MRCA News and Discussion

All threads that are locked or marked for deletion will be moved to this forum. The topics will be cleared from this archive on the 1st and 16th of each month.
Craig Alpert
BRFite
Posts: 1440
Joined: 09 Oct 2009 17:36
Location: Behind Enemy Lines

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Craig Alpert » 17 Sep 2010 04:26


Craig Alpert
BRFite
Posts: 1440
Joined: 09 Oct 2009 17:36
Location: Behind Enemy Lines

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Craig Alpert » 17 Sep 2010 04:36

Dubai's negotiating tactics!

UAE May Ditch Rafale Hornet a Surprise Competitor for $10B Deal
The U.S. source said the Gulf state is believed to be frustrated over price and the technology offered by France.

UAE authorities have been negotiating with the French government and industry a potential co-development of a more capable "fifth-generation" model of the Rafale.

Abu Dhabi is being asked to pay to upgrade the Rafale, while the F-18 is already at the desired technological level.

The Gulf source said, "The Super Hornet has everything we need. We don't need to co-develop or modify it."

Upgrades under discussion include a longer-range active electronically scanned radar, a more capable Spectra electronic warfare suite and a M88 engine that gives 9 tons of thrust, 1.5 tons more than the ones in the French Air Force's Rafales.

French Defense Minister Hervé Morin has said developing the upgrades would cost UAE around 2 billion euros ($2.6 billion). France itself would also bear some of the cost.

Media reports have estimated the actual development cost to UAE at 4 billion to 5 billion euros. Morin dismissed those figures as "fantastic."

The UAE did help bankroll the development of the Block 60 version of the Lockheed Martin F-16 and owns some of the technology. UAE bought 80 of the so-called Desert Falcon planes for $7.2 billion in the 1990s under a policy of spreading purchases among suppliers.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16504
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby NRao » 17 Sep 2010 06:08

Even 10-15 years ago we could have bundled the needs of various nations in one basket. No longer. Specially WRT India.

I just do not think the UAE situation pertains to India - even remotely.

Following that discussion is good - over a drink or two. But that is all it is. From an Indian PoV, just a discussion over drinks.

JTull
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2706
Joined: 18 Jul 2001 11:31

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby JTull » 17 Sep 2010 19:56



So it seems due to ejection seat problems the Saudi Arabian pilot couldn't eject from the twin seater while his copilot did so.

manum
BRFite
Posts: 604
Joined: 07 Mar 2010 15:32
Location: still settling...
Contact:

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby manum » 17 Sep 2010 21:06

few days back I had shown some sense of humor about this incident, I am really sorry about it...It must be terrible to be not able to eject...I feel sorry for myself...

Wickberg
BRFite
Posts: 252
Joined: 01 Jul 2008 18:45

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Wickberg » 18 Sep 2010 05:11

manum wrote:few days back I had shown some sense of humor about this incident, I am really sorry about it...It must be terrible to be not able to eject...I feel sorry for myself...


Well, you should never make jokes of accidents. No matter of some one dies or get injured. Of any nationality....

AFAIK the seat did eject but the parachute did´nt worked as it should have done.ALL Eurofighter nations (UK, Spain, Germany, Italy and I don´t know if there is any more. Have grounded all their Eurofighters.) Germany have also grounded their F4 fighters cause they have the same kind of seat...

SriSri
BRFite
Posts: 545
Joined: 23 Aug 2006 15:25

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby SriSri » 18 Sep 2010 09:08

Defence Ministry Will Not Rush Into Shortlisting Indian Air Force M-MRCA Deal Options

Despite getting gentle nudges from the government, the defence establishment does not seem to be ready for an early down-listing of the $10-billion 126 medium multi-role combat aircraft (MMRCA) contract in which companies from the US, France and Russia are in the race.

Sources told FE, "The field trial report of the six contenders has been sent to the director-general acquisition's office, who is expected to make recommendations and send it to the defence acquisition council (DAC) of the ministry of defence (MoD)."

"The DG's recommendations will not only be based on the field trial report but will also take into consideration the evaluation of the offset proposals of the six contenders. The Offset Technical Committee in the defence ministry has already initiated the process of evaluating the offset proposals," sources added.

They went on to clarify that they are under no pressure to downselect contenders prior to the visit of the US President Barack Obama, French President Nicholas Sarkozy and his wife Carla Bruni and the Russian President Dmitry Medvedev.

American companies, Lockheed Martin F-16IN, Boeing F/A-18, French Dassault Rafale, EADS Eurofighter Typhoon, Saab Gripen and Russian MiG-35 are in the running for the 126 aircraft deal which is expected to replace the ageing MiG-21s. According to sources, "Vendors who are compliant rule wise, Defence Procurement Policy and Technical offsets will ultimately be opened for consideration. Also, the lowest bidder, designated L1, will be selected as the medium multi-role combat aircraft (MMRCA)."

Once the contenders receive the evaluation of the Offset Technical Committee, the contenders for the MMRCA will give fresh offset proposals. After that, fresh recommendations will be sent to the defence ministry. Once the Cabinet Committee on Security gives the nod, negotiations between governments will begin, which could start early next year, sources added.

The contenders have being invited to submit their offset plans and the IAF will meet different contenders to discuss flight evaluation reports once the field trials are complete. It may be noted that the IAF is considering "life-cycle costs" and not just the lowest bid for the MMRCA. The contract entails acquisition of 18 aircraft to be bought off-the-shelf and the rest to be manufactured in India under transfer of technology.

http://www.india-defence.com/reports-4534

Juggi G
BRFite
Posts: 1070
Joined: 11 Mar 2007 19:16
Location: Martyr Bhagat Singh Nagar District, Doaba, Punjab, Bharat. De Ghuma ke :)

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Juggi G » 18 Sep 2010 09:50


Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Singha » 18 Sep 2010 10:18

downlisting will be done only after AF1 clears indian airspace on its return flight.

JTull
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2706
Joined: 18 Jul 2001 11:31

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby JTull » 18 Sep 2010 18:10

Now it's the turn of RAF to ground 'non-operational' flights.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11355789

Henrik
BRFite
Posts: 211
Joined: 10 Apr 2010 15:55
Location: Southern Sweden

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Henrik » 18 Sep 2010 19:47

Singha wrote:downlisting will be done only after AF1 clears indian airspace on its return flight.

Agree to 100%.

Klaus
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2168
Joined: 13 Dec 2009 12:28
Location: Cicero Avenue

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Klaus » 18 Sep 2010 22:47

JTull wrote:Now it's the turn of RAF to ground 'non-operational' flights.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11355789


OT....

How much of this is due to the economic meltdown in Britain and EADS sponsor nations (except Germany)? Britain is not being able to afford many community programs and they might be having difficulty retaining full-time maintenance crew. Only a matter of time before an error occured due to worker overload/fatigue.

Or is there something deeper that I am missing?

prabir
BRFite
Posts: 150
Joined: 27 Aug 2008 03:22

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby prabir » 18 Sep 2010 23:12

Going slow on the process before US President's visit itself means that MMS will not have his way in awarding deal to US. This is a good signal. Doing business with Americans in non-serious stuff is ok, but in MRCA deal, it is not worth. They cannot be reliable friends / partners. This apprehension is shared by many who matter in the establishment and that is good.

Willy
BRFite
Posts: 283
Joined: 18 Jan 2005 01:58

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Willy » 18 Sep 2010 23:40

Could also mean that the teens are not doing well at all in the competiton and the GOI dosent want to piss of the US before Obama's visit by cutting them out of the competition :) Just my 2 paise worth of speculation :) :P

VishalJ
BRFite
Posts: 997
Joined: 12 Feb 2009 06:40
Location: Mumbai
Contact:

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby VishalJ » 19 Sep 2010 02:15

Gripen over Burj Al Arab

Image

Image

Image

Image

Over Dubai Port

Image

Over Palm Jumeirah

Image

manum
BRFite
Posts: 604
Joined: 07 Mar 2010 15:32
Location: still settling...
Contact:

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby manum » 19 Sep 2010 09:13

Willy wrote:Could also mean that the teens are not doing well at all in the competiton and the GOI dosent want to piss of the US before Obama's visit by cutting them out of the competition :) Just my 2 paise worth of speculation :) :P


when i saw the reports that Defence Ministry is slow on downlisting, then i realized, even using the word downlisting, means process has already started or the vague idea is already there, only thing they are not giving the face to it...
or lets say, they are just waiting for right time, I think, so that it doesn't spoils the little parties they will be having with head of nation, and bring in change of taste and agenda for their visit...

IAF has always bought perkiest and fresh aircrafts of its era, at any point of time....so anyways as per history its not going to go for Teens, which are clearly not the perkiest but mature though...might be valid for few nations, not for us, we want different capabilities on table, than minimum deterrence, so we want differently capable aircraft, than just fitting the brief we have supplied to the tender, I think there is a fine line somewhere in brief, or may be unsaid also...

anyways whatever it goes, Indian government would have still bought teens, if there was change in attitude of USA of how they sell their products, if they would have bit more flexible in how they approach things, they might have succeeded to give us atleast hornet..just for a change, in these positive times, but I don't think, USA is still trying to bend down a bit more and do the physical work, they are still trying political backdoor....and for India defence is more important than most of the nations in the world...so more is required in terms of flexibility in norms, if someone is trying to sell things to us...like C17, we are almost only buying hardware, given in this category we have only 2 of major contenders to buy from, in which C17 stands of its own...so there wont be much change in policy of how we are going to use this aircraft...which would almost be the same...still we are buying the hardware, and don't want to get caught with any clause...that says the story, that in a monopolized buy, we still don't want to be monopolized...

that is why chances of Gripen, Rafale, EF has increased, as them being perky, Flexible and unexplored to build new tactics upon...but options can be narrowed down if, lets say, some unavoidable technical fault being found on aircrafts, which seemingly can handicap the procurement process....for example the EF case...but i think ejector seat is not a great concern (as per current scene, there might be other serious problems waiting to be found), in view of over all aircraft, it can be rectified within time...

anyways in case of Rafale, i think the case builds up more strongly, due to totally sanction free, Ideologically not too heavy baggaged of not selling to conflict zone...and aircraft being new and our experience with mother firm of the aircraft...
but i find more important point...causing the tilt in Rafale's favour is, Snecma core in Kaveri engine...I am realizing, if reason of totally denying EF can be only possible, if we find Engine replacement, and if Snecma is giving the Opportunity or more than that...then we might go for rafale, except EF did exceptionally well...given EF is considerably costlier...so it must give us more in similar terms...with respect to rafale, in enhancing the capabilities we are looking for...or surprise us...

Gripen is underdog, in true sense, we'll buy it, only if Rafale and EF kill each other...by any chance...
Migs I am not counting...given we already involved with many other fighter programs...like MKI's and PAKFA...we won't like to own Migs...and anyways as per my memory, we have already been offered a mig aircraft complete technology transfer, if in return we agreed to kill LCA program and we denied....this is the same MIg, JF17 is based upon or similar to...with some f16 addition...

moreover, IAF only holds the keys, if datasheets are flipside of our guess...but i hardly think so...
then only reason and most important deciding factor will be the IAF datasheet, which will lead us to absolute winner, and when winner gets announced, i would like a quote, of data of from this fact book...


PS...i said obvious things here, but what i find most valuable in any say is compiling things together and putting it the best way, so that one provides the fullest picture, one can provide...otherwise everything we are saying, have been already been said...

kmc_chacko
BRFite
Posts: 326
Joined: 07 Feb 2007 10:10
Location: Shivamogga, Karnataka

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby kmc_chacko » 19 Sep 2010 17:18

why we r not offered F-15s ?

manum
BRFite
Posts: 604
Joined: 07 Mar 2010 15:32
Location: still settling...
Contact:

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby manum » 19 Sep 2010 18:11

kmc_chacko wrote:why we r not offered F-15s ?


I think f-18 and F-15 are similar in operation role and capabilities...USA may be wanted to field both of it's firm...and give them fair chance...and hence increase the probability...and variance of choice...

jai
BRFite
Posts: 366
Joined: 08 Oct 2009 19:14

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby jai » 19 Sep 2010 18:19

why we r not offered F-15s ?


Its not a "medium" aircraft. It would be in the category of SU 30 MKI's, which we already have and are getting more of, along with FGFA in due time.

The need started as a lighter, multirole and advanced jet that could fill in the numbers till such time the indigenous aircraft and FGFA could become available to IAF in numbers.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Singha » 19 Sep 2010 18:19

well since F-15 and F-18 are both owned by boeing....f15-I could have been offered. its a far better product imho in its F15-SG avatar + aesa than F-18E/F. "silent eagle" changes could also have been worked in.

Asit P
BRFite
Posts: 311
Joined: 14 May 2009 02:33

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Asit P » 19 Sep 2010 18:29

F 15 is a heavy air superiority fighter. IAF already had such a fighter in the form of SU 30 MKI. It wanted a multi role aircraft which could complement the fleet of MKIs. Hence F 18 and F 16 were offered.

Cosmo_R
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3407
Joined: 24 Apr 2010 01:24

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Cosmo_R » 19 Sep 2010 18:39

Singha wrote:well since F-15 and F-18 are both owned by boeing....f15-I could have been offered. its a far better product imho in its F15-SG avatar + aesa than F-18E/F. "silent eagle" changes could also have been worked in.


IIRC, The F-15 was offered. The IAF then indicated it would duplicate the MKI and Boeing then got SD/Pentagon permission to offer the F/A-18 as AsitP also posted.

Added later: It was also a cost issue: The F-15s were running 2x the cost of F-16s and Boeing wanted to offer a cheaper alternative. Take that with a grain of salt since at that time, the F-35 was also projected at $40MM given the anticipated volume.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Singha » 19 Sep 2010 19:54

>> the F-35 was also projected at $40MM

rotfl, the tata nano of 5th gen a/c it was marketed as. would be surprising if it came in below $120 mil a pop for customers now....starting...and then weapons pkgs, training, contractor support, spares pipeline....

Christopher Sidor
BRFite
Posts: 1435
Joined: 13 Jul 2010 11:02

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Christopher Sidor » 19 Sep 2010 20:11

vishal great photos. keep them coming.

shambu
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 7
Joined: 14 Feb 2010 02:03

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby shambu » 19 Sep 2010 21:16

MRCA aircraft deal to be signed soon: IAF chief

Air Chief Marshal P.V. Naik on Sunday said the contract for supply of 126 Multi-Role Combat Aircraft (MCRA) to Indian Air Force will be signed soon.

“Evaluation of six aircraft from the bidding companies has been completed and details have been submitted to the Ministry of Defence which is expected to take a final decision soon,” Air Chief Marshal Naik told reporters on the sidelines of an event here.

The IAF has been holding trials for its $10-billion Medium MCRA tenders in which Boeing and Lockheed Martin from U.S., French D’Assault, Swedish SAAB, European consortium EADS and Russian MiG are contenders.

“The evaluation report will be discussed by the Cabinet Committee on Security, after which the process of awarding contract would be initiated,” he said.

He said that it would take another year to sign the contract and the delivery of first batch of 18 aircraft would be received within three years after the orders are placed.

The Defence Ministry has allocated Rs. 42,000 crore for the purchase of 126 aircraft.

http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article698941.ece

Dmurphy
BRFite
Posts: 1543
Joined: 03 Jun 2008 11:20
Location: India

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Dmurphy » 20 Sep 2010 08:47

Excerpt from the Ajai Shukla article on EJ200 and GE-414
MoD sources have expressed surprise that Eurojet could bid 20% cheaper than its rival, General Electric, which is widely regarded as a cost-effective manufacturer. In fact, conversations with EADS executives reveal that this is a well-considered business strategy.
Alert! Possible pitfall ahead.
If we go in for the EJ200 just because its cheap, we could be walking into a trap. Thinking we'll have it easy if the EF is chosen as the MMRCA could also mean the EADS increases the EF's prices to take advantage of us saddling up on the EJ200 horse. A royal ride will follow.

JMT

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Singha » 20 Sep 2010 08:58

EADS surely need to come up with projected cost of the EJ210 ... such an engine is what will make the mark for Tejas mk2. GE has the advantage of 414 engine already having the desired thrust of 23,000lb albeit 110kg heavier. they can probably play around, use next gen materials and either reduce the weight and increase the thrust some more which is inevitable beacause USN F_18s can only grow heavier.

manum
BRFite
Posts: 604
Joined: 07 Mar 2010 15:32
Location: still settling...
Contact:

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby manum » 20 Sep 2010 09:03

how can they increase the price IIRC all the contenders were asked second time to submit their price quotes to ministry...and news were taking rounds of EF getting cheaper due to fall in euro...i think that time Greek economic problems were going on too...

tender means...the price quoted remains unchanged after deal is done...even if world goes upside down...means neither you get 9/10 or 11/10...thats what the deal or contract means...that is how construction industry works of any type...

Please don't quote Gorshkov as it was being donated to us...so deals were flaky...here lots of procedures are going on...

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20419
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Philip » 20 Sep 2010 11:06

The IAF accusing the DRDO of going slow in selecting the engne for the LCA (LCA thread) confirmsd what I've been saying for ages,that a concerted effort is on to sabotage the LCA,plus delaying the engine selection as it impacts upon the MMRCA choice.No guesses as to who will benefit from scuttling he EJ engine!

t is good that the MOD is staying put and not bowing to the PMO's pressure.If one recalls,MMS was supposed to have commented upon delayed defence decisions in his press interview.I also indicates that the "inner council" thinks dffereltly from the PM on this issue and no matter what compromises the MEA makes to firm up "deliverables" for Om-baba's visit,it is not going to be able to bend the MOD to its will.

manum
BRFite
Posts: 604
Joined: 07 Mar 2010 15:32
Location: still settling...
Contact:

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby manum » 20 Sep 2010 11:59

yeah, hopefully we got Iron man sitting in MOD...

vishnu.nv
BRFite
Posts: 168
Joined: 22 Aug 2007 19:32

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby vishnu.nv » 20 Sep 2010 12:45

manum wrote:yeah, hopefully we got Iron man sitting in MOD...


Antony is no IronMan.... But in his end tenure as the chief minister, i think last month he did quite a few things. One thing he will no take a penny from any one... :)

jai
BRFite
Posts: 366
Joined: 08 Oct 2009 19:14

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby jai » 20 Sep 2010 13:23

If we go in for the EJ200 just because its cheap, we could be walking into a trap. Thinking we'll have it easy if the EF is chosen as the MMRCA could also mean the EADS increases the EF's prices to take advantage of us saddling up on the EJ200 horse. A royal ride will follow.


Not necessarily. This is obviously such a huge requirement (total of all pipeline projects) that they will more than makeup in the volumes, so it is a smart strategy. Besides, I am sure, they desperately need the business and would also like to get a firm foot in the door to one of the largest defense spenders in the coming decades...this alone would make companies offer the kind of pricing they have offered..besides, they need something to beat the L1 clause as well to win...this may be it. Besides, given the state of affairs in Urope, and the fact that they can not sell to China, who else can give them such a huge volume of business.

It also means that Amrikhan co's realize that their future business with India completely depends on the mood of the folks in their senate/W.house (given previous sanctions on consulting projects etc for LCA) and that there may be no guarantees there, hence they may not be willing to take as much risk.

If we are getting the complete tech. transfer from Uropeans in this deal, and EF is the AF choice (being the most modern of the contenders in the MRCA competition), we may actually have a big win on our hands....we could always order more transporters from the A. Khans as in any case we need them ..and thus keep A.khans satisfied..in my view, going with Khan engines or A/C would be a huge risk....give them both, and we are doubling our risks, which I am sure IAF are well aware of..hence the protests.

Its well worth it, considering that the dragon desparately needs engine tech for its in dev fighters - it will keep the pressure on Urope to not sell weapons and tech to Dragon. The US would not do it in any case, the Russians would not easily either due to fears of reverse engineering and our business size with them, we have enough business with the french to keep them out of it, and the rest of Urope would not let the Swedes sell to the dragon either... :wink: :wink:
Last edited by jai on 20 Sep 2010 13:33, edited 1 time in total.

Dmurphy
BRFite
Posts: 1543
Joined: 03 Jun 2008 11:20
Location: India

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Dmurphy » 20 Sep 2010 13:24

manum wrote:how can they increase the price IIRC all the contenders were asked second time to submit their price quotes to ministry...and news were taking rounds of EF getting cheaper due to fall in euro...i think that time Greek economic problems were going on too...
Manum, first of all, in all probability there will be face to face discussions to bring down the prices. Every well negotiated deal has them. How else will say Eurofighter know what the MOD is prepared to pay or sometimes if the MOD can give them a counter offer, they'll know how much they've overquoted. We only stand to gain from the price negotiations.

Without alluding to the Gorky deal, if you recall we also paid Russia some extra monies for the price escallation in MKIs as well.

And secondly, when I say EADS might increase the prices, it could also mean they don't negotiate their prices further down because of the leverage they will now have in terms of EJ200 for Tejas.

To be honest, I too am in favour of EF over the SH or Gripen and ditto with the engines. But if I were in MOD's place, I would at least negotiate the prices of the EF to the lowest possible level (if not sign and formalise the deal) before i sign the purchase contract for EJ200.

Dmurphy
BRFite
Posts: 1543
Joined: 03 Jun 2008 11:20
Location: India

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Dmurphy » 20 Sep 2010 13:29

jai wrote:besides, they need something to beat the L1 clause as well to win...this may be it.
There's the catch. What if we sign the EJ200 for tejas deal now and later we find out the EJ200 powered EF is a lot costlier than GE414 powered Gripen and there is no way the EF is gonna be L1. This will be a typical foot in mouth case for the MOD where even if they tell EF point blank that they're L6, EF will not break too much sweat...thanks to the "firm foot in the door to one of the largest defense spenders in the coming decades". It will be a penny wise, pound foolish kind of a decision.

So close the MMRCA deal first and then finalise the Tejas engines.

jai
BRFite
Posts: 366
Joined: 08 Oct 2009 19:14

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby jai » 20 Sep 2010 13:48

There's the catch. What if we sign the EJ200 for tejas deal now and later we find out the EJ200 powered EF is a lot costlier than GE414 powered Gripen and there is no way the EF is gonna be L1


Even in this scenario, we would still want to hedge our risks against sanctions, and therefore it would still make sense to have EF engines in the LCA and get the engine tech..considering that we would have a much larger number of LCA's eventually than the MRCA which would not be sanction prone.

Indeed, GOI would have to find a way to rationalize the MRCA procurement beyond just the cost and allow for better technology to come in - considering that the chosen MRCA would equip our IAF against threats like the dragon for the next 30 - 40 years, indeed, no other aircraft may remain technically relevant and effective counter to the dragon over this period - going by the rate at which Dragon is improving both its aviation tech and fighter numbers...before long, advanced J - 10 derivatives and J XX would be available against us...going with L1 in this scenario would be the worst possible mistake the GOI can make to compromise national security.

Besides, GE would never transfer all the key technologies for 414, which we so desperately need given Kaveri's record so far.

manum
BRFite
Posts: 604
Joined: 07 Mar 2010 15:32
Location: still settling...
Contact:

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby manum » 20 Sep 2010 14:19

all correct...but i was just talking about no possibility of escalation after the deal is done for the same Bill of quantities...so if they quote price for the fighter...with MOD agreed after negotiation...cool, deal done, signed sealed...then engine that is separate tender, deal done signed sealed...

so in other words...their will be no change after the deals are done...so if there is any change in price it must be before the paper work...so right now if, EF is quoting price, it must have to be competitive and non-competitive (means they can present their own contextual benefits, so the negotiations will happen on those benefits, not on price), with what it is providing...ya, negotiations are part of it...and that paperwork is tender itself...where they quote the prices, when government invites it...so its written and comparable with others...

the second price that MOD asked to be filed, was after negotiations only, I guess, or else what was the need? and there will be no change in price afterwards, what will change is, the secondary things coming with the fighter, that is where negotiations will happen...Engine price must be part of it...to support the price EF already quoted...there won't be any change in the Fighter price whatsoever...

MKI's escalation happened, when another tender of modification was floated with different requirement...it is separate tender, hence price escalation is possible...not with older bill of quantities as per sum amount must have been quoted...and it all started when user ie IAF queried for different configurations...means...the new planes are totally new acquired, separated from old deal...

Dmurphy
BRFite
Posts: 1543
Joined: 03 Jun 2008 11:20
Location: India

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Dmurphy » 20 Sep 2010 15:12

manum wrote:MKI's escalation happened, when another tender of modification was floated with different requirement...it is separate tender, hence price escalation is possible...not with older bill of quantities as per sum amount must have been quoted...and it all started when user ie IAF queried for different configurations...means...the new planes are totally new acquired, separated from old deal...
AFAIK, configuration or the BOQ didn't change. It was per CAG reports where the price increase was attributed to some economic fundas which I'm not too conversant in. Another example of price escalation post deal signing -Scorpene deal.

manum
BRFite
Posts: 604
Joined: 07 Mar 2010 15:32
Location: still settling...
Contact:

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby manum » 20 Sep 2010 15:23

scorpene deal, MOD, didn't finalized or sealed the deal...that what it was the whole outcry, it let the prices escalate...and when they had to finalize due to all the reasons the deal, price had already increased considerably...IMHO...if deal would have been done, prices corrections in later years wouldn't have mattered...as deal was through...

That is why GOI was blamed...

see this is how tenders are filed...or else it'll deteriorate the credibility of all the deals and make them highly disputable...as world market price always remain volatile in terms of materials...as well fuel price, hence transport...so the deal gets signed as per current prices...and those prices remain as it is till the order gets done...for which money is paid...
this simplifies many things...

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20419
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Philip » 20 Sep 2010 16:46

The LCA MK-2 project must stand on its own merit and requiremens.If the EJ is the best for it then so be it.If this also has a bearing on the MMRCA deal in a positive sense then all the better.The LCA has been delayed for so long that it would be an act of reason to hold it ransom to that of a decision on the MMRCA ,which is at least one year away from reports!
Let's not forget that the Naval LCA s also at risk with a delayed decision and a TVC EJ engine would enhance the naval version's capabiliy especially when taking off from the ski-jump.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20419
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: MRCA News and Discussion

Postby Philip » 21 Sep 2010 18:39

Latest AWST says that Israel is making massive plans for upto 50% of its air force to be comprised of UCAVs within the next few decades.The implications are enormous as studies have found that there is hardly any advantage using manned fighters,which are costlier and smaller air forces may take the same route.It would be very prudent for the IAF to start planning for a similar strategy for the future and that the MCA programme should be an unmanned one.We will have the MMRCA,5th-gen fighter,LCA,and hundreds of Flanker derivatives in srvice by 2020.The IN is also asking for poposals for a UCAV,helo style,for its warships apart from the Indo-Israeli project to use old Chetaks/All-3s in an unmanned role.


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 34 guests