Rafale & MMRCA News and Discussions

member_20453 · Post by **member_20453** » 10 Sep 2012 17:55

^ Well I know the Rafale and Dassault well enough to say that it was never really full-independent as the marketing campaigns claim, neither can they guarantee 100% TOT, now it doesn't come as a surprise that the price they quote was calculated to screw us with the TOT. I had even posted various links about Rafale's list of suppliers, many of those parts coming from the US and clearly under ITAR, yet many kept claiming the obvious bs about it being purely French. A lot of the aircraft's extremely effective and sensi sensors have US made components.

member_22605 · Post by **member_22605** » 10 Sep 2012 18:15

BY TOT they mean they'll enable us to make the aircraft the way they make it. If they source something from US then we would do that too and that would all be in the relevant papers. Further the IAF is a much more competent body than all of us put together. Further more the EF2K is even more dependent on the US for almost everything and still its an inferior aircraft and has been proved to be inferior in every competition that it has entered with the rafale while still being expensive. Hence i see no point in calling a competition which has chosen a worthy winner, a fraudulent one.
Cheers!

adityadange · Post by **adityadange** » 10 Sep 2012 18:17

Septimus P. wrote:^ Well I know the Rafale and Dassault well enough to say that it was never really full-independent as the marketing campaigns claim, neither can they guarantee 100% TOT, now it doesn't come as a surprise that the price they quote was calculated to screw us with the TOT. I had even posted various links about Rafale's list of suppliers, many of those parts coming from the US and clearly under ITAR, yet many kept claiming the obvious bs about it being purely French. A lot of the aircraft's extremely effective and sensi sensors have US made components.

my logic says since total life cycle cost is calculated, the CNC/MOD/GOI must have come to the suppliers (and their origins) in order to ensure uninterrupted supply of spare part. so they might try to replace the systems with either french/indian/friendly 3rd party ones (in future)
besides, i remember reading in newspaper that france and india have decided to go beyond just buyer-seller relationship couple of years back. not sure what that means.

nakul · Post by **nakul** » 10 Sep 2012 18:25

adityadange wrote:besides, i remember reading in newspaper that france and india have decided to go beyond just buyer-seller relationship couple of years back. not sure what that means.

Pipavav, France's DCNS join hands to build warships

The partnership is expected to boost India's drive for self-reliance in the field of defence manufacturing, create local jobs

There might be more such deal in the pipeline. Our relationship with Russia has already moved beyond buyer - seller (Brahmos, FGFA). Expect similar stuff with France.

RoyG · Post by **RoyG** » 10 Sep 2012 18:26

Haha, for the longest time Dassault has been claiming complete independence but as I have said tons of times before indeed a good 7% of the aircraft falls under ITAR and i am pretty sure these are components for the Spectra, AESA, FSO and other critical tech.

How did you reach 7%? Are these component's there b/c they cannot be substituted, or b/c they are cheaper? You've been pretty sure about a lot of things in the past like Boeing's F-18 win and that didn't materialize. So understandably the "I am pretty sure" coming from you doesn't sit well unless you provide some evidence.

I am pretty sure we'll end getting only 50% TOT. Rafale winning is one of the biggest scams.

Again, besides a few hiccups here and there the process for selection was rather transparent. Scam based on an opinion piece? I'm not saying you're wrong, just that some evidence would be nice.

Watch as the French screw us over in the next few years. They won't even be able to meet the 60% TOT clause in the RFP.

As opposed to American sanctions on engines and other components in the event we have to validate our thermonuclear capability? Again, this deal is part of a security architecture that balances both freedom of use and capability. How do you know that it will be capped at 60% ToT in the RFP?

Man o man what a waste

Just like those Boeing shares you own Keizer

? Btw, I'm losing track of how many name changes you've gone through at BRF. Not that I have a problem with it or anything, but wouldn't it be easier if you stuck to one instead?

member_20453 · Post by **member_20453** » 10 Sep 2012 21:11

Indeed I did expect a super horny win alas the US just didn't offer the degree of freedom and autonomy as I hoped though ex-IAF chief clearly stated that the Amreekis had the best of weapons and sensors sampled in the testing. That said Lca mk-2 will be powered by a US engine so the talk of sanctions is a waste. Time will tell just how clean this raffy deal is. I have nothing against the raffy, just don't agree with comments of raffy being totally independent.

nakul · Post by **nakul** » 10 Sep 2012 21:19

We don't need ToT to last forever. It should be enough to manufacture our own licensed counterparts. Stop scaremongering about US components. They also entered the MMRCA. Its not that US would not provide ToT at all. We will only need them for the parts France can't, assuming that's true. The rest (most of it) will be French

RoyG · Post by **RoyG** » 10 Sep 2012 22:02

Septimus P. wrote:Indeed I did expect a super horny win alas the US just didn't offer the degree of freedom and autonomy as I hoped though ex-IAF chief clearly stated that the Amreekis had the best of weapons and sensors sampled in the testing. That said Lca mk-2 will be powered by a US engine so the talk of sanctions is a waste. Time will tell just how clean this raffy deal is. I have nothing against the raffy, just don't agree with comments of raffy being totally independent.

I find your arguments a bit incoherent and your climb-downs expected. Who on this forum claimed that the rafale was totally independent? Again, it can be inferred that the decision to go with GE was done after examining how sanctions would affect our war fighting capabilities and how it would fit into MMRCA and nuclear contract negotiations. Deals can't be looked at in isolation. Could it be that it was the best deal given the geopolitical climate at the time?

member_22605 · Post by **member_22605** » 10 Sep 2012 23:06

It was a decision based purely on technical and commercial merit and in that order and the SH was "Just not good enough" despite whatever anyone might think, feel or say.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 10 Sep 2012 23:28

Hardly we can find anything in our inventory that is "totally independent". The degree of freedom lie is the strategic sphere, as the khaans always are known for their version of these freedom - take for the INS Jalasha as an example. The degrees of operational freedom is higher with French products, and also it comes with certain cost.. and that we must chew on. Of course, unkill always has the best package for any nation on the planet. Should we keep harping about that? It is just out of bounds on the very same degrees.

Our goals and objectives here are even though France can chew our pockets, they don't chew our freedom.. whereas the Russkies will chew us on the operations with substandard after sale service.
It was all written on the face of Rafale, even when M2K was withdrawn. Heck, even the RFI was based on M2K++ initially.

The only other aspect we should maximize the bang for the buck (any way we are spending), is to get maturity and engineering expertise on Kaveri++ clubbed with this deal. That would be sweet.

nakul · Post by **nakul** » 10 Sep 2012 23:34

Dassault was happy to provide us a Kaveri powered Rafale to clinch the deal. If we can get Dassault to help us on this, it would give us tons of experience since the other aspects of Rafale are known. Moreover, it would be safer to test on twin engined Rafale than single engine LCA. This could give us more freedom while allowing Kaveri to mature. (i am not expecting kaveri to have a 10000 hr life span from day 1)...

arthuro · Post by **arthuro** » 11 Sep 2012 00:43

The rafale is fully independent and 100% ITAR Free. The assertion in the quoted article by Septimus is simply incorrect. One should have checked the source of the article before believing it for face value. It is the same author who wrote this article which is full of mistakes and obviously virulently anti-rafale :
http://www.ipcs.org/pdf_file/issue/SR12 ... Rafale.pdf

Should one have taken systems maturity as a sign of electronic superiority then the F-18 had no equal, with the Eurofighter a very close second

and in electronic terms the Rafale is simply not a match for the tried and tested F-16 Block 50.

Should hostilities ensue one must remember that the Saudi’s have both the F-15SE and the Eurofighter

while the Rafale having no such device (or the provision for such device in the future) suffers at both very low altitudes and at higher altitudes thus being forced to fight at altitudes where it is kinematically completely outclassed by Russian and Chinese fighters.

The Eurofighter is a full 1 tonne lighter than the Rafale

China’s bigger radars will invariably mated to the SD-10 already the longest range (reportedly) BVRAAM in the market presumably also for sale to Pakistan.

The Eurofighter’s cockpit enables the pilot to see through much of the floor and body of the aircraft as if the aircraft never existed

The Rafale’s “Omni-Role” tag only ensures it fails miserably at everything.

Now let's review an independent interview of a Dassault representative from the Canadian parliament :

Mr. Yves Robins:
Our company has a very long tradition of industrial cooperation with its customers. It is part of our corporate DNA. There are numerous examples of industrial cooperation with countries such as Greece, Belgium, Spain, the United Arab Emirates and Taiwan, which have purchased Mirage 2000, Mirage F1 and Mirage 5 fighters from Dassault.
On each occasion, we have shown our ability to adapt to the industrial cooperation needs of the client. Clients express their needs and it is our responsibility to provide a satisfactory response where possible.
Very often our response and proposals on industrial cooperation are governed by an extremely important principle in the area of technology transfer. In cases where the French Government decides to sell a fighter to a friendly nation, we do not restrict the transfer of technology. This is especially important today given the huge number of electronic components in fighter navigation and attack systems. It is also vital given the need for countries with the necessary capacity to be able to tailor weapons systems to their own requirements and to support the operational life and upgrading of the aircraft over a 30 to 40-year period. As a rule of thumb, it is essential, in cases like these, to provide client nations with software engineering workshops. These are designed to deliver the tools customers will need to maintain and customize the aircraft to their Air Forces' current and future requirements.
(1650)

Hon. Dominic LeBlanc:
Your reply to my question is very informative.
Thank you. I have no further questions.

The Chair:
Thank you, Mister LeBlanc.
Mister Bachand, you have the floor.

Mr. Claude Bachand:
Thank you, Mister Chair.
Mister Robins, does the term ITAR-free that I frequently hear Europeans using refer to the unrestricted technology transfers you mentioned?

Mr. Yves Robins:
ITAR is a term specific to U.S. legislation. It is not part of European law. The Rafale fighter is a 100-percent French product. As a result, the French Government is free to choose to which countries it will transfer technology.

http://www.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications ... nt-3474371
This interview from the Canadian parliament is very informative and I advise to take the time to read it.

**********************************

Other reports :

Dassault equipment not subject to ITAR restrictions (U.S.)

http://europeagenda2010.free.fr/article ... rticle=221

Dassault claims that the Rafale has an advantage over many of the competitors because it is not subject to ITAR restrictions.

http://software.carsonrage.com/security ... r-force-★/

Fundamental point, the aircraft was intended and designed from the outset to overcome the U.S. rules "Itar" export control of sensitive materials. A key point to guarantee national independence in combat aircraft. In France, in fact, no way dependent on foreign technology for one of its most strategic weapons. The State therefore control any bolt-Rafale or almost - thus ensuring that nobody can prevent build or to fly. And he can sell to whomever he wants, without having to ask permission.

http://archives.lesechos.fr/archives/20 ... 40-ECH.htm

Jaybhatt · Post by **Jaybhatt** » 11 Sep 2012 10:39

RoyG wrote:
Septimus P. wrote:Indeed I did expect a super horny win alas the US just didn't offer the degree of freedom and autonomy as I hoped though ex-IAF chief clearly stated that the Amreekis had the best of weapons and sensors sampled in the testing. That said Lca mk-2 will be powered by a US engine so the talk of sanctions is a waste. Time will tell just how clean this raffy deal is. I have nothing against the raffy, just don't agree with comments of raffy being totally independent.
I find your arguments a bit incoherent and your climb-downs expected. Who on this forum claimed that the rafale was totally independent? Again, it can be inferred that the decision to go with GE was done after examining how sanctions would affect our war fighting capabilities and how it would fit into MMRCA and nuclear contract negotiations. Deals can't be looked at in isolation. Could it be that it was the best deal given the geopolitical climate at the time?

Oh dear ! When I posted the URL of the Pioneer article, I did not envisage that Shri Septimus, in one of his new incarnations, would jump into the fray with his concocted "evidence" and imaginary "data" to further his American agenda.

In any case, Arthuro has rebutted the concoctions of Septimus babu very effectively and convincingly. Merci, cher collègue.

To go back to the Pioneer article, I do not necessarily concur with all the propositions of the author. However, on costing and TOT, there are certain leads that the Indian negotiators should keep in mind.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 11 Sep 2012 10:48

well I think this fight is a moot point. we are in bed with americans on many fronts incl Tejas engine, C130, C17, perhaps Chinook, Apaches, lots of munitions (and hopefully SDB2 and SLAM-ER soon), P8, perhaps C27, jalashwa and her sikorsky sea king helis, LM2500 turbines on all our latest and oncoming ships, boeing BBJ for our ruling elites, a fleet of AW101 for vvip , the list will be long if we look around ......

rather than usage restrictions I believe the slow legs/lack of oomph in superhornet performance (esp in Leh ops) and the relative lack of american interest in wink-wink strategic projects with India were factors. one has to fully agree the shornet did have the most ready-to-use nav-attack system, APG79 and the widest and cheapest goodie bag of munitions.

member_20453 · Post by **member_20453** » 11 Sep 2012 13:29

Indeed, time will tell how the French will screw us with the Rafale TOT. Arthuro keeps posting french articles about how Rafale in purely independent but obviously Dassault ran into problems trying to give full-TOT to Brazil when the American objected to Dassault's tall claims. Now, suddenly we see claims of Indian industry not being mature enough to be able to handle full-tot. Rafale truly can't match the Block 60 matter of fact or else UAE would have bought it a long time ago. All signs point to a good screwing in the making by the french just like the scorpene deal.

Agree with Singha, all this bickering about buying American is an utter waste of time, we are buying more and more and they are bound to win a lot more deals. I just keep hearing post after post of waste full chatter about how buying amreeki is so suspicious. It isn't, they do have the best sensors and weapons tested during the competition, even the Raffy fast and capable as it is, isn't just as good without proper Amreeki weapons deployed from it.

French claim after claim about Rafale being completely independent is also waste, just another lie, or else they wouldn't have had so many issues when it come to TOT chatter.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 11 Sep 2012 17:02

Bed with Americans is a fine logic as long as the product that comes out of such relationship has Indian last name.

arthuro · Post by **arthuro** » 11 Sep 2012 20:48

Indeed, time will tell how the French will screw us with the Rafale TOT. Arthuro keeps posting french articles about how Rafale in purely independent but obviously Dassault ran into problems trying to give full-TOT to Brazil when the American objected to Dassault's tall claims. Now, suddenly we see claims of Indian industry not being mature enough to be able to handle full-tot. Rafale truly can't match the Block 60 matter of fact or else UAE would have bought it a long time ago. All signs point to a good screwing in the making by the french just like the scorpene deal.

If Dassault and the french governement lied about ToT and the rafale being ITAR free then why the negotiation are progressing smoothly ? If the french side is unable to provide full ToT due to their own fault then the negotiations would have already stopped long ago. The issue regarding ToT is more linked at the pace Indian industry can absorb the technology rather that alleged lie of the french side.

"I find no reason why it shouldn't be signed by the end of this month or next month", Air Officer Commanding-in-Chief, Training Command, IAF, Air Marshal Rajinder Singh said.

He indicated that negotiations are currently on with regard to pricing for the 126-aircraft deal. "There is money....this thing here and there (pricing being finalised)".
The Air Marshal admitted to "some problems" (on pricing) but asserted that it's not unusual in such big deals. "It should come through", he said, adding that the first aircraft under the MMRCA deal would start "flowing in" in 2017.

http://articles.economictimes.indiatime ... rca-tender

The above quoted statement is simply inconsistent with the claim of lie or manipulation regarding ToT.

It is simply nonsense to believe that both the french governement and Dassault/Thales/Safran would lie to such and extent to India, Brazil, Canada, Malaysia... And take the risk of the negotiations being cancelled. I mean just use your common sense.

As for the rafale and F16E do you remind that the F16E+ (F16IN) did not passed the technical evaluation ? And have the UAE both more F16E or another aircraft instead of the rafale ? They didn't. With F16E and mirage 2000-9 they can afford to wait that's all.

nakul · Post by **nakul** » 11 Sep 2012 20:51

Forget his claims. He was claiming that F 18 will win. If US would not give ToT, how could F 18 win?

member_23364 · Post by **member_23364** » 11 Sep 2012 21:17

This might be off-topic here but i find that there are numerous references to the way "the French scre*** us with the Scorpenes".

The Scorpene deal had 3 components- License cost, Imported systems/components cost and Cost of manufacture at MDL. At the time the initial contract was drafted, MDL gave a projection of the components it *thought* it could manufacture on its own/in India. This increased the value of the last cost bucket. 5+ years after the deal was signed and the Scorpene build being nowhere complete to the level it should have been, MDL admitted it could not make these components/parts on its own. Now, these parts needed to be imported and the cost escalation for this change was Rs 4500 odd crores.

I am not a French fan-boy but i find blame in-house for this. MDL should have made an accurate assessment of its capabilities before giving that commitment. If you are creating an opportunity to be fleeced, you WILL be fleeced, no matter who is the customer or the client.

RoyG · Post by **RoyG** » 11 Sep 2012 21:23

Septimus P. wrote:Indeed, time will tell how the French will screw us with the Rafale TOT. Arthuro keeps posting french articles about how Rafale in purely independent but obviously Dassault ran into problems trying to give full-TOT to Brazil when the American objected to Dassault's tall claims. Now, suddenly we see claims of Indian industry not being mature enough to be able to handle full-tot. Rafale truly can't match the Block 60 matter of fact or else UAE would have bought it a long time ago. All signs point to a good screwing in the making by the french just like the scorpene deal.

Agree with Singha, all this bickering about buying American is an utter waste of time, we are buying more and more and they are bound to win a lot more deals. I just keep hearing post after post of waste full chatter about how buying amreeki is so suspicious. It isn't, they do have the best sensors and weapons tested during the competition, even the Raffy fast and capable as it is, isn't just as good without proper Amreeki weapons deployed from it.

French claim after claim about Rafale being completely independent is also waste, just another lie, or else they wouldn't have had so many issues when it come to TOT chatter.

“You're never a loser until you quit trying.” - Mike Ditka

Good day Sir.

arthuro · Post by **arthuro** » 12 Sep 2012 02:22

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 12 Sep 2012 02:37

In the above pic, are the canards just behind the inlet airflow path?

member_20292 · Post by **member_20292** » 12 Sep 2012 12:28

Singha wrote:well I think this fight is a moot point. we are in bed with americans on many fronts incl Tejas engine, C130, C17, perhaps Chinook, Apaches, lots of munitions (and hopefully SDB2 and SLAM-ER soon), P8, perhaps C27, jalashwa and her sikorsky sea king helis, LM2500 turbines on all our latest and oncoming ships, boeing BBJ for our ruling elites, a fleet of AW101 for vvip , the list will be long if we look around ......

Thats the best thing about the Indian armed forces. They are truly unique in the sense that they are in bed with Russia, America, Europe, Israel. The amount of optimization and system integration that they are used to doing, is incredible.

India gets the best technology from everywhere w.r.t armed forces. China gets nothing. That's good.

member_20292 · Post by **member_20292** » 12 Sep 2012 12:31

^^^ nice articles Arthuro. I find your posts to be very very good. Thanks.

siddharth · Post by **siddharth** » 12 Sep 2012 13:21

arthuro wrote:

Beautiful aircraft. In this profile, to my eyes it resembles our own Tejas (if you subtract the canards of-course! ).

member_20453 · Post by **member_20453** » 12 Sep 2012 15:11

Fact is we would have never known about US TOT intentions till SH had made the downlist. Boeing did meet the TOT requirement set in the RFP. Making the downlist would have allowed for more negotiations with the US, the SH in it's current form already kills the Raffy, the SH international offered to us was far superior than anything in the competition. regardless of what anyone says, a deal for 126 jet immediate buy with options that could go upto 74 more creates a whole lot of leverage even in the US, this leverage could have been used to get the US to stop supplying tech to Pak, get a lot of TOT, joint customization of source codes, lots of neat weapons and more importantly a partnership that allows us to have much needed support against the Chinese.

Moreover with the SH, they would have had commonality with LCA mk-2 for engines. Not to mention the whole deal being atleast 5 billion+ cheaper than the Rafale. Also the deliveries can be faster with SH being produced at around 42 aircraft per year. The large panel cockpit, stealth pods, uprated engines, internal IRST, by far the most cutting edge of AESAs, increased range, etc do make it a cut above the rest. We could have even had some Growlers with borrowed jammers till the next gen jammer became available.

Govt, IAF and MOD are known for blunders, Rafale seems to be turning into one as well. I assure you, strong as we are, we currently neither have the capacity or the volume to take on china/ Pak at the same time, all by ourselves without things going nuclear, Unkil has to come to our rescue.

All this hogwash about the pace of absorption of technology in India is also pure BS. We have been making advanced all aspect TVC engines and kick ass avionics for the MKI for the better half of the last decade. Rafale apart from the Spectra, AESA and lower rcs has little avionics related advantages over the MKI. MKI's Bars has a longer detection range, it's EW suite Eagle to be deployed soon also matches the Spectra.

We'll wait to see how much TOT we will finally get for the Rafale.

nakul · Post by **nakul** » 12 Sep 2012 15:16

^^^

That tells us why we should not adopt the Swiss way of direct democracy where citizens choose the plane for deals like MMCRA...

arthuro · Post by **arthuro** » 12 Sep 2012 16:51

Fact is we would have never known about US TOT intentions till SH had made the downlist. Boeing did meet the TOT requirement set in the RFP. Making the downlist would have allowed for more negotiations with the US, the SH in it's current form already kills the Raffy, the SH international offered to us was far superior than anything in the competition. regardless of what anyone says, a deal for 126 jet immediate buy with options that could go upto 74 more creates a whole lot of leverage even in the US, this leverage could have been used to get the US to stop supplying tech to Pak, get a lot of TOT, joint customization of source codes, lots of neat weapons and more importantly a partnership that allows us to have much needed support against the Chinese.

The SH was regarded as inferior to the rafale. As a matter of fact it did not pass the technical evaluation. Why are you persisting in your own delirium ? The SH was rejected on a technical basis while the rafale wasn't.

Rafale apart from the Spectra, AESA and lower rcs has little avionics related advantages over the MKI. MKI's Bars has a longer detection range, it's EW suite Eagle to be deployed soon also matches the Spectra.

You are forgetting the most important aspect : sensor fusion which enables you to have almost the perfect knwoledge of the battle field in a simple glance at your tactical display without long and stressfull mental work. That's a huge leap compared to the mki

member_20453 · Post by **member_20453** » 12 Sep 2012 17:03

SH in it's current form is indeed Inferior in aerial performance, not in weapons and avionics, the weapons and avionics proved themselves to be the best available in the competition. Performance improvement was part of the SH international on offer. Just a matter of ordering them. However, it's current inferior performance still allows it to kill the Rafale in a one on one.

arthuro · Post by **arthuro** » 12 Sep 2012 17:14

SH in it's current form is indeed Inferior in aerial performance, not in weapons and avionics, the weapons and avionics proved themselves to be the best available in the competition. Performance improvement was part of the SH international on offer. Just a matter of ordering them. However, it's current inferior performance still allows it to kill the Rafale in a one on one.

Proof ?

The only knwon encountered opposed rafale M F3 with PESA radar against SH block2 with AESA radar. The BVR simulated fights gave a very balanced kill exchange rate between the two types.

Then the SH was eliminated of the indian evaluation in the first round which means that it is not as good as you think. Besides according to first local rumors the rafale also came ahead of the SH in the malaysian technical evaluation.

Now the rafale offered to India has : AESA, improved spectra, a new OSF and long range meteor missiles. With meteor, AASM, mica IR and SCALP the rafale is in fact more capable weapon wise than the SH (although costlier). In terms of performance and maneuvrability it is clearly ahead and in terms avionics they are roughly in the same category.

PratikDas · Post by **PratikDas** » 12 Sep 2012 23:38

Cross posting from the International Aerospace thread:

Ravi Karumanchiri wrote:BAE Systems, EADS in merger talks

Paul Sandle
London — Reuters

Published Wednesday, Sep. 12 2012, 12:57 PM EDT
Last updated Wednesday, Sep. 12 2012, 1:02 PM EDT

Britain’s BAE Systems PLC said on Wednesday it was in talks about a merger with EADS NV, the parent of Airbus SAS, to create a European powerhouse in aerospace, defence and security.

BAE shareholders would own 40 per cent of the combined group and EADS shareholders the remaining 60 per cent with the combine structured as a dual-listed company, BAE said in a statement.

<snip>

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-o ... le4539212/

If this comes to fruition then British minds, and therefore US minds by proxy, will influence execution of the Rafale contract. I can't imagine any good coming out of that.

Ravi Karumanchiri · Post by **Ravi Karumanchiri** » 13 Sep 2012 00:14

^^^^PratikDas,

I don't understand what you mean. Rafale is by French Dassault. The potential merger between BAE and EADS would impact on Eurofighter, not on Rafale.

Am I missing something?

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 13 Sep 2012 00:43

Wasn't there a report on the merge scenario between Dassault and BEA? Perhaps it was a pre-merger study

Ravi Karumanchiri · Post by **Ravi Karumanchiri** » 13 Sep 2012 01:29

RE: ^^^^^

http://www.defenceaviation.com/2011/01/ ... ation.html

Dassault Aviation is fully privately owned French Aerospace and Defence Company specializing in design, development and manufacturing of civilian and military aircraft.

<snip>

... finally changed its name to Dassault Aviation in 1990. Dassault Aviation is notably known around the world for its Mirage Fighter Jets and Falcon Business Jets. Currently Charles Edelstenn is the Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the company.

Ownership: Dassault Aviation became fully privately owned company in 1998 when the French Govt. transferred its shares to Aerospatiale. Aerospatiale later merged with EADS. Today majority stakes in the company are held by the Dassault Group which is owned by the Dassault Family lead by Serge Dassault.

Dassault Aviation also owns several related companies and maintains them as its subsidiaries. These include Dassault Falcon responsible for Falcon Business Jets, Thales Group which is involved in electronics, avionics, radars and combat vehicles. Thales supplies all the primary subsystems like radar, avionics and electronics suit to Dassault Fighter jets. Others include Dassault Procurement Services, Dassault Falcon Service and Sogitec Industries.

Presence: Being a French company, Dassault as its maximum presence in France with 10 facilities spread all across the country. It also has its offices in countries like Brazil, India, Taiwan, Hong Kong (PRC), Greece, Russia, Switzerland and UAE. Its subsidiaries have large presence in USA with 5 offices. Thales has its presence in UK, USA, Germany, China, Spain, Egypt, UAE, Venezuela and Israel. Dassault Aviation has sold its product to as many as 76 countries. It employs more than 12000 employees and its aircrafts have logged more than 25 million flight hours. So far Dassault Aviation has delivered over 7900 aircrafts.

Notable customers:
French Air Force and Navy
Spanish Air Force
Indian Air Force
Israeli Air Force
Pakistani Air Force
Royal Air Force of Oman
UAE Air Force
Republic of China Air Force
Wells Fargo Bank
Federal Express (FedEx)

Notable Products: Most notable products of Dassault Aviation include Mirage Series Fighter Jets, Rafale Fighter Jets, Falcon Business Jets and nEUROn UCAV.

<snip>

Rafale: Dassault Rafale was first introduced with the French Air Force in the fall of year 2000 and with the French Navy in 2002. Rafale is one of the most advance 4th Generation fighter and is comparable with the Eurofighter Typhoon and the Su-30/35. Its capability include low observability, Advance avionics, best in the world EW suit, high payload capacity and high endurance. It is currently on offer to many countries including India, Brazil, Libya, Greece, Oman and UAE. However even with superior capability the Rafael has so far failed to win any foreign orders and has suffered four mishaps since 2007.

<snip>

nEUROn: Is experimental Unmanned Combat Air Vehicle being developed with cooperation with other European companies. Only one prototype will be built and will be used to develop a production UCAV by 2020.

Future: Dassault Aviation is the only aircraft manufacturer in the world which is still owned and controlled by the family which founded it. Dassault Aviation continues to earn more than €350 million net profit and its product are at the forefront in terms of technology. The Falcon Family business Jets are still quite popular and have good demand and the Rafael is leading multi-vendor competition in India and Brazil. Dassault has also bagged multi-billion dollar contracts to upgrade its Mirage series fighters from across the world. Most importantly Dassault Aviation is passionate about its work and will continue to enjoy great deal of success for decades to come.

http://www.defenceaviation.com/2011/01/ ... ation.html

RE: OWNERSHIP, SHAREHOLDING as per corporate disclosure http://www.dassault-aviation.com/en/avi ... g.html?L=1

Groupe Industriel Marcel Dassault - 50.55%
EADS - 46.32%
Public - 3.13%

ONE LAST REMARK....

Re-read that second line I copied from the Globe and Mail website and do some quick math....

"Under the detailed plans announced by the two firms on Wednesday BAE shareholders would own 40 per cent of the combined group and EADS shareholders the remaining 60 pct with the firm structured as a dual-listed company."

REALIZE: The French-controlled EADS will be gobbling-up British-controlled BAE in order to compete with American behemoth Boeing. The only way that's going to happen-and-work, is if the Typhoon is taken off the table. JMT

Could this signal the end of the Eurofighter Typhoon? (Something that I have long anticipated, for macro-industrial reasons like the ones we're seeing at play right now.)

PratikDas · Post by **PratikDas** » 13 Sep 2012 03:44

If Dassault sources components from EADS and EADS sources within, from the new BAE Systems unit, is the Rafale still 100% French and immune to ITAR?

(Not a rhetorical question)

Ravi Karumanchiri · Post by **Ravi Karumanchiri** » 13 Sep 2012 04:31

^^^^^
ITAR is an American thing. BAE is British and EADS is Franco-German, with a wee bit of Spanish.

ITAR is therefore, not a factor in any of this.

Please understand the report: They're not talking about setting up units (which would be like a JV). No, this would be a formal "stock-swap" deal that would cede ownership/control/boardroom votes to the EADS side of the table (comprising 60%), not the BAE side of the table (which would only comprise 40% -- so the "votes" will be in EADS hands).

The only reason BAE would consider such a deal, is if they considered their long term prospects to be bleak; so better merge now with EADS and retain shareholder value.

As for sourcing parts; that's a whole separate issue from ownership. No one should try to impute who is sourcing exactly what from whom; because there is nothing in this report that would indicate any of that. HOWEVER, I don't know what parts of the Dassault Rafale are Made in the USA -- Are any? (Not a rhetorical question.)

GeorgeWelch · Post by **GeorgeWelch** » 13 Sep 2012 09:29

Ravi Karumanchiri wrote:^^^^^
ITAR is an American thing. BAE is British and EADS is Franco-German, with a wee bit of Spanish.

ITAR is therefore, not a factor in any of this.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internatio ... Retransfer

member_22605 · Post by **member_22605** » 13 Sep 2012 10:11

Again the SH was thrown out not because of ITAR or TOT, but because it was "inferior" as an overall package. As things stand, the Rafale "won" and it did so hands down with the EF2K being a close second in terms of performance but a distant second in terms of the price we would've had to pay.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 13 Sep 2012 12:07

Ravi Karumanchiri wrote:REALIZE: The French-controlled EADS will be gobbling-up British-controlled BAE in order to compete with American behemoth Boeing. The only way that's going to happen-and-work, is if the Typhoon is taken off the table. JMT

Could this signal the end of the Eurofighter Typhoon? (Something that I have long anticipated, for macro-industrial reasons like the ones we're seeing at play right now.)

EADS isn't French controlled. By design the Germans and French have an equal shareholding in the company (though the French govt ended up with a marginally higher share). Any merger (and it is a merger not an acquisition) will require the approval of French, German and British governments (the latter exercises a veto through a golden share in BAE).

And as to the question of who will maker the bigger gain in the event of the merger going through; the talks are still on but the news pushed up BAES shares by 8% while EADS shares dropped by 5.6%.

Strategically, the merger makes perfect sense. The EADS' airliner business is burgeoning but it needs to shore up its relatively weak defence business that has made negligible inroads into the critical US market, while BAE being a vertically integrated defence company with the fourth largest market share in the US, is looking to diversify its business in light of impending defence spending cuts.

In any case, this will no effect on the fate or fortune of the Eurofighter. It has confirmed orders logged for over 150 aircraft, and unless those are cancelled production will not stop and even in that case, support through maintenance and upgrades for already commissioned aircraft will carry on for the next 30 years.

nash · Post by **nash** » 13 Sep 2012 13:43

http://www.livemint.com/Money/d3TZcj7U7 ... emand.html

Is this anything to do with deal signing with rafale this or next month end.

Its a 20-25 paise move because of defence payments, might be a large amount.