IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

[maitya]

What is the penalty if it gets cancelled?

H&D.

... actually, in the unlikely event of the deal-cancellation etc, the more worrying part is the current GAD state of the "no plan B" service-leadership worsening to that of MDD state.

Now that will be quite something to worry about ...

[Philip]

As Indranil has put it,what is the bleedin' necessity for just 36 Rafales at such prices? They aren't going to be the magic bullets for the IAF unlike 36 stealth birds from wherever. That would make more sense. The dog work will be done by the type in largest number,at the moment the 272 planned MKIs.If the LCA prod can be ramped up with another prod facility,perhaps even in the pvt sector ,as there are quite a few Indian pvt. entities like the R Co. salivating at the thought of future defence orders,then we will have the required numbers inching up towards the holy grail of 45 sqds. If we pick up the 2 sqds of Rafales at these unholy prices,then we may see sqd. strength decline even further!

Reg Russian vs French/EU missiles,etc.A comparison of equiv BVR,WVR AAMs,munitions,etc. would be interesting.there is a lot of open info available and should give us an idea of the "baggage" costs accompanying the "air tkt".

No air force or chief worth his salt can ever say that he has no "Plan B". This is a ludicrous statement that must be dismissed without favour.Imagine going into battle without alternatives if events don't go according to plan (A)! The DM should in such a case work out his/the ministry's own Plan B,C,whatever and force it down the sulking gent in uniform.

[rohitvats]

<SNIP> The question is very simple. WHY DO WE ABSOLUTELY HAVE TO HAVE RAFALES? I was one of the strongest supporters of MMRCA. We were getting 6-10 squadrons of one of worlds premier fighters. All this while learning manufacturing technology which could be dovetailed into our own products. Made a lot of sense. This piddly super expensive buy doesn't make sense. 2-3 squadrons of Rafale does not change the face of a 50 squadron IAF. Neither does it make up numbers significantly or fast enough. In the years of global financial slowdown this super expensive buys don't make much sense to me.

I'm not in favor of getting only 36 Rafale or 2 squadron. It ain't a F-22 where even 2 squadron is worth its weight in gold.

72 fighters is still OK. But IMO, we need those 126 numbers. Or more. The requirement and worth of those numbers will start making themselves acutely felt in 2025 period when IAF will enter its largest transformation stage. Both in terms of numbers and quality.

And frankly, I don't buy 'expensive' argument. We spend peanuts on defense in comparison to the threats we face and position we aspire for.

[Gyan]

IF we look at French Costing then Rafale is at around USD 100 Million but similarly when Russia orders Su-30 series their internal cost is also USD 30-50 million dollars. Hence there is no doubt that Rafale is atleast twice more expensive. Indian CAG report marks Su-30MKI at USD 70 million dollars for the last order in 2012. We dont know whether USD 70 Million includes extra engines, spare parts etc or not but in any case in 2012 Su-30MKI for India was not more than USD 70 Million. This can also be the reason to keep Su-30MKI out while allowing heavies like F-18, Typhoon or Rafale to bid.

As per Brazilian competition the Rafale was coming in at around USD 300 million including 30 year spare part support.

[brar_w]

IF we look at French Costing then Rafale is at around USD 100 Million but similarly when Russia orders Su-30 series their internal cost is also USD 30-50 million dollars. Hence there is no doubt that Rafale is atleast twice more expensive.

Be careful what you are using for comparison. One one side, you have french government document, and budgetary material that leads you to the $80-$100 Million cost. On the other side, you have a news report which tells us absolutely nothing about the budgetary process, how an aircraft is ordered or what the total unit-flyaway cost is for the Su35.

Hence there is no doubt that Rafale is atleast twice more expensive.

From a procurement side of things, a cost difference of +$20-$40 Million (vs MKI made in Russia), or +$5-10 Million vs Su-35 exported by Russia is not unreasonable and can be essentially explained by the economies of the two countries and the aerospace industry wage and benefit structure.

This can also be the reason to keep Su-30MKI out while allowing heavies like F-18, Typhoon or Rafale to bid.

Or it could be that they had an upper size limit in mind, when they added the M in the MMRCA? Heavies end up costing up a lot over the life-time of the aircraft...and unless you need that level of range/payload performance throughout your fleet (in some cases you may) you are best of optimizing your fleet.

As per Brazilian competition the Rafale was coming in at around USD 300 million including 30 year spare part support

I believe the brazil deal also involved TOT.

[member_20453]

A question - is the price being quoted for the deal inclusive of certain amount of weapons system, spares for 'n' years, logistic support, crew training, simulator etc? Is the entire package being talked about in per unit terms? Something like hotels - where entire construction cost is calculated on per key basis.

yes its the entire package deal and not plain jane aircraft , some one posted the news in previous thread what that is to roughly put up 2 squadron infra , MRO facility , Ground infra , weapons , Spares for 5-10 years , IAF demanding 90 % uptimes etc

There is no clarity on Meteor, if anything Astra will be on the Rafale. There is enough stock of Micas to ensure operational abilities till Astra is integrated. Moreso, as per last weeks reports the 11 billion doesn't contain costs of spares for 10years. Availability in the french AF is 60%, they cant attain 90% in India. Till there is more info on its weapons package no point in making half baked claims.

[member_20453]

Even the French won't recieve Meteor till 2018.

[rohitvats]

<SNIP> Availability in the french AF is 60%, they cant attain 90% in India. Till there is more info on its weapons package no point in making half baked claims.

Availability in French AF is more than 85%. That 60% availability number came about because some idiot looked at a number w/o understanding its significance.

French have two metric to calculate availability - (a) %age of total fleet available (b) %age of operational fleet available.

Now, it seems that French don't keep all their fighters in operational condition. Some are kept in freeze. So, assume French AF has 100 Rafale and of this number, 40 are in freeze. And of 60 operational fighters, we've 85% available at any time. Hence, serviceability of Rafale in French AF is 85%. But at the same time, only 51% of TOTAL fleet of 100 fighters is available.

[Texafr]

The Rafale production is down to single digits per year at the moment from 11 in 2014 iirc.

No, in 2015 Dassault produced 11 Rafale as usual but delivered only 8 (5 for France, 3 for Egypt).
As per the contractual agreement with Egypt the last 3 Rafale were delivered yesterday.

The biggest thing with a lot of the comments here is that folks simply divide the total cost by the total amount and then start to throw non apples to apples figures like Su-35 for $15 Million, Su-30 for $60 Million etc. What is being negotiated here is an extremely small amount of a fairly expensive 4+ generation fighter, with OEM support, and a PBL'esque system of spares for at least 5 years, with possible coverage through 10 years, or approximately a 1/3 of the life of the aircraft. What this deal also covers is between 30% (less likely) and 50% (more likely) offset and a weapons package from a supplier that is known to offer some of the most expensive weapons in their class. All in, expensive YES, it was always going to be so..but it is wrong to say a rafale costs 250 Million, or $300 Million..there is a lot more in that, then just a rafale.

This is a honest and level-headed message, it should be highlighted.

Indeed, the price of the full package is directly proportional to the lenght of the Indian negotiators’ list of exigences.
According to an Indian forumer on another forum who claims to be close to an Indian source :

Source based information - (take it with pinch of salt, dont blame me)
* Jets + weapons are estimated at Euro 4 bn
* Customization includes Astra BVR integration + another few specific customization which needs development and financing by India.
* The customization cost is coming out high as Indian Rafales will be in between F3 OT4 but less than F3R. Such customization are at present Not requested by any AF including FrAF (beyond IRST)
* The customization cost itself is estimated at close to Euro 2 Bn plus which includes systems/sub systems from Israel and is a one time cost for all future purchases at one go.
* The spares/service being procured is for 10 years and India is negotiating for 15 years at the same price.
* etc
* etc
* etc
The deal all inclusive is estimated at Euro 11 Bn

Without surprise, the bigger the appetite, the bigger the bill is.

[brar_w]

Availability in the french AF is 60%, they cant attain 90% in India.

French availability means absolutely nothing in the Indian contex. If you want to see how maintainable a system is you follow the reliability metrics, the design features (geared towards making it easier to maintain) and not the availability metrics. Any air-force can adjust its budgets to highlight (or not) mission capability or availability. They can also willingly make the trade (as the USAF is doing at the moment for example) where they take a hit in readiness, to fund modernization.\

It may be in a particular nation's interest (not saying that it is in French interest, but that you are looking at the wrong metric) to deliberately underfund depot capacity, and keep availability at just about the numbers required for peacetime operations in order to free up the annual budget for other priorities. One nation may be perfectly happy with a 50% availability of its frontline fighter as long as it can surge to 90-100% for short bursts, and to 70-80% for sustained periods if and when required. Even if we are to assume availability at any given time was 60%, it tells us nothing about whether 90% availability can be maintained for such a system.

If India is willing to invest in depot capacity, manpower, and invest in a steady supply of spare parts and other consumables (through a PBL or internal logistics) then it is entirely possible. If reliability metrics however point to sub-optimal performance than it can be argued that 90% availability would come at a financially unacceptable cost, but there is nothing in open source literature that points to the rafale being an inherently unreliable aircraft.

[member_20453]

<SNIP> Availability in the french AF is 60%, they cant attain 90% in India. Till there is more info on its weapons package no point in making half baked claims.

Availability in French AF is more than 85%. That 60% availability number came about because some idiot looked at a number w/o understanding its significance.

French have two metric to calculate availability - (a) %age of total fleet available (b) %age of operational fleet available.

Now, it seems that French don't keep all their fighters in operational condition. Some are kept in freeze. So, assume French AF has 100 Rafale and of this number, 40 are in freeze. And of 60 operational fighters, we've 85% available at any time. Hence, serviceability of Rafale in French AF is 85%. But at the same time, only 51% of TOTAL fleet of 100 fighters is available.

Globally, no fleet is available more than 75% of time. 85% is a bag of lies. Such high rates are unattainable financially during peace let alone during war.

[member_20453]

Availability in the french AF is 60%, they cant attain 90% in India.

French availability means absolutely nothing in the Indian contex. If you want to see how maintainable a system is you follow the reliability metrics, the design features (geared towards making it easier to maintain) and not the availability metrics. Any air-force can adjust its budgets to highlight (or not) mission capability or availability. They can also willingly make the trade (as the USAF is doing at the moment for example) where they take a hit in readiness, to fund modernization.\

It may be in a particular nation's interest (not saying that it is in French interest, but that you are looking at the wrong metric) to deliberately underfund depot capacity, and keep availability at just about the numbers required for peacetime operations in order to free up the annual budget for other priorities. One nation may be perfectly happy with a 50% availability of its frontline fighter as long as it can surge to 90-100% for short bursts, and to 70-80% for sustained periods if and when required. Even if we are to assume availability at any given time was 60%, it tells us nothing about whether 90% availability can be maintained for such a system.

If India is willing to invest in depot capacity, manpower, and invest in a steady supply of spare parts and other consumables (through a PBL or internal logistics) then it is entirely possible. If reliability metrics however point to sub-optimal performance than it can be argued that 90% availability would come at a financially unacceptable cost, but there is nothing in open source literature that points to the rafale being an inherently unreliable aircraft.

My point indeed, the cost of 90% availability at all times would quite unrealistic and would certainly break the bank.

[SaiK]

We dealt with Rafales for 118+80 some moons back. [large EOS]
We are dealing with them for 36 now. [medium pricing]
Next, we should ask them to price for just 1. [data missing]

[brar_w]

Generally high availability metrics are easier to achieve with lighter, smaller, simpler systems as the costs to achieve high availability are lower. This was the USP of both the F-16, and something that the F-20 highlighted (hard to believe) over the more expensive F-16 at the time, and a strategy that SAAB essentially took over from Northrop with the JAS-Gripen. They argue, that their smaller, lighter and simpler system (single engine etc) ensures higher availability at lower cost than their medium sized competitors. This is largely true, however as even their own Janes Sanctioned study points, there are capability implications.

[member_20453]

It is possible to have the infrastructure in place during peace time or such as foreign tours like Red Flag 2008 to support short bursts of 90% availability as demonstrated by the MKIs but that was for just over 2 weeks, was an expensive affair and cannot be sustained. If the MKI fleet is able to maintain a consistent 70-75% availability rate during peace or war, that in itself is a significant achievement. For the Rafale its possible to have 90% but this will cost the IAF an arm and a leg and a kidney in addition to loss of hair, as the figures clearly show.

[Lalmohan]

We dealt with Rafales for 118+80 some moons back. [large EOS]
We are dealing with them for 36 now. [medium pricing]
Next, we should ask them to price for just 1. [data missing]

fixed costs and variable costs my friend... the more you get the better it gets...

[ramana]

When IAF selected Rafale did they specify all those extras to be integrated on it?

Looks to me they did not.

If non-standard stuff is demanded price goes up and is all allocated to this contract.

Now knowing the price has been jacked up they should settle for what is afforadble and not insist on it.


Its like a bazaar you ask the price and not buy those features id its not afforadble.
Euro 2B for integration on alrady flyinng Rafale is too much.


Looks like no Plan B mentality at work.

After plane is selected demand additional doo dads whcih jack up price.

[arthuro]

Radio interview of Dassault's CEO on the rafale for India after Holland's visit:

http://www.europe1.fr/economie/rafales- ... er-2658355

1) Price negotiation has just begun a few days ago after other elements have been settled.
2) He and its Indian counterparts are hopefull to sign the deal end of February.
3) He is convinced India will eventually sign the deal.

[Hitesh]

If there were any penalty clauses for canceling the order, I would negotiate with the French that in exchange for dropping the order of Rafales, I would order more purchases of nuclear reactor or fuel or just bite the bullet and stick with the number of 126 planes because anything less is just useless.

[brar_w]

This deal is pretty much sealed and barring a miracle the IAF should be operating the rafale in its colors in a few years time. On the contract and penalty issue: Any enforceable penalty that a reasonable nation would agree too would cover at most the cost of the money spent by the consortium (Dassault, MBDA and co) on marketing the aircraft, sending the aircraft to India and man-hours put in to work the deal with the Indian counterparts.

[Vipul]

There is no way the French will agree to make a big cut in the price they are asking as any discount given to us will affect their $15 Billion deal with UAE which is on the verge of finalization.So we are going to pay at least $200-250 Million per frame.

[Viv S]

This deal is pretty much sealed and barring a miracle the IAF should be operating the rafale in its colors in a few years time.

Oh really? Okay. Here's a question, give it your best shot.

What was Air Chief Marshal Arup Raha doing at Eglin Air Base in May 2015? Discussing SOCOM ops?

[chetak]

Unless ACM Raha told you something else, this is what he was supposed to be doing

amreki fighters are no use to us as they will either sell them to the pakis also or familiarize the pakis with them and sell them weapons to counter the aircraft

During the visit, Air Chief Marshal Raha is scheduled to hold talks with senior military leadership and discuss a wide range of bilateral issues on the ongoing defence cooperation between the two countries. While at Washington, the Air Chief will also call on the Indian Ambassador H.E. Shri Arun Singh.

The itinerary also includes a conducted tour of airbases under Special Ops Command and a visit to the Combined Air Operations Centre at Nellis Air Force Base, Nevada where he would be briefed on IAF participation in multi-lateral Air Exercises.

[brar_w]

He was accompanied by the CSAF, ACC leadership or PACOM leadership on the multi stop 3-4 day visit. His trip to Eglin was at the invitation of AFSOC at Hulburt field, and to Nellis to discuss RF-A 16/1. He was also expected to spend a day with the PACOM boss in Hawaii.

[Viv S]

Unless ACM Raha told you something else, this is what he was supposed to be doing

He was accompanied by the CSAF, ACC leadership or PACOM leadership on the multi stop 3-4 day visit. His trip to Eglin was at the invitation of AFSOC at Hulbert, and to Nellis to discuss RF-A 16/1. He was also expected to spend a day with the PACOM boss in Hawaii.

Could be. Could be. Although, does a four star flag officer really need to go all the way to Nellis to discuss Red Flag participation? Its not the first one we've planned. Meanwhile, its been over a decade since the Garuds were raised - we've not firming up doctrine any more. But... maybe it was just a goodwill visit. Until four months later, when this rather odd (dare I say, bizarre?) press conference took place.

amreki fighters are no use to us as they will either sell them to the pakis also or familiarize the pakis with them and sell them weapons to counter the aircraft

We're not going to get a refund on our P-8Is or AH-64Es. Rather late in the day to start avoiding lethal platforms of US-origin.

[brar_w]

Although, does a four star flag officer really need to go all the way to Nellis to discuss Red Flag participation?

Thats something we'll never know but it isn't unusual for air-chiefs of a lot of countries to visit Nellis, or for the USAF to plan a stop over at Neilis for visiting foreign dignitaries .

[Kashi]

amreki fighters are no use to us...

..is correct

as they will either sell them to the pakis also or familiarize the pakis with them and sell them weapons to counter the aircraft

Not for these reasons alone..since Pakis can and will familiarise themselves with Rafales (UAE, Egypt), Typhoons (KSA) and Flankers (PRC). They probably already have some familiarity with some of these systems just as we do with F-solahs via our bilateral exercises with Singapore.

Amreeki fighters are of no use to us because Amreekis cannot and should not be trusted..Pakistaniyat is not just a Paki national trait.

[member_29294]

Even the French won't recieve Meteor till 2018.

Meteor will be gimped on the Rafale anyway. The plane can't do two-way datalink with the weapon, which is one of the main advantages and selling points of the missile itself. It is also one of the main reasons why Meteor is so costly as well.

On the contrary Gripen and EF can fully do the two-way data-link, giving them a large advantage in BVR combat.

Just more evidence showing that Rafale is an outdated, last generation platform that cannot even support the latest missiles. Hence why nearly all their export bids have failed.

There is no way the French will agree to make a big cut in the price they are asking as any discount given to us will affect their $15 Billion deal with UAE which is on the verge of finalization.So we are going to pay at least $200-250 Million per frame.

When Modi made the 36 flyaway deal, the French were promising costs of $7.5 billion. Now they are suggesting $11 Billion. This has been the second time the French have done this. They cannot be trusted. Deal should be scrapped. Spend just a fraction of that $$$ to setup another Tejas factory and double production to 32/year by 2018. Then spend some more to induct more Su-30MKI. Finally, spend the remainder on AMCA development. Stop this stupid French donation scam to Invest and Make in India.

[Singha]

$1b in sukhoi spares depots and stockpiling a pipeline of long lead items, deeper local manufacture of spares
$1.5b to setup a swank Tejas factory and associated cost of tools and training of people and ramp up to 24/annum
$3.6b to get 36 Su30mki-mk4
$1b for pushing domestic munitions buyup by the 1000s

for around $7b we could be all set

[NRao]

Radio interview of Dassault's CEO on the rafale for India after Holland's visit:

http://www.europe1.fr/economie/rafales- ... er-2658355

1) Price negotiation has just begun a few days ago after other elements have been settled.
2) He and its Indian counterparts are hopefull to sign the deal end of February.
3) He is convinced India will eventually sign the deal.

He said that in 1998.

Although, does a four star flag officer really need to go all the way to Nellis to discuss Red Flag participation?

Not Red Flag, it is RF-A 16/1. It is the very complex version of Red Flag.

[member_24684]

Even the French won't recieve Meteor till 2018.

Aren't those Rafale pictures with Meteor is dummy missile ..!!

[rohitvats]

<SNIP>Globally, no fleet is available more than 75% of time. 85% is a bag of lies. Such high rates are unattainable financially during peace let alone during war.

It might or might not be 85%. But it definitely is not 60% as you claimed earlier.

Also, since French keep only a part of their fleet operational, it is possible that this smaller fleet has 85% up time. Which might not be directly applicable to our case.

[nirav]

Noob pooch.

Just went through the discussion on keypubs on French AF Rafales. They dont have HMDS.
Is HMDS going to be a part of Indian Rafales ? hope it is .. the mega millions for the jet increasingly look silly otherwise ...

If AF has precision bombing/bomb truck in mind as end use for Rafales, we might as well restart the Jaguar line with upgraded engines ..

[Y. Kanan]

we can probably get a unarmed flyaway cost plane 1.5:1 in Su30:rafale
but for su30 we already have all the logistical tail, training, repair, weapons in place and more can be incrementally scaled up with too much capex. the rafale will prove very costly in that aspect...that too for just 36. for instance if you need a simulator you need 1, regardless of 12, 24 or 36.

anything related to su30 now gets cheaply amortized across 272 already confirmed.

I thought GoI was paying $40-60 million USD for each received SU-30MKI (not counting life cycle costs, of course). Are full life cycle costs being factored in to the $300 million price tag per Rafale jet?

Perhaps Modi gowerment is more deeply upset by recent Russian reproachment w/Pakistan than it has let on? Thus its seeming desperation to avoid throwing more $$$ at the Ruskis? Dunno how to explain this Rafale insanity...

[brar_w]

Even the French won't recieve Meteor till 2018.

Aren't those Rafale pictures with Meteor is dummy missile ..!!

Please resize images when posting..Regarding Meteor integration, its underway. First tests happened last year against an aerial target. The french plan to fully integrate the weapon in the F3R standard by 2018. The pictures you have posted involve earlier trials with meteor and other weapons on the CdG aircraft carrier.

Noob pooch.

Just went through the discussion on keypubs on French AF Rafales. They dont have HMDS.
Is HMDS going to be a part of Indian Rafales ? hope it is .. the mega millions for the jet increasingly look silly otherwise ...

If AF has precision bombing/bomb truck in mind as end use for Rafales, we might as well restart the Jaguar line with upgraded engines ..

Thats an interesting point. Back in the MMRCA days, I guess you could not even compete if you lacked things like an AESA radar. One would have thought that an HMD integration and capability would have been OEM funded. Perhaps, the french were willing to integrate a french product while the IAF wanted an Israeli product for which Dassault is negotiating an extra cost?? of integration. The Scorpion is what the french would use if they were to use an HMD on the Rafale, and it essentially works with the existing helmet. It will also, most likely be what the F-22A gets in a few years time.

[Gyan]

Noob pooch.

Just went through the discussion on keypubs on French AF Rafales. They dont have HMDS.
Is HMDS going to be a part of Indian Rafales ? hope it is .. the mega millions for the jet increasingly look silly otherwise ...

If AF has precision bombing/bomb truck in mind as end use for Rafales, we might as well restart the Jaguar line with upgraded engines ..

HMDS is only essential for LCA but it is not an important requirement for Rafale as the role of HMDS can be effectively performed by xxxxxxxx

[nirav]

I clearly remember ACM Arup Raha's air force day press conference in which he asserted that apart from 36 Rafales, IAF has a requirement for more "Rafale type A/c".

Wonder whats happening on that front.

[kit]

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... ct-421387/

Dassault’s unusual business model – with the same factories and engineers building two very different types of product for two very different markets – seems to be proving an investor-pleasing counterweight to the industry’s inevitable and often ruinous vicissitudes.

[kit]

i suppose all these deals will cross subsidize Dassaults projects !!

[brar_w]

Noob pooch.

Just went through the discussion on keypubs on French AF Rafales. They dont have HMDS.
Is HMDS going to be a part of Indian Rafales ? hope it is .. the mega millions for the jet increasingly look silly otherwise ...

If AF has precision bombing/bomb truck in mind as end use for Rafales, we might as well restart the Jaguar line with upgraded engines ..

HMDS is only essential for LCA but it is not an important requirement for Rafale as the role of HMDS can be effectively performed by Blondes, Wine and Euros.

On the contrary, from the PTI report from August it is clear that the IAF and MOD are insisting that the aircraft come with an HMD.

It is not just the offset clause that the French are worried about. Indian Air Force wants to integrate a Israeli helmet mounted display with the Rafale fighter jets besides tweaking the weaponry technology so that the aircraft can fire a missile other than what the Rafales carry.
The missile, sources said is of American make.