https://www.business-standard.com/artic ... 229_1.html
Describing Rafale as a "beautiful" aircraft, Air Marshal S B Deo, the Vice Chief of the Indian Air Force(IAF), said those criticising the deal must understand the procurement norms.
Describing Rafale as a "beautiful" aircraft, Air Marshal S B Deo, the Vice Chief of the Indian Air Force(IAF), said those criticising the deal must understand the procurement norms.
And why hadn’t the current NDA leadership taken the opposition parties into confidence about this deal? And endless delays in inducting the aircraft will only make India more vulnerable. As for the allegations of favouring Anil Ambani’s Reliance group, this is also contestable since it is the prerogative of the manufacturer to choose one or more Indian partners like Anil Ambani’s Reliance defence company. In the current G2G deal, there is no need to identify offset partners. This is to be done only when the other 90 aircraft are to be assembled/made in India. And Reliance apart there will be many more bidders for these arrangements.
First part is about the Tejas and the second part is about the Rafale....Rakesh wrote:Rafale will give India 'unprecedented' combat advantage: IAF Vice Chief
https://www.business-standard.com/artic ... 229_1.html
Describing Rafale as a "beautiful" aircraft, Air Marshal S B Deo, the Vice Chief of the Indian Air Force(IAF), said those criticising the deal must understand the procurement norms.
BREAKING NEWS!Bhaskar_T wrote:If I recall correctly, the expected first Rafale delivery is in 2019 (probably Q4 2019), almost a year to go. I would love to hear a confirmation from GOI/MOD/DA/French-Govt that the delivery is going to happen as planned. Would be excellent if one can show 2 Rafales on assembly lines which are being prepared for India.
https://twitter.com/strategic_front/sta ... 8118518785 ---> Should be noted that NONE of these Indian-Specific Enhancements (ISE) were present on the Rafale deal negotiated by previous government. ISE ensures that the IAF will receive the most advanced and capable Rafales ever created.Rakesh wrote:6) The article is wrong in stating that the IAF had asked for 13 India-Specific Enhancements during the UPA tenure. I believe that is incorrect and the India-Specific Enhancements were only negotiated under the present Govt for 36 birds. Someone please correct me, if I am wrong.
https://twitter.com/sneheshphilip/statu ... 0437374976 ---> Breaking News: An IAF offficer to fly to France today. Will be trained for a year in France to fly the Rafale. He is being given Instructor level training and will act as instructor for next batch of pilots later on.Rakesh wrote:3) Thus the IAF realizes its best bet lies in acquiring what is in currently in the inventory. No bird will start evaluation prior to Sept 2019 anyway, when the first set of Rafales will be operational. Even prior to that, aircrew will be sent to France for Rafale conversion training. Pilots will be raving about the plane (and justifiably so) and that will definitely be heard - LOUD & CLEAR - at Air HQ. And if Dassault offers the F4R roadmap - even if on paper - it will be an even more attractive proposition.
Meanwhileat least two senior military teams will visit France in the coming weeks, sources said. One of the teams, to be led by the deputy chief of air staff, will inspect the production line of the Rafale fighter jets. The senior officer is also scheduled to fly the fighter jet during the visit, from the front cockpit. Another team, led by a senior naval officer, will review the ongoing production and delivery of the Scorpene submarines that are being rolled out from Mumbai-based Mazagon Dock Shipbuilders Limited (MDL).
Y I Patel wrote:the decision to go with 36 Rafaels in place of the original 126
Y I Patel wrote:why was the original premise of manufacture in India bypassed in the new deal.
The 36 Rafales (not Rafaels) were the stop gap due to the deal for the 126 with local manufacture etc. going nowhere. This has been clear from the outset and has been repeated several times including by the IAF in the last few days. In other words, they are not the replacement for the 126 but the minimum immediate requirement identified by the IAF which was waiting for years form MRCA-1 to fructify with an inventory that was rapidly crossing into obsolescence.Y I Patel wrote:How is the additional amount in the new deal spent
Srutayus wrote:The 36 Rafales (not Rafaels)
Rafale will give India 'unprecedented' combat advantage: IAF Vice ChiefSrutayus wrote:How many times will the Government and IAF have to clarify the same things?
The above is from the Vice Chief of Air Staff, Indian Air Force. But RaGa and his lackeys know more about the procurement process than the Indian Air Force. It is not Air Chief Marshal Dhanoa who is the Chief of Air Staff, but RaGa onlee. He wrote the DPP after all!Describing Rafale as a "beautiful" aircraft, Air Marshal S B Deo, the Vice Chief of the Indian Air Force(IAF), said those criticising the deal must understand the procurement norms. Deo said "all discussions on the deal" were taking place as people do not have adequate information about the procurement procedure.
You would think after the full Ramayana and Mahabarat on explaining the bolded part - umpteen times - on BRF, folks would be able to discern the difference. Alas, that is meant not to be. Like RaGa - even with the explanations and the evidence - they still believe otherwise. You can bring a horse to the water, but you cannot make him drink.Srutayus wrote:There was no old deal from MRCA-1, MRCA-2 is the attempt to actually have a deal, and the 36 is to arrest the shortfall in the interim.
Dropping the F-16 and F-18 from MRCA-1 has caused a lot of heartache and angst among some on BRF. That is proving a hard pill to swallow. So every now and then, the same questions (actually insinuations!) are repeated to sow doubts that there is indeed some ghotala in the Rafale deal. Let the CAG report come out and then everyone can see.Srutayus wrote:It takes far more effort to put together replies than to raise frivolous questions. I have seen how every few weeks after the questions have been comprehensively answered, the same questions are repeated. I request the Admins to create an FAQ for the Rafale deal so it can be used when this happens.
So, it’s not as if the new deal will happen in one or two years’ time. My guess is, it will be at least 4-5 years. At least 4 years. Today, we only have an RFI. The RFP (Request for Proposal) has to be given after a detailed scrutiny of the RFI. Subsequently, the proposals will come. The technical evaluation will take place. The reports will be made and studied. There are timeframes given in the Defence Procurement Procedure for all these. This, by itself, will take 2-3 years. Then comes the contract negotiations, which take a very long time because we have to negotiate the main contract, the offset contract and technology transfer details. Taken together, it will be 4-5 years.
Exactly Karan! +108!Karan M wrote:Rakesh, I will bet this MRCA 2.0 fracas will ultimately be cancelled if NaMO is back, common sense will predominate and we will buy another 36-50 odd Rafales.
The best antidote to nonsense is surely common sense. Check this out on the Common Sense Index. The total cost of the 36 Rafale strike aircraft for the Indian Air Force, upgraded with latest assault capability, was reportedly around Rs 58,000 crore. Congress president Rahul Gandhi claims that there has been corruption of Rs 45,000 crore on this purchase through subsidiary, future business, known as “offsets”, to one particular industrialist. Why should any foreign manufacturer sweeten someone else’s life to the extent of Rs 45,000 crore in order to get a contract of Rs 58,000 crore? The math simply doesn’t add up. We know that Mr Gandhi is talking about this limited order of 36 planes, and not the proposed full order of 126 Rafales, because in a tweet timed 7.22pm, July 27, he claimed, with pseudo-linguistic winks, that the “benefit” to this industrialist would be “20 BILLION US$”. The language is juvenile, but the imagination is fertile. The $20 billion figure has quietly disappeared from discourse because Mr Gandhi’s highly compensated advisers clearly felt that, even by the standards of Pinnochio, this was ludicrous overkill.
If common sense junks these fabrications, facts demolish them. Let us take the accusation at the core of this propaganda: the lie that Rafale is overpriced. In March 2012, the UPA government accepted a price of Rs 538 crore for the bare aircraft, along with a price escalation clause that by May 2015 would have taken the cost to Rs 737 crore. The present government has bought the bare aircraft a year later for Rs 670 crore, which is 9% less. The bare aircraft however is exactly what it says it is: bare. It is only a cockpit craft with radar, a passenger plane for one pilot who can perhaps see the enemy on radar and then freeze into impotence. With the necessary weaponisation needed for a multi-role combat machine, the price, by UPA-accepted specifications, would have gone to Rs 2,023 crore per aircraft. The present government has further enhanced strike capacity, technology, equipment, performance-based logistics, added earlier delivery — and brought down the total cost by nearly 20%. Rahul Gandhi compares the price of an impotent, bare Rafale to that of a superb fighting machine that will fill a yawning hole in India’s air security, and believes he can fool the people of India.
This price reduction is because of a commitment given by France to Prime Minister Narendra Modi in the joint statement on April 10, 2015, that the Rafale would be procured on “better terms” than those negotiated with UPA. “The two leaders agreed to conclude an Inter-Governmental Agreement (IGA) for supply of the aircraft on terms that would be better than conveyed by Dassault Aviation as part of a separate process underway...” Further, once the contract moves through the IGA route, it has to be approved by the Competent Financial Authority and due diligence. The process, including Defence Procurement Procedure, is a legal requirement. Mr Gandhi’s process, on the other hand, consists of nothing more nuanced than flinging numbers in the air, without an iota of evidence, and hoping that some of the dirt will stick. Take the requirement of offsets, which obliges Dassault to allot future business on maintenance or spare parts to Indian companies. The government of India has no role in the distribution of this business. Mr Gandhi always suggests that only one particular company, part-owned by Anil Ambani, will get subsidiary contracts once the need arises three or four years down the line. The fact is that there are 72 such companies, including BEL and DRDO in the public sector and Tata in the private sector. The total worth of orders to be spread among 72 companies is estimated to be Rs 30,000 crore. You have to be weird to believe any company can make Rs 45,000-crore profits out of Rs 30,000 crore worth of orders that will be divided between 70-plus firms.
If you question Congress leaders, they will accept, in muted tones, that no bribe has been paid. Unlike in deals like Augusta Westland helicopters, or HDW submarines, or the famous Bofors guns. There is no “Uncle Quattrocchi” this time. For those who may not remember, Ottavio Quattrocchi was an Italian businessman operating out of India, who became such a close friend of the Gandhi family that he was a virtual “Uncle” to Rahul Gandhi. Quattrocchi was the conduit for bribes paid in the purchase of Bofors guns in the 1980s. The last favour he got in India was during the UPA era, when his frozen bank accounts were released by the law ministry. It has been wisely said that telling the truth is easier than telling lies. Lies must be protected by sustainability; the truth does not vary. As finance minister Arun Jaitley noted in his scathing blog, Rahul Gandhi claimed from Karnataka in May that the price of each bare Rafale was Rs 700 crore; in Parliament this was deflated to Rs 520 crore; in Raipur he raised it to Rs 540 crore — and in Jaipur he offered two figures (Rs 520 crore and Rs 540 crore) in one speech. As they say in the digital age, a lie flies halfway across the world while the truth is putting on its boots. But truth has now put on its boots, and is kicking lies out of the ballpark.
namOnamaH focus on AMCA, Mk2 and MKI upgrades.Karan M wrote:Rakesh, I will bet this MRCA 2.0 fracas will ultimately be cancelled if NaMO is back, common sense will predominate and we will buy another 36-50 odd Rafales.
Singha wrote:the bitter truth is none will help us cross the hump of the hot section or materials science.
100% Lies. But please continueY I Patel wrote:Totally agree. But as I point out, the help was to rectify faults in existing Kaveri and integrate it into Tejas. The original commitment nowhere mentions any transfer of technology - only requirement was to test existing technology, certify it, and integrate it into Tejas. Release of high level financial information related to current progress and upcoming outlays on this commitment is all that is required to silence criticism.
Your entire series of posts can be discredited in this one sentence you have mentioned above. Because here are the facts;Y I Patel wrote:I am more than willing to be proven wrong. I would love to see lots of Rafales in IAF service, provided they have the real Kaveri and not a rebadged M-88. So please prove me wrong. Like I mention above, it should not take much to do so.
Code: Select all
Length: 353.8 cm (139.3 in)
Diameter: 69.6 cm (27.4 in)
Dry weight: 897 kg (1,978 lb)
Code: Select all
Length: 3,490.0 mm (137.4 in)
Diameter: 909.3 mm (35.8 in)
Dry weight: 1,236 kg (2,724 lb)
Code: Select all
Length: 154 in (391 cm)
Diameter: 35 in (89 cm)
Dry weight: 2,282 lb (1,036 kg)
Code: Select all
Length: 154 in (391 cm)
Diameter: 35 in (89 cm)
Dry weight: 2,445 lb (1,110 kg)
You show me one official report that states what you have said. Go ahead and show me. Do not show me a media report!Y I Patel wrote:So if all this work was already done, why did Macron come with an offer to use a rebadged M-88 in Rafales instead of the real deal?
In response to A and B;Y I Patel wrote:Rakesh, I will say this - I cannot ignore you because you are an admin, but I would love to because (a) you are unable to put together nuanced thought, and (b) you cannot argue without making it personal.