered (Mark II version). He said the induction of the fifth generation fighter aircraft (FGFA) will play a crucial role in achieving the full operational capabilities.
On the sticky MMRCA (Rafale) deal, the Chief said that the Cost Negotiations Committee (CNC) is currently looking into the issues involved in the deal. "IAF needs MMRACAs and I am not saying it has to be Rafale.

The bold part about full Squadron strength of 42 squadrons by 2027 (end of 14th plan period) is the key to understand what is driving various IAF decisions. That is a very aggressive timeline considering the present scenario of types which can be inducted in the period between 2015 -2027.

Only way this number can be filled realistically in required timeline is by ordering more Tejas Mk-1 and increasing number of MMRCA inducted - with more coming directly from foreign vendor. And I'm not factoring in FGFA at the moment. IAF would be lucky to get 1 x Squadron in service by then!

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 19 Feb 2015 23:43

>>>All the IAF wanted was 126 Mirages as a follow on order. Thanks to the dramabazi that must be part of any decision in India, the EF/SH/LM lobby kicked in against a single vendor.

Cosmo, that was then circa 1999. CAG rules noted no single vendor & hence the IAF asked for a Multi role fighter from multiple vendors mixing up weight classes and what not.

How "Mirage 2000" the RFP was can be judged from several of its clauses which were not revised, they were basically Mirage 2000 performance. Without getting into details (even if public) after all the Mirage 2000 is still part of the Orbat, it basically shows the IAF wanted the best tech but some of the specs were not revised upwards. The Russians/Swedes cribbed later they met those requirements & hence claiming the others were better was not accurate etc since it was not part of the original ask etc.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 20 Feb 2015 00:20

Sid wrote:^^^ Rohitvats, Although you have a very big soft-spot for armed forces (we all do), but do you really think -

1. Can India afford MMRCA "now"?
2. When negotiating price for a contract, should a service chief put his weight behind seller? Thereby empowering seller's position? A thought of loosing a tender, almost as big as French air-force order, should have shaken their management. But... with chief clarifying his preference no shaking seems to be happening.

I am just asking for your personal opinion here.

Sid - thanks for asking this question.

But do pardon me for not answering it directly but using it as a medium to address a larger issue.

You see, my soft corner for Services is nothing but an effort to see the whole situation from their side. I'm a it more inclined than others to look at the Order of Battle (ORBAT) and Table of Equipment (TOE) related aspects. Many posters on BRF come from technical background and can relate to many aspects of R&D which is discussed. But I'm yet to see anyone even make cursory effort to understand the operational requirement(s) which the Services face.

Bottom line is, when yellow matter hits the fan, it is the Chief and his boys who'll face the brunt and manage the situation. That is the realty which faces Services in face each day, every day. This might seem like a rhetorical argument, jingoistic even, but it is the reality. And each Service will try to address this requirement to best of their abilities.

I had put up a IAF re-equipment analysis thread listing in detail the kind of issue(s) IAF is facing with respect to its fleet strength. How much discussion do you see on the subject? Has anyone bothered to align their 'prescription' to IAF for ordering X or Y platform to the actual realty on the ground? But yet, we continue to pass casual remarks on what IAF should do!

Just go back and read Karan's reply on my question about why not simply order more Su-30 MKI and go through a dog and pony show of MMRCA fly-off. Leave aside the technological aspect and concentrate only on the logistical challenge of maintaining and running that fleet. After reading what he wrote, would you as IAF Chief want to order 150+ more Su-30 MKI? And don't forget, this information is what a poster on BRF possesses (accepted, a much informed poster

)...imagine the reality facing IAF in the face?

Whether we do R&D in-house or import stuff from abroad, it has to reflect in terms of what equipment you're putting in the hand of Services in a timely manner. Or in this case, number of Squadron in IAF service by a certain time-frame. Because that is what India's war-fighting potential is.

How many people here realize the dangerous situation we're in with respect to low squadron numbers? Or, number of squadrons we actually require (42) and by what time will we have that capacity and capability? IAF Chief says it is aiming that 2027 to reach that magical number of 42 squadrons. That is 15 years from now!

He has clear challenge in front of him and only limited solution. One of them is MMRCA - because along with Tejas Mk-1, it is the only certainty in the given time horizon. And as Air Chief, he will push for something which is will deliver result. FGFA is a paper plane; induction of MMRCA helps to take pressure off from LCA Mk-2 as well. Which is likely to come online by only 2022.

You spoke about IAF Chief being out of line - In the curious - and broken - set-up that we have for higher defense management, it is Services who end up looking out for themselves. Like any other department of the GOI. Because they're far removed from decision making (after all, Services HQ are 'attached offices' to MOD) and everyone has his own interest to take of. And these are not necessarily in line with interest of Services.

So, you should be happy that a Service Chief is batting for his Service to ensure it has the required capability to fight a war which he thinks he might have to. Because he knows that finally, Services will be left holding the lemon.

arthuro · Post by **arthuro** » 20 Feb 2015 00:29

AERO INDIA: HAL defends ability to produce Rafale fighter

Hindustan Aeronautics (HAL) chairman T Suvarnaraju has hit back at reports that an Indian deal to obtain 126 Dassault Rafale fighters is being held up by French concerns about the Indian manufacturer’s quality standards.
Suvaranraju was addressing the media at the Aero India show in Bengaluru, where local journalists have shown great interest in the Rafale programme and the HAL’s helicopter businesses.
Suvarnaraju stressed his faith in HAL’s products, adding that it produces components and structures for a number of major aircraft types, such as the forward doors for the Airbus A320 and the gun bay doors and wire harnesses for the Boeing F/A-18 E/F Super Hornet. The company has also worked on Boeing’s commercial programmes, including the 737 and 777, he said, and pointed to its long record in license-producing types such as the Sukhoi Su-30MKI, BAE Systems Hawk and Dornier 228.
Nonetheless, Suvarnaraju declines to confirm or deny persistent reports that Dassault is dubious about guaranteeing fighters produced by HAL. Under the original terms of the medium multi-role combat aircraft (MMRCA) requirement, the first 18 Rafales are to be produced in France, and the subsequent 108 in India by HAL.
[...]
In a separate press conference, Indian air force Air Marshal Arup Raha said that obsolescence in the service’s Mikoyan MiG-21 fleet means that obtaining the Rafale is an urgent priority for the service. He declined to respond to questions about what the air force will do if negotiations over the MMRCA programme between Dassault and India’s defence ministry fall through.

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articl ... er-409235/

arthuro · Post by **arthuro** » 20 Feb 2015 00:31

This is for VivS and other supporter of US platforms for MMRCA. Imagine if India decided to go against Pakistan without US permission....Hey Egypt is taking on...ISIS and the US already complains !

Pentagon claims no advance warning of Egyptian airstrikes against ISIS in Libya

In a reminder that relations with Egypt have remained strained since the overthrow of President Mohammed Morsi, the Pentagon said Wednesday it was not given any advance warning by the Egyptian air force before it conducted airstrikes against ISIS training camps in eastern Libya Monday.

“We weren't notified ahead of time. We didn't participate or support them in any way, and we're not taking a position on it,” Rear Admiral John Kirby said during a Pentagon briefing.[...]

"It's a complex relationship that we have with Egypt,” Kirby told reporters.[...]

Some high profile weapons shipments have been halted to Cairo ever since, including a shipment of four F-16 fighter jets and spare parts that Cairo has requested since July, part of a larger deal reached in 2009 for 20 F-16s.

“What can I tell you is we are continuing to review the security assistance policy in light of developments -- developments inside Egypt,” Kirby told reporters Wednesday. “So we are still holding -- currently holding on the delivery of several weapon systems, to include the F-16s, the --the M1A1 tanks and -- and some other things, like Harpoon missiles. Those are still on -- on hold, and there's been no decision with respect to that.”

In December the Pentagon delivered a stalled shipment of 10 Apache helicopters to Egypt as Cairo tried to fend off a rising Al Qaeda-linked element carrying out attacks against its soldiers in the Sinai.

Earlier this month, Al Sisi signed a $5.9 billion deal with France to purchase 24 French fighter jets made by Rafale. France agreed to cover the expense should Cairo default.[...]

The symbolism was clear: Al Sisi wanted to show that he has other options and is not dependent on the U.S. military.[...]

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/02 ... -in-libya/

arthuro · Post by **arthuro** » 20 Feb 2015 00:40

The new policy is not about saving on imports, but increasing the domestic market capability to support defense – by boosting investment, expanding manufacturing, support enterprise, raise the technology level and increase economic growth in India.
“As part of this campaign we aim to develop and produce high end technology systems and expand the Defense Industry Base in our country. We believe in the vision of ‘Make in India’ and our proposed Joint Venture with Rafael is a step in this direction.”

http://defense-update.com/20150219_mak- ... OY_0VpICWd
> JV with israelis

arthuro · Post by **arthuro** » 20 Feb 2015 00:42

Fighter squadrons to reach 42 by 2027

BENGALURU: The requirement of having 42 operational fighter squadrons is affected by the ongoing phasing out of the legacy fighter planes and upgradation of existing fleet, chief of air staff Marshal Arup Raha said.

IAF currently operates only 25 fighter squadrons even as it has a need for 42, and the Centre had given a nod to raise 45 squadrons. "Under these circumstances, there is need for faster induction of new fighter aircrafts," he said.[...]

He said that apart from phasing out the MiG-21 aircraft, even upgraded versions of MiG 27 will be phased out in the coming years. The medium multi-role combat aircraft (MMRCA) project, which would replace these aircrafts, would form the first squadron only three years after the deal signed. In the subsequent 5-6 years, rest of the MMRCA squadrons will be formed.[...]

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 303523.cms