MRCA News and Discussion

[RKumar]

IF it is planned well, there can be no "dent" - just cannot.

exactly IF.... like LCA, MRCA is also not running as per plan (please check the previous page)

Test pilots by themselves cannot be an issue. Specially if the others keep the date.

You know as well as I... unfortunately when enemy attack only then we start helping each other. I think problem is not 2 fold but n-fold e.g. Funding, ADA, HAL, IAF, MoD, Import lobby.

Kindly explain what do u mean vendors will not sit quitely?

What vendors has to do with our pilots wrt to the point we were discussing... did i miss something.

Did I say problem is with MRCA testing

It seems you worry too much for vendors then IAF <-> India. (Just pointing, no accusation. It is a positive comment.)

[NRao]

I think we are going OT here, so my last response.

"quietly": The vendors have a lot of investmentS in these tests. IF the IAF is not prepared, the vendors will not be too happy about it.

On IAF/India vs. vendor, I do not see it that a way. There is mutual interest WRT MRCA tests and both sides I feel expect maturity and delivery.

[RKumar]

"quietly": The vendors have a lot of investmentS in these tests. IF the IAF is not prepared, the vendors will not be too happy about it.

Ofcourse, if I will be losing money in business ... I will make lot of noises and cry out loud. Does it mean, other should throw money away at me???

On IAF/India vs. vendor, I do not see it that a way. There is mutual interest WRT MRCA tests and both sides I feel expect maturity and delivery.

I never meant that way ... you are senior to me that’s why I explained explicitly and I am sure you have spent more blood then I have spent my sweat for India.

My only aim to draw bigger picture... most of MRCA planes are 5-10 yrs advance then LCA. And this gap cannot be closed with one or two iterations of LCA. I am not talking here of F-22 and other bird, which are 15-20 yrs advance. But we have to start somewhere. A days lost is a another day we are legging in technology. See where we were 5 years ago and where are we today with missiles (defensive as well as offensive). The same way ATV, last 5 yrs we progressed like monsters/giants. Chandrayaan/launch of 10 satellites in single go. We should not slower our pace with combat planes. We have already seen a feeble light after long night. We have to be brave and break this darkness.

We cannot defeat chinkiland with MRCA or MKI, because most of these birds will be gone with first strike and no one will help us during war... as no one dear to tell chinki that stay away from Taiwan. Chinkiland has the money, military power and it may be next super power(SP). May not be full SP, close to it. So we need to have local production of defense equipment and that to with maximum deterrence power, which we can have.

This will be my last post on this topic and before I go for 3 weeks of holidays.

[Cain Marko]

No, those are for different countries and hence aren't comparable

Actually those are from the Brazil competition, link was posted by Dorai in previous MRCA thread. The article put the Rafale as the most expensive @ $ 140 million and the Gripen @ $ 71 million (similar to norway and dutch bids) The shornet was somewhere in the middle until of course the DSCA disclosed what the deal was all about. The article was quite critical of the french and raised major questions about them and still put the price @ $ 140 mil.

You have no idea what Gripen's offer to Brazil is.

Check above.

Sorry, that would be the Rafale

Welcome to the BR bandwagon

Where are you getting those prices?

DSCA report for Brazil and the OGLOBO article mentioned above.

CM

[putnanja]

Sorry, that would be the Rafale

Welcome to the BR bandwagon

CM

CM, I think george was saying that Rafale would be at the bottom of the list and not his company's.

[GeorgeWelch]

No, those are for different countries and hence aren't comparable

Actually those are from the Brazil competition, link was posted by Dorai in previous MRCA thread. The article put the Rafale as the most expensive @ $ 140 million and the Gripen @ $ 71 million (similar to norway and dutch bids) The shornet was somewhere in the middle until of course the DSCA disclosed what the deal was all about. The article was quite critical of the french and raised major questions about them and still put the price @ $ 140 mil.

So there you have, two articles put the Rafale as the most expensive, yet you cherrypick the one number that makes the SH more expensive.

It's obvious each article is comparing different things, so to pull a number from one article and compare it a number from a different source without context is meaningless.

What is important is that everything I have seen that lists the price for all 3 together using the same baseline puts the Rafale as the most expensive (and thus at the bottom of the pole)

[Cain Marko]

CM, I think george was saying that Rafale would be at the bottom of the list and not his company's.

Oh well! another lost soul.

So there you have, two articles put the Rafale as the most expensive, yet you cherrypick the one number that makes the SH more expensive.
It's obvious each article is comparing different things, so to pull a number from one article and compare it a number from a different source without context is meaningless.

[/quote]

Nope, no cherrypicking. While the Rafale's cost may in fact be lesser or the Gripen's cost more (although I doubt it considering its similarity to the norwegian and dutch bids) consdering those figures came from regular and often inaccurate media, the source on the Shornet is dead on - DSCA.mil, doesn't get any more accurate than that. IOWs, the price quoted for the shornet stays and I daresay gives the others plenty of space to manouver.

CM

[b_patel]

Actually those are from the Brazil competition, link was posted by Dorai in previous MRCA thread. The article put the Rafale as the most expensive @ $ 140 million and the Gripen @ $ 71 million (similar to norway and dutch bids) The shornet was somewhere in the middle until of course the DSCA disclosed what the deal was all about. The article was quite critical of the french and raised major questions about them and still put the price @ $ 140 mil.

If you quote the the Super Hornet price in that article it is $90 Million. The 190 Million that you quoted includes everything (training, spares, transportation, weapons, maintainence for 10 years).
You can bash the Super Hornet all you want but the reality is that besides the Rafale it fits what Brazil wants: an aircraft that excells in the A2G role.
I wondered why the Typhoon and Su-35 were eliminated so quickly, they lack A2G capabilites compared to the others and the F-16 is just way too old if brazil is going to spend that kind of money.

[GeorgeWelch]

So there you have, two articles put the Rafale as the most expensive, yet you cherrypick the one number that makes the SH more expensive.
It's obvious each article is comparing different things, so to pull a number from one article and compare it a number from a different source without context is meaningless.

Nope, no cherrypicking. While the Rafale's cost may in fact be lesser or the Gripen's cost more (although I doubt it considering its similarity to the norwegian and dutch bids) consdering those figures came from regular and often inaccurate media, the source on the Shornet is dead on - DSCA.mil, doesn't get any more accurate than that.

Yup, choosing which price to believe is called cherrypicking

You were presented with the 3 prices and chose the most expensive.

You say that the dsca price is accurate, well
1) That is if ALL options are exercised
2) If the news media are that inaccurate about the SH price, what makes you think they are accurate for the other two?

You can't just decide the media is credible for Gripen but not for SH. Either they are credible or they are not.

[Cain Marko]

If you quote the the Super Hornet price in that article it is $90 Million. The 190 Million that you quoted includes everything (training, spares, transportation, weapons, maintainence for 10 years).
You can bash the Super Hornet all you want but the reality is that besides the Rafale it fits what Brazil wants: an aircraft that excells in the A2G role.
I wondered why the Typhoon and Su-35 were eliminated so quickly, they lack A2G capabilites compared to the others and the F-16 is just way too old if brazil is going to spend that kind of money.

I know that the article suggested a price like $ 90 million for the shornet, I already noted that it was between the Rafale ($ 140 mil) and Gripen ($ 70 mil). Point is I'll take the DSCA disclosure any time over a common media report and it puts the price (yes inclusive of support) @ $ 190 million plus. But for the Gripen and the Rafale we have no choice but to go with whats available (general media article, which seems heavily biased against the french). Further, the Gripen NG price in said article could very well include the price for weapons/logistics/infrastructure as it closely matches the official bids given to norway and netherlands ($ 70 odd million) which included the extras. As Jean_M pointed out, the rafale too included extras @ $ 140 million.

As far as the brazilian bid goes, it is not so pertinent to the IAF MRCA race in terms of qualitative requirements, the IAF will have its own set. And we will see what the FAB considers most "suitable" or "what it want", how do you know for sure? We'll wait and see. Btw, the Super Flanker (35) is back in contention with the FAB.

Irrespective of all this (and what prices are offered by the Saab or Dassault), my original point remains that @ $ 190 million per unit (with little weapons), the superhornet increasingly looks like an exhorbitantly priced bird for the IAF's MRCA. I don't think even $ 12 billion would cover it.

CM

[Cain Marko]

Yup, choosing which price to believe is called cherrypicking
You were presented with the 3 prices and chose the most expensive.

What choice do I have? Any other reports? Or would you rather have me take a media article over the DSCA disclosure? Secondly, the gripen's price is pretty close to other available offers made by SAAB.

You say that the dsca price is accurate, well
1) That is if ALL options are exercised
2) If the news media are that inaccurate about the SH price, what makes you think they are accurate for the other two?

Well what options are there in that deal that brazil can do without? No training or support, no engines or EW, no HMD? I think most of those options are standard and the FAB will exercise most if not all of them.

[You can't just decide the media is credible for Gripen but not for SH. Either they are credible or they are not.

[/quote]
You'd love to have it that way wouldn't you? But tell you what, it is not. It is a range rather than a yes/no type scenario, some media reports are more credible than others, which should be obvious to most. And the DSCA disclosure is probly the most reliable.

Irrespective of my cherrypicking or your nitpicking (as your verbal manouvering might be called), my original point was that @ a whopping $ 190 million per unit (including of all the extras), the superhornet looks certainly on the very expensive side and probly out of the IAF's reach. No more can it be regarded as one of the less expensive options, IOWs, it is up there with the twin engined eurocanards and probly ahead of them.

CM.

[GeorgeWelch]

Irrespective of my cherrypicking or your nitpicking (as your verbal manouvering might be called), my original point was that @ a whopping $ 190 million per unit (including of all the extras), the superhornet looks certainly on the very expensive side and probly out of the IAF's reach.

Even accepting a worst case scenario, the unit price for India would be far less. There are a lot of fixed costs that are the same whether you buy 1 or 1000, but when you buy more they are less per unit.

For instance, training the trainers is probably going to cost about the same no matter how many you buy.

Also India's deal will include local assembly which will make it less.

To look at the theoretical unit price of such a small order tells you nothing of what it would cost India.

No more can it be regarded as one of the less expensive options, IOWs, it is up there with the twin engined eurocanards and probly ahead of them.

Yet every single article says the Rafale is more expensive.

[GeorgeWelch]

Btw, the Super Flanker (35) is back in contention with the FAB.

No it's not.

[Cain Marko]

Irrespective of my cherrypicking or your nitpicking (as your verbal manouvering might be called), my original point was that @ a whopping $ 190 million per unit (including of all the extras), the superhornet looks certainly on the very expensive side and probly out of the IAF's reach.

Even accepting a worst case scenario, the unit price for India would be far less. There are a lot of fixed costs that are the same whether you buy 1 or 1000, but when you buy more they are less per unit.

For instance, training the trainers is probably going to cost about the same no matter how many you buy.

Also India's deal will include local assembly which will make it less.

To look at the theoretical unit price of such a small order tells you nothing of what it would cost India.

Two points here:
a) The above applies to all the other contenders and to some (such as the Rafale and MiG-35) more so than others

b) Will the above justification be enough to bring down the price to fit what seems to be the GOI MRCA budget - $ 10.2 billion (if that?). For example: a small order of Su-30MKMs (18 pieces) cost the RMAF about $ 900 million or about $ 50 million per a/c. It certainly cost india a bit less ($ 37 million per unit approximately). So, there is a definite difference, but not a substantial one either. What does this mean for a $ 190 million priced super hornet?

t every single article says the Rafale is more expensive.

But the one that really matters seems to state otherwise. Of course I could use your argument - we don't really know what was included in the Rafale package after all do we?

CM.

[GeorgeWelch]

a) The above applies to all the other contenders and to some (such as the Rafale and MiG-35) more so than others

I never said it didn't, but your original question was along the lines of 'How can India afford $190 mill/plane? Which is an irrelevant question because the price was never going to be that for India.

For example: a small order of Su-30MKMs (18 pieces) cost the RMAF about $ 900 million or about $ 50 million per a/c.

You cannot compare aircraft deals across countries.

Period.

t every single article says the Rafale is more expensive.

But the one that really matters seems to state otherwise.

No it doesn't.

It gives a possible price for the SH, it says nothing about the Rafale being cheaper.

You refuse to accept that if the articles can be that far off on SH, they can be just as far off on Rafale.

Personally I don't believe the articles are 'off' so much as they are talking about different things. Once you add all the extras to Rafale, it's going to be even more.

[putnanja]

Given the rather short legs of SH compared to other aircraft in its category and the fact that it is optimized for carrier operations, is any modifications planned on the SH to reduce its weight and increase the range for land based ops?

[vardhank]

Also, are we looking only at single-seaters? Which versions of the SH, Rafale and F-16 have been offered?

[Vivek K]

With China making ominous noises, what the f**k are we doing still talking about the MRCA??? Does it take this long to make up our minds?? And does more time necessarily mean a better decision? Take a damn decision and get any one of the planes. Develop tactics and operationalize these to work in conjunction with the AWACS.

I guess when the Chinese are storming the Himalayas, we will expedite the trials and set up a committee to fast track the acquisition. Gents, we SUCK!!!

[JaiS]

‘We will shift workload from Germany to India in the area of avionics’

New Delhi: One of the largest defence purchases in recent times, the 126 aircraft purchase order from the Indian Air Force, is reaching the final stages of the a long drawn out tender process, with flight trials of the five aircraft set to start this month. Mint’s Anil Padmanabhan and Rahul Chandran spoke to Bernhard Gerwert, chief executive officer of military air systems, EADS Defence and Security, the largest stock holder in the Eurofighter Typhoon, one of the five aircrafts going to flight trials this year, when he was in New Delhi. Edited Excerpts:

We have to go into flight trials. And to go for flight trials is a very expensive journey. Coming to India with two, three fighters, doing the flight trials in Europe and before doing so, I’d like to get a little grip on where we are. And I have to say, I have a good feeling.

--------------- rest snipped -------------------------

[Cain Marko]

Gents, we SUCK!!!

TOTALLY! waat to do wonlee!

CM.

[Cain Marko]

I never said it didn't, but your original question was along the lines of 'How can India afford $190 mill/plane? Which is an irrelevant question because the price was never going to be that for India.

Well hello! Of course its not for india, it better not be. Stilll, one has to go by something. So not totally irrelevant, it gives us a sort of estimate.

You cannot compare aircraft deals across countries. Period.

Convenient wot? Esp. when the comparison is not in your favor.

No it doesn't. It gives a possible price for the SH, it says nothing about the Rafale being cheaper.

No possibility there, zat is ze price for zat package. Course it doesn't say anything about the rafale, its a dsca doc.

You refuse to accept that if the articles can be that far off on SH,

You refuse to accept that said article (DSCA) is not that far from shornet price.

Once you add all the extras to Rafale, it's going to be even more.

How do you know they are not already?

Frankly, I'd rather pay an extra premium for a Rafale/tiffy than go for an uber expensive shornet even if its a tad less.

CM.

[PratikDas]

Frankly, I'd rather pay an extra premium for a Rafale/tiffy than go for an uber expensive shornet even if its a tad less.

My 2 cents - if any country other than the US brings a fully functional AESA to our doorstep within the stipulated date then I too would be inclined to support the newer platform.

Not that my support matters much

[kit]

China is already a super power with political and economic might beyond all other countries except the US , its military power does lag quite behind the sole hyper power,so it does look a bit diminutive beside it.But the hyper power owes China a huge economic debt , the surplus held by the country almost equal to the formers debt.So the creditor and debtor will continue to tango in all major issues including those related to other countries,read India (we don't have to delude ourselves into thinking India is Asia s 3rd or 4th largest economy simply because the largest one is 3 times more compared to india (ie,equivalent to 3 Indias) .India can and should try the same game militarily what China is doing vs the US,that is asymmetric warfare.This is likely to be difficult for 2 reasons,that china is closed and india being more open as to capabilities., but still it is the only way India can keep the dragon in check.A credible 2 nd strike nuclear deterrent is sine qua non for India, the better it is the better it will be for the whole of Asian stability.However Uncle Sam will not overtly help in this plan for more reasons than one.
As it is the MRCA deal more looks like a political decision.If push comes to shove America is least likely to help India given its economic quagmire.So no frontline offensive american weapons please.You need weapons that you can and will use no matter what the political scenario maybe.US can get deals for some defensive weapons given its probable stance in a conflict.

[NRao]

With China making ominous noises, what the f**k are we doing still talking about the MRCA??? Does it take this long to make up our minds?? And does more time necessarily mean a better decision? Take a damn decision and get any one of the planes. Develop tactics and operationalize these to work in conjunction with the AWACS.

I guess when the Chinese are storming the Himalayas, we will expedite the trials and set up a committee to fast track the acquisition. Gents, we SUCK!!!

There is some left over chai from yesterday.

[krishnan]

There is some left over chai from yesterday.

High time our Babus got off their corrupt/lazy arses and showed some urgency in this 'Birbal ki Khichdi' selection process....

That is never going to happen. its not that they dont realize, its just that doing last minute and urgent shopping gives them the chance to make good amount of money. Its like someone not bothering to take precaution against swine flu and suddenly gets it, and some hospital squeezes every bit of money out of them as they can

[Singha]

its not just about planes - we need a massive and varied inventory of air launched
smart weapons to [a] inflict pain at decisive points and quickly keep our losses low.

hence a LGB seeker pgm and retrofit to 1000s of existing 'dumb' bombs and some
form of air launched missile of the crystal maze mould should be considered as strategic as arihant or agni programs and given ALL NECESSARY RESOURCES to manufacture in bulk.

[nachiket]

Frankly, I'd rather pay an extra premium for a Rafale/tiffy than go for an uber expensive shornet even if its a tad less.

My 2 cents - if any country other than the US brings a fully functional AESA to our doorstep within the stipulated date then I too would be inclined to support the newer platform.

Not that my support matters much

Well as per some news stories/rumors the AESA radar is mentioned as a requirement in the RFP. So the russkies and Eurocanards have no choice but to bring a fully functional AESA.

[eklavya]

This is cool:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7NZ9X9A2efA

[b_patel]

This is cool:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7NZ9X9A2efA

HAHA that was sick! Just another reason the Typhoon is better than any of the other contenders.

‘We will shift workload from Germany to India in the area of avionics’
New Delhi: One of the largest defence purchases in recent times, the 126 aircraft purchase order from the Indian Air Force, is reaching the final stages of the a long drawn out tender process, with flight trials of the five aircraft set to start this month. Mint’s Anil Padmanabhan and Rahul Chandran spoke to Bernhard Gerwert, chief executive officer of military air systems, EADS Defence and Security, the largest stock holder in the Eurofighter Typhoon, one of the five aircrafts going to flight trials this year, when he was in New Delhi. Edited Excerpts:
We have to go into flight trials. And to go for flight trials is a very expensive journey. Coming to India with two, three fighters, doing the flight trials in Europe and before doing so, I’d like to get a little grip on where we are. And I have to say, I have a good feeling.
--------------- rest snipped -------------------------

Read the rest of the article its not bad. EADS actually has a good idea of how India would be able to absorb the TOT.
Anyone know if it would have any potential problems performing in the humid environments during the trials? I know the desert climates aren't a problem (SA flies them).

[NRao]

‘We will shift workload from Germany to India in the area of avionics’

This:

So you are differentiating between the partnership you have in India and the existing partnerships in Europe with other member countries?

Yes. It must be different because I would like to point out that India has the great opportunity to become our industrial partner. However, it cannot be that we say “Okay. India could become a fifth partner and then we divide everything through five instead of four.” Of course this is not possible, let us be clear among ourselves.

So, not ToT of EF.

The "four" will build and sell and EADS will provide more in terms of offsets it looks like to me. Is that right?

[chiragAS]

rose has been appointed as new Lockheed CEO. guess he is a successor to the one who ran away after classified docs were found in Lockheed office.
why is GOI not doing anything on that issue.
sold out?

btw this news article saying lockheed's renewing solid commitment is a kick below the belt. stupid reporters/journos.

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/NEWS/news ... wsid=11090

smashhit site guys should stop reporting defence news.
i smell something fishy. music download site reporting on lockheed.

[Charu]

Flying the Rafale is great experience atleast on MS FSX

[Willy]

Buy French They sell to everyone but then neither do they sanction anyone

[pralay]

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/NEWS/news ... wsid=11094
it seems like mig-35 and amrikans fighters are going to lag in the race.

Rafale was out in the initial round only(dunno how they managed to get back)

So EuroFighter 2000 is the most likely winner.
(does not mean its the best fighter, just best suited for our interests and specs)

[Sanku]

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/NEWS/news ... wsid=11094
it seems like mig-35 and amrikans fighters are going to lag in the race.

No it says strategic considerations, that a pretty way of saying that IAF requirements are going to be given the shaft and PMO is going to decide which a/c to buy, which we know will be from our strategic partner only.

[Philip]

Lt.Gen. Utterback,whom I quoted earlier,the head of the US's 18th Air Force,says in an aviation mag,that he "flew the SU-30MKI" (this means that India allowed him to fly our most sophistiucated air dominance aircraft) and tried every way in which to destabilise the aircraft but couldn't.He was full of praise for it said that it was very easy to fly and reliable and also better than the MIG-29 (not MIG-35).Given his views on the Flanker,why should we even consider buying old hags from the US?

[b_patel]

So, not ToT of EF.
The "four" will build and sell and EADS will provide more in terms of offsets it looks like to me. Is that right?

There will be TOT for the EF the requirements of the MRCA state that (I think). India would most likely build certain components of the eurofighter for future sales/orders. Obviously you can't Include India as the fifth partner they didn't do any of the work for the EF! But I think EADS would consider India as a fifth partner for future Tranches of the aircraft. India would have a say in what is upgraded etc. (I think thats what EADS refers to when they call India a "partner"). I mean lets face it they are about to purchase almost the same as any of the partner nations 200+ aircraft. Im assuming India exercises its option for the additional aircraft.
The EF or the Rafale should win this, EADS and Dassault are desperate for an order of this magnitude. They are doing what they have to in order to secure this deal. If they weren't so desperate I doubt EADS would make the offer of India becoming their preferred "partner". They didn't do it for Saudi Arabia.

[Philip]

Good pic of the MIG-35 from Flight Intl. in this article on "Russia rebuilds..",its aviation industry.

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/20 ... uilds.html

[Austin]

Great Pics of Mig-35 out here

http://www.migavia.ru/photo/

But there are still not the real Mig-35 but a test platform to test tech for Mig-35 , this is the Mig-29M2 MMRCA.

The interesting thing to note is the placement of SOAR and ULS under the engine , which could perhaps be replaced by 2 Hard point for AAM , since these look like modular hardpoint.

The Mig-35 should have 5 hardpoint in each wing , and if the engine hardpoint can indeed be converted to AAM in theory this should get 12 Hardpoint for Mig-35

[saptarishi]

Lt.Gen. Utterback,whom I quoted earlier,the head of the US's 18th Air Force,says in an aviation mag,that he "flew the SU-30MKI" (this means that India allowed him to fly our most sophistiucated air dominance aircraft) and tried every way in which to destabilise the aircraft but couldn't.He was full of praise for it said that it was very easy to fly and reliable and also better than the MIG-29 (not MIG-35).Given his views on the Flanker,why should we even consider buying old hags from the US?

one thing is for sure nobody wants f-16in,,,f/a-18in has a good chance because of apg-79, ge-f414-400 being married to LCA andsome amount of US political pressure,but again,USA will offer limited tech transfer,,,i don't know whether source codes will be offered ,,then there will be monitoring the weapons up for sale,,,,further if there is a war with the porkis,,USA may restrict their use stating that no ''MAJOR NON NATO ALLY WILL BE HARMED USING USING US WEAPONS''. in such case we will be at a disadvantage,,,moreover rafales,typhoons ,mig-35s are sufficient i think,,,,,full TOT on AESA,, full transfer of source codes,,,GOI will have a tough task ahead of them