IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 26 Aug 2015 05:37

This is a deal that the people of France need to oppose.

Hobbes · Post by **Hobbes** » 26 Aug 2015 05:43

From the AINonline article by Neelam Mathews quoted above:

“So much for the Make in India program,” said an Indian defense vendor, who told AIN that the valuable MMRCA project would have boosted the aerospace industry in India.

I believe the "Indian defence vendor" in question is most probably Anil Ambani, who stood to gain substantially if the MMRCA deal went through with Dassault in its original form.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 26 Aug 2015 05:43

I have a viewpoint on exactly who was "fixated" with the Rafale.

A few years ago, when it was announced that the Rafale was selected as the winning contender of the MMRCA fly off and that negotiations would start with the French to arrive at a deal, we on BRF saw that as a done deal. As a group we made 5 million posts chalking out numbers of Rafales. deployments, avionics suites, AESA capabilities, ECM, ECCM, Missiles, bombs, range, payloads, targets etc. We did our homework diligently while negotiations were on. In that period what did the IAF do to prepare itself for the Rafale? Nothing! Shocking no? While we on BRF had prepared everything about how the Rafale would fit into the IAF - the IAF itself sat twiddling its thumbs and did not so much as build a thatched hut in preparation to receive the first Rafale. But when it comes to "fixation with the Rafale" - it was the IAF that was fixated not us. We are our normal "ahead of curve" patriotic selves. We were ready to receive the Rafale, but not fixated. The IAF made no preparations for the Rafale but was "fixated" with it. If this is not Lahori logic, please tell me what it is.

And just remember folks as you wipe your tears away for all those man hours spent doing what we thought was the IAFs job wrt to the Rafale. The words "Plan A" was never ever mentioned by anyone. Not by us. Not by GoI. Not by IAF. Not by Dassault. The words "Plan A" did not exist.

Then suddenly out of the blue some reporter asked "What is Plan B". The CAS said "there is no Plan B". So that is the IAFs fault, But tell me my beloved fellow Lahori logicians, why did no one ask what plan A was? Did anyone define plan A? When what we think was Plan A was still being negotiated, not a done deal we were talking as if it was a done deal and now we say the IAF was fixated. And when we now realize that we are the morons who never understood that negotiations and plans can fail and one must not prepare for deployments even before a deal is struck. So who was fixated? Us or the IAF? Mentally we had deployed the Rafaale. We cannot be blamed. But the IAF was fixated and the IAF has no plan B. Did we have a plan B? Did anyone mention it in those 250 million posts we made about the Rafale?

And tell me another thing folks. When the Rafale was selected and negotiations started, if someone had said "Plan A is to buy/make 126 Rafales in India" how would people have reacted? How come we were not intelligent enough to see that as plan A. we could have made a plan B for IAF no, considering that we almost deployed Rafale on BRF. Why are we behaving so butt hurt and throwing blame around at everyone else rather than laughing at our own naivete and stupidity for having spent nearly a decade making plans for the IAF? The mind boggles. To think that we laugh at Pakis for behaving in this manner

I think we have simply taken ourselves too seriously and taken that too far.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 26 Aug 2015 05:51

Hobbes wrote:From the AINonline article by Neelam Mathews quoted above:

“So much for the Make in India program,” said an Indian defense vendor, who told AIN that the valuable MMRCA project would have boosted the aerospace industry in India.
I believe the "Indian defence vendor" in question is most probably Anil Ambani, who stood to gain substantially if the MMRCA deal went through with Dassault in its original form.

Well, that statement is true, irrespective of who the vendor is/was.

However, the deal, when seen in its entirety, was equally questionable.

I just do not see a way out with the French. Buying from them is bound to be expensive.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 26 Aug 2015 06:00

Here are a few dates so we stop using Lahori logic

The Rafale was selected as winning contender in 2012
Modi was elected PM in 2014. "Make in India" was Modis idea.

If we start including pre-Modi programs as part of make in India then it means that Su-30 was a make in India success of UPA govt because first HAL made Su 30 appeared under UPA.. Rafale is Modi's "make in India fail"

srai · Post by **srai** » 26 Aug 2015 08:43

ldev wrote:The latest (Aaj ki tajee khabar!!)

Breakthrough likely in Rafale talks as France softens stand

So this article says that the deal is likely to be Euro 8 billion for the 36 aircraft i.e. Euro 222 million per aircraft or US$ 255 million at the current exchange rate or Indian rupees 1700 crores per aircraft. There...France is not going to charge US $ 300 million which some people were afraid off, now its "only" US$ 255 million they have softened their stand....so the IAF should be very happy!!

...

Don't forget MLU in 15-to-20-years time. As a general rule stated by Dassault for its Mirage-2000 upgrade, MLU costs 80% of a new aircraft. Then also throw in additional LCC package and weapons at MLU. So you are looking at an average of $400 million/aircraft for its 30-to-40-year life.

Other hidden costs: integrating Indian weapons. OEM will charge a bit for that too.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 26 Aug 2015 08:51

wasnt $250 mil the price of each of our Phalcons and the initial cost of the P15 DDG?

its even costlier than the F22

member_22539 · Post by **member_22539** » 26 Aug 2015 09:20

^All that money for something utterly unremarkable. Yes it does everything a little better than other 4 gen fighters out there, but how is that worthy 250 to 300 million dollars a piece, along with another boatload of money for weapons and MLU that will be the ultimate b!tch of a money sucker?

No amount of fuel saved or uptime available will justify this price, which is almost twice that of a Su-30MKI and at least four times that of a LCA. Is this white elephant actually twice as good and four times as good as the Su-30MKI or LCA?

So it gives 80% availability as compared to a 50% to 60% (projected to be 70% soon) availability of the Su-30MKI, but is that better than 2 Su-30MKI?

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 26 Aug 2015 09:25

MMRCA Deal was projected based on Life Cycle Cost of the Aircraft , So Rafale figures would be based on it.

member_22539 · Post by **member_22539** » 26 Aug 2015 09:51

^I doubt they would have included all the lifetime costs involved like spares, fuel and weapons (more than happy to be corrected, as that would finally make sense). If not, then what does this lifecycle costs include? And what would be similar lifecycle costs for Su-30MKI and LCA?

Spares deals for western purchases like that of C-17 have been negotiated and signed separately and cost another boatload of money (which is totally worthy it, given the options, unlike the Rafale). If I remember right, lifecycle costs were calculated for them as well and the purchase price didn't include the cost of lifetime spares, etc.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 26 Aug 2015 10:15

The entire MMRCA deal and the only IAF fighter purchase till date was based on Life Cycle Cost , Offsets and TOT .
It does not include Life Time cost of Weapons .Weapons is always a seperate deal for any aircraft purchase , Certainly not life time spare but for 1 to 3 years as mutually decided

The other cost is building infra for deployment of squadron IAF wants at two location , Training and Maintenance , Simulators etc

There are tons of things that go into such deal and fine print after negotiation are vetted by legal team , its very difficult for any AAM Abdul to know it unless one is part of negotiating such deal

member_22539 · Post by **member_22539** » 26 Aug 2015 10:27

^Seems right, but are you saying that quotes for Su-30MKI and LCA does not include the cost of such infrastructure/training (though Su-30MKI must have much already in place, but LCA is totally new right?) and is just the fly away cost of it? Also, what is the fly away cost of Rafale (Wiki says 108 million dollars flyaway cost in 2011 and it must be much more now right, maybe 150 million dollars)? Is that still economical for us considering the fly away price of Su-30MKI and LCA?

Gyan · Post by **Gyan** » 26 Aug 2015 10:30

Re Shiv

I think lot of problem, (uninformed?) persons like me have with Rafale is an evident dislike and step brotherly treatment meted out to indigenous products, in this instance, to LCA, while complete passionate love affair with super costly imports. Refusing to give a leg up to (cheaper) indigenous production makes it seem that these imports are represented by a lobby which not only want to sell imported products to India but keep India "continuously" dependent on imports. For instance, lets assume LCA is limited aircraft but what is the big problem ordering another 20 (+40) or Giving Rs. 300 crores for project definition study of AMCA which is pending for 10 years?

eklavya · Post by **eklavya** » 26 Aug 2015 10:36

GeorgeWelch wrote:For instance, the MKI would fail the MRCA evaluation (and no, I'm not just talking about the size limit).

Could you provide some details of which parameters were failed by the F-16 and F-18 and would be failed by the Su-30MKI.

GeorgeWelch wrote: Yes, the process must weigh capability vs affordability. Simply demanding everything you want with no regard for cost is guaranteed to end in disaster.

It's big of you to concede that the F-35 programme is a disaster. Incidentally, what is the USAF /USN/USMC Plan B?

srai · Post by **srai** » 26 Aug 2015 10:45

Gyan wrote:...

I think lot of problem, (uninformed?) persons like me have with Rafale is an evident dislike and step brotherly treatment meted out to indigenous products, in this instance, to LCA, while complete passionate love affair with super costly imports. Refusing to give a leg up to (cheaper) indigenous production makes it seem that these imports are represented by a lobby which not only want to sell imported products to India but keep India "continuously" dependent on imports. For instance, lets assume LCA is limited aircraft but what is the big problem ordering another 20 (+40) or Giving Rs. 300 crores for project definition study of AMCA which is pending for 10 years?

You have summed it up well!

40 LCA Mk.1 order is ok but 36 Rafale is not ok ... it must be 126 + 63 options only

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 26 Aug 2015 11:01

Arun Menon wrote:^Seems right, but are you saying that quotes for Su-30MKI and LCA does not include the cost of such infrastructure/training (though Su-30MKI must have much already in place, but LCA is totally new right?) and is just the fly away cost of it? Also, what is the fly away cost of Rafale (Wiki says 108 million dollars flyaway cost in 2011 and it must be much more now right, maybe 150 million dollars)? Is that still economical for us considering the fly away price of Su-30MKI and LCA?

MKI purchase never included Life Cycle Cost as key parameter , One of the figures from a seminar in AI 15 showed the total cost of MKI for 272 aircraft including TOT etc was ~ $12 billion for a deal which was signed in 96 ,99 and few more than in 2000 in batches , We know from Parrikar recent Statement each MKI built by HAL cost ~ $61 million

LCA R&D cost is quite well know and perhaps even Unit cost , I am not sure if IAF has calculated Life Cycle Cost but then its also indiginous aircraft and we have built an industry with LCA not just an aircraft.

I dont know what wiki says for Rafale and it has little to do with what IAF will get it at as IAF has asked for some customisation for it but French equipment generally tends to be expensive though have been reliable and French dont put strings with its purchase or have over political implications ( like UK or US , 98 etc )

IAF has a long history of operating ,maintaining French aircraft over 5 decades so there is also an institutional trust between the two country , these are things you cannot put in Euro or USD and can only come over years and decades. Politically among any GOI French has been the most acceptable partner.

We have to wait for final figures from GOI on Rafale gets signed and we will have a clear picture of the final deal and cost

Gyan · Post by **Gyan** » 26 Aug 2015 15:10

One can perhaps understand USD 10 Billion Order for Rafale if prior to that LCA was also given an order worth USD 10 Billion or even an Order worth USD 5 Billion plus commitment of another USD 5 Billion to AMCA, Kaveri series engine etc.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 26 Aug 2015 15:41

Austin wrote:MMRCA Deal was projected based on Life Cycle Cost of the Aircraft , So Rafale figures would be based on it.

That's wishful thinking. The L1 determination was made based on life cycle cost. It had nothing to do with the price negotiated with the French.

Here's a simple assessment -

_________________________________________________________

Life-cycle cost = Acquisition cost + Operational cost

Assuming the Rafale costs $20,000/hr to operate (a generous assumption), the basic operations cost over 7000 hours becomes 20K x 7K = $140 million.

(^Not including upgrades which will be another $50-100 million.)

If $200 million is the life-cycle cost of the Rafale, the acquisition cost would be roughly $60 million each.
_________________________________________________________

Which you'd agree is an absurdly low figure. It costs the French state at least twice as much.

member_22539 · Post by **member_22539** » 26 Aug 2015 15:55

^So much for that fig leaf.

Thanks Viv S for clearing that up.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 26 Aug 2015 16:16

Arun Menon wrote:^There is only one person who has a tendency to "shoot of their mouth and pontificate on the subject" and that is certainly not me. If someone says something that you do not like, you tend to resort to name calling and questioning their credentials (like you are so full of it). You could have countered the person with a well-structured retort, but you think you are Rambo out here to teach all these idiots a lesson. If someone thinks that IAF should have had a plan B and questions the lack of one, instead of attacking that person, why don't you try using your enormous authoritative knowledge of the matter to explain why there is no plan B.

First - I had asked a perfectly straight forward question to the gentleman (@srai) who deems it all right to call IAF 'Import Air Force'. And question was about his thought on what this Plan B can be and all the associated issues. I see that he has not thought it important to reply. Nor have other air-warfare experts on this forum. Maybe, it is a tedious and lowly job to put together a good cogent analysis...always easy to pass off high sounding flatulence wrapped under 'indigenous' cover as the answer to all that ails India's 'Import Air Force'.

Now, you decided to jump in with a completely unrelated reply questioning the very basis of asking the question that I did. For someone who wants me to put together a well structured retort, you hardly come across as someone who practices what he preaches.

To all those uber-patriots on this forum who call IAF as 'Import Air Force' - the same air force has been fighting India's wars since 1947 with 'imported' stuff since 1947 and will do so for another 20 years at least. Tough luck, as our collective arse will be saved by use of these horrendous 'imported' stuff, flown by incompetent 'Import Air Force'. Or maybe, uber-patriots can sign up a petition and proclaim that they'll avail of security offered by IAF only when given by flying 'indigenous' stuff!

member_22539 · Post by **member_22539** » 26 Aug 2015 16:28

^Please understand the sense of frustration that goes behind such name calling, which I have personally never indulged in, but am understanding of.

It is a frustration that sees hard-won advances squandered by IAF/MOD/HAL, like the Marut.

Also, I would like to request that you tone down your indignation and outrage towards those who criticize your beloved Armed Forces, for they are our beloved Armed Forces as well. No one here even remotely questions their bravery, skill or professionalism (at least a part of it). What is being questioned are the decisions of some higher-ups, who have limited credibility thanks to the past actions of their colleagues.

I am no one to preach anything to you and all of this is just a request. I have no interest in a blue-on-blue flame war and hope that does not happen between others as well.

member_20453 · Post by **member_20453** » 26 Aug 2015 16:37

Imported Air Force or not, IAF has always had a major problem at the highest levels. The lowly fighter pilot whether in an outdated airframe fatigue infested Mig-21 or sparling new Su-30MKI rushes off to defend the skies and take the battle to the enemy when needed and we are ever grateful for their work & sacrifice. But the real problem here is the lack of strategic foresight, a clear vision, some times even a basic logical thought process at the highest levels. That IMO needs to change and that can only happen with MOD's direct intervention. This obsession with Rafale is unhealthy, if the deal is fair and meets the requirement set, then all is well, else bury it quickly and buy more MKI and LCA and be done with it.

ldev · Post by **ldev** » 26 Aug 2015 16:38

Is Malaysia Ready to Buy Rafale Fighters

All right gentle ladies of BRF, so the French may be ready to wrap up another Rafale sale, this time to Malaysia.

Sale of Dassault’s Rafale fighter aircraft to Malaysia could be on agenda during the French Defense Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian’s visit to Kuala Lumpur this weekend.

The French media has reported that Le Drian is expected to visit the South East Asian nation on August 30. In the past, sudden visits by the French defence minister have resulted in contracts signing as in the case of Egypt and Qatar.

Dassault had offered a 10 year financial package to Malaysia from a French bank guaranteed by the government of France for procurement of its Rafale fighter jet at the Langkawi International Maritime and Aerospace (LIMA) exhibition earlier this year.

Dassault Chief Executive Officer Eric Trappier had expressed willingness to have a long term business deal in Malaysia. He had said that Dassault is looking at different types of industrial packages that includes final assembly line of aircraft, production of some parts, development, maintenance and support to local industries if they were willing to collaborate with them.

"We believe we can succeed in Malaysia. We have a good aircraft to offer and as far as I am concerned, good government-to-government relations as well," Trappier had said during the exhibition.

Malaysia is eyeing to replace its fleet of Russian MiG-29 fighters. Boeing's F/A-18, Saab's Gripen and the Eurofighter Typhoon are the other alternatives that Malaysia may eye.

With fiscal troubles due to low oil and commodity prices, Malaysia might delay its decision to buy fighter jets, local reports said. However a French government financial package, along the lines of what sealed the deal with Egypt might tempt Kuala Lumpur which needs new aircraft to serve as deterrence against Chinese aggressive maneuvers in the South China Sea.

The French are really on a roll!! If India does not act fact, the Euro 8 billion may go up to Euro 10 billion, take it or leave it!!. The tragedy is that the Indian procurement process and Modi's announcement in Paris in May may have provided the credibility and impetus for the Qatari, Egyptian and possibly Malaysian deals which were all signed AFTER Modi's Paris announcement. Ironically the French can now take a much tougher position vis a vis the Indian negotiations with Dassault's financial outlook much healthier as a result of these recent sales. Where is Modi's famed Gujju business acumen and is Parrikar just another bureaucrat to let this deal fester?

member_20453 · Post by **member_20453** » 26 Aug 2015 16:51

The French are really on a roll!! If India does not act fact, the Euro 8 billion may go up to Euro 10 billion, take it or leave it!!. The tragedy is that the Indian procurement process and Modi's announcement in Paris in May may have provided the credibility and impetus for the Qatari, Egyptian and possibly Malaysian deals which were all signed AFTER Modi's Paris announcement. Ironically the French can now take a much tougher position vis a vis the Indian negotiations with Dassault's financial outlook much healthier as a result of these recent sales. Where is Modi's famed Gujju business acumen and is Parrikar just another bureaucrat to let this deal fester?[/quote]

The Indian procurement process??? We have wasted 3 years on account of a lying/corrupt vendor like Dassault that has lied through its teeth from their MMRCA bid to the BS negotiations going on right now. They have failed to agree to provide everything they marketed since the start. The only failure here is of Modi to continue dealing with them. This deal is a farce. It seems they are now being forced by the MOD to get in line or loose the deal, if they have any sense they will fall in line else they will loose the deal for 36 and potentially more.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 26 Aug 2015 17:17

Septimus P. wrote:
The Indian procurement process??? We have wasted 3 years

"Indian Procurement Process" is an expression designed to cause sneering contempt - like Hindu rate of growth. But for a forum of opinionated amateurs with internet access like Bharat Rakshak it is OK to say that and be done with it. The only risk is that we might take ourselves seriously - but it won't get much further than that.

If you look at the Indian procurement process for aircraft like the Jaguar and the Hawk - the process lasted very long but once a deal was reached the aircraft continue to serve in the IAF long long after other air forces induct, use and retire them. This has happened with the MiG 21 as well although the negotiation was less tortuous. Same for Su-30 MKI.

It's not as if the French can say "take it or leave it". the deal with India will be much more comprehensive than with any of the other two bit air forces that are jumping in to buy 5 or 10 or 20.

We on BRF tend to place ourselves as being far more discerning than the press and we ask why the press should report as if they are outsiders looking down at Indian behaviour. But we do that as well. Here you are placing your opinion as a person outside - judging the Indian procurement process and predicting what the French will do in the manner of a person who is neither Indian nor French but having the clout and expertise to speak about the "Indian Procurement process"

It is funny - but what the heck. It is Indian behaviour.

nirav · Post by **nirav** » 26 Aug 2015 20:23

I hope that theres some more disagreement in the negotiation at the last minute and the Rafale is cancelled for good.

If contracted,by the time the Rafales start getting inducted, in the same time frame, IAF can expect to start inducting PAKFAs ..

So the Light-Medium-Heavy force structure would already start getting hybrid with Light-Medium-Heavy-Stealth structure ..

Also, gold plated 36 rafales out of One base will need serious BMD against Short Range Paki Ballistic Mijjiles further driving up operational cost.

ldev · Post by **ldev** » 26 Aug 2015 20:39

^^You may be out of luck, gold plated or not. Vive la France!! Euro 8 billion incoming and counting.....

French Defence Minister to sign Rafale contract with India on August 31

French Defence Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian is expected to sign the Dassault Rafale fighter aircraft contract with India on August 31.

French publication Tribune reported today that Le Drain would be visiting Malaysia on August 30 probably to get Kuala Lumpur to purchase the two Mistral warships which were recently taken over by France after paying compensation to Russia.

“On the way back the defence minister would be visiting New Delhi to sign the contract for 36 Rafale jets,” the publication said.

There is no confirmation of this information from the Indian side.

French media reported last week that the Indian Rafale contract would be signed in 10 days.

If the information is correct, it brings to an end over five years of India's quest to purchase a Medium Multi-role Combat Aircraft (MMRCA) and three years of negotiations with Dassaullt.

The Indian Air Force's long standing demand for an urgent purcurement of MMRCA aircraft would have finally been met.

nirav · Post by **nirav** » 26 Aug 2015 20:50

ldev wrote:^^You may be out of luck, gold plated or not. Vive la France!! Euro 8 billion incoming and counting.....

French Defence Minister to sign Rafale contract with India on August 31

French Defence Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian is expected to sign the Dassault Rafale fighter aircraft contract with India on August 31.

French publication Tribune reported today that Le Drain would be visiting Malaysia on August 30 probably to get Kuala Lumpur to purchase the two Mistral warships which were recently taken over by France after paying compensation to Russia.

“On the way back the defence minister would be visiting New Delhi to sign the contract for 36 Rafale jets,” the publication said.

There is no confirmation of this information from the Indian side.

French media reported last week that the Indian Rafale contract would be signed in 10 days.

If the information is correct, it brings to an end over five years of India's quest to purchase a Medium Multi-role Combat Aircraft (MMRCA) and three years of negotiations with Dassaullt.

The Indian Air Force's long standing demand for an urgent purcurement of MMRCA aircraft would have finally been met.

Damn ..

This means we will end up paying thru our Kachcha while MLU-ing these 36 in 2025-30 to integrate Astra- MK2. Ofcourse the MLU will be completed by 2040 at the rate of 4 per year and at at cost of about 16-20 Billion Euros at the minimum ..

Cosmo_R · Post by **Cosmo_R** » 26 Aug 2015 21:16

ldev wrote:..

French publication Tribune reported today that Le Drain would be visiting Malaysia on August 30 probably to get Kuala Lumpur to purchase the two Mistral warships which were recently taken over by France after paying compensation to Russia.

Down le Drain nos Euros

arthuro · Post by **arthuro** » 26 Aug 2015 22:26

I am not sure to understand the price issue some wants to raise.

200 M$ per aircraft with facilities, spare parts, training is in line with market.

Look, the Brazilian bought the smaller gripen at 150M$ a copy...So 200 million seems realistic for the rafale. That's just the price of inducting a modern fighter jet nowadays.

Once the initial investment for 36 rafales is done (if contract signed), the case for additional rafales will more evident as the facilities & in country knowledge will be already there.

And for those advocating for more SU30, I am not sure IAF is willing to place all its eggs on the MKI which is late 90's vintage technology now and also taking into consideration that China is operating various SUs derivatives with the SU35 to come.

As for the LCA, I don't feel IAF very confident or supportive of that program. I assume they have good reasons for this.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 26 Aug 2015 23:50

arthuro wrote:I am not sure to understand the price issue some wants to raise.

200 M$ per aircraft with facilities, spare parts, training is in line with market.

Look, the Brazilian bought the smaller gripen at 150M$ a copy...So 200 million seems realistic for the rafale. That's just the price of inducting a modern fighter jet nowadays.

Once the initial investment for 36 rafales is done (if contract signed), the case for additional rafales will more evident as the facilities & in country knowledge will be already there.

And for those advocating for more SU30, I am not sure IAF is willing to place all its eggs on the MKI which is late 90's vintage technology now and also taking into consideration that China is operating various SUs derivatives with the SU35 to come.

As for the LCA, I don't feel IAF very confident or supportive of that program. I assume they have good reasons for this.

- The Brazilians got ToT and a local production line with their Gripens. We're getting neither. 50% ToT is looking doubtful for India (compared to nearly 200% for Brazil).

- At EUR 8 billion, the unit cost of the Rafale is over $250 million.

- For a fighter that is 'vintage' '00s technology, its clearly overpriced in this era of stealth fighters.

There's a good reason why most European markets are a straight contest between the F-35 and the Gripen, with the EF & Rafale forced to look elsewhere.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 27 Aug 2015 08:03

At 36-60 aircraft, the IAF should just ask GOI to do a FMS deal for the JSF rather than buying the 1970s origin Rafale which will be very limited versus a pure stealth aircraft given it doesn't even have the aperture space to put a large AESA in.

member_20292 · Post by **member_20292** » 27 Aug 2015 08:09

has the jsf been discussed with the Americans? is it on offer at all?

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 27 Aug 2015 08:54

http://www.indiastrategic.in/topstories ... ia_JSF.htm

"The US F-16 and F-18 competed, but were not down-selected, in the Medium Multi-Role Combat Aircraft (MMRCA) competition in April 2011," the US defence department says in a report to the US Congress on US-India Security Cooperation.
"Despite this setback, we believe US aircraft, such as the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF), to be the best in the world," said the Pentagon report prepared in response to a request from the powerful Senate Armed Services Committee on a five-year action plan to strengthen bilateral defence relations.
"Should India indicate interest in the JSF, the United States would be prepared to provide information on the JSF and its requirements (infrastructure, security, etc.) to support India's future planning."

member_20292 · Post by **member_20292** » 27 Aug 2015 09:10

chidiyas and kauwwas in Delhi tell me that Indians are not comfortable with America, primarily because of their support to Pakistan.

people do not want to reward the US for their part friendly part perfidious behaviour.

However, I personally believe that American arms send a message to China like no ones business. It's a good idea to have them.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 27 Aug 2015 10:55

Karan M wrote:At 36-60 aircraft, the IAF should just ask GOI to do a FMS deal for the JSF rather than buying the 1970s origin Rafale which will be very limited versus a pure stealth aircraft given it doesn't even have the aperture space to put a large AESA in.

Well, the requirement is for 126 and then some more. If GOI feels Rafale is too expensive and not worth bang the buck, might as well junk the 36 a/c order and go the whole hog with Su-30MKI or Su-35 even. But get those aircraft.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 27 Aug 2015 11:03

rohitvats wrote:
Karan M wrote:At 36-60 aircraft, the IAF should just ask GOI to do a FMS deal for the JSF rather than buying the 1970s origin Rafale which will be very limited versus a pure stealth aircraft given it doesn't even have the aperture space to put a large AESA in.
Well, the requirement is for 126 and then some more. If GOI feels Rafale is too expensive and not worth bang the buck, might as well junk the 36 a/c order and go the whole hog with Su-30MKI or Su-35 even. But get those aircraft.

TBH, the Rafale deal was dead but for Modis pull a rabbit out of the hat stuff to land the n-tech transfer to L&T from Areva. The 126 aircraft purchase won't happen IMO. If a small aircraft purchase is now insisted on by the IAF, which is just fixated on any import to balance out the reliance on Russia, then the JSF makes sense.
The JSF all its warts included, is still a huge step up from whatever we'd get with the Rafale. Better signature management, avionics (more powerful AESA) & will allow better SEAD tactics against China. The IAF was bent on Rafale to hedge against issues with Su-30, now those are being resolved, yet, the R-deal is now so expensive we can only afford a silver bullet fleet. In which case, go with proper silver bullets. Will also provide time for the FGFA and AMCA to arrive.
But overall, IAF needs to fix its issues with long term local production and development. There seems to be no clarity on that aspect whatsoever. Where is the 3 decade plan with AMCA, LCA variants, and other programs properly supported and GOI brought on board - fix HAL as part of the process. IAF is spending all its political capital pushing for the R-deal.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 27 Aug 2015 11:45

deleted

kit · Post by **kit** » 27 Aug 2015 11:45

Better idea.. sell off the Rafales at a later date .. who ever buys it can do the MLU.. the rafales look like a stop gap option only !.. and i do hope they have good re sale value

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 27 Aug 2015 11:48

Karan , With reduction of Rafale numbe to 36r , they are better off spending more money on Tejas and MKI , Add 4-5 more squadrons of Tejas Mk2/Mk1 and 2 Squadron of Super MKI

I think 6 Squadron of Tejas/MKI would still cost lower then 3 Squadron of Rafale plus Make in India built into it.

Increasing the number of types be it JSF or Gripen will only add logistical complexity and behold we are back to 80's with 40 of each type.

Streamlining the number of fighter types and Weapons standardisation would go a long way in reducing the cost and complexity of maintaining them