India selects Typhoon and Rafale for MMRCA shortlist

[Sri]

^^^
I think Boeing and LM's fault... what do you think?

[Sri]

I don't know because I'm hoping we never have to buy another fighter ever again. But if you're suggesting that we will punish them, what is the downside for India? We bought the C-130j, C-17, P8I and M777 howitzer because they are the best in class. We need more such stuff.

Satya Vachan. Very true Victor Ji. We should have freedom to buy the best and only the best without any political or geo strategic interference. More importantly anything that our Armed forces select after user trials.

I'm sure this is mere speculation on your part. Nobody knows other than GoI, IAF, Boeing and LM.

This too is true Sir. I am speculating only. But last I heard neither Boeing nor LM have either gotten back IAF or the Indian Courts with any kind of objection or complaint. Should I take it that IAF debriefs were pretty thorough and technically sound?

If true, whose fault was this?

I think Boeing and LM... what do you think?

[rohankumaon]

IMHO, F-18 and F16 lost purely on technical ground. Rafale and EF performed better on the technical metrics laid out by IAF. The proof of this can be earlier reports in media that suggested theoretically all six fighter can qualify to the bidding round. Thus, this makes technical evaluation being the sole criteria of selecting the aircraft. Only question is whether there was a clause of TOT in all those 640 odd parameters. My speculation would be NO because LM and Boeing will not field aircraft with XY technology and suggesting we are not going to transfer this to you. Other speculation would be they deliberately downgraded the equipment that could be transferred to India. I would also think that will not be a cause because then they would be at disadvantage in meeting the criteria which were of very high standard.

The answer is very simple that F-16 and F18 were not good enough in comparison to EF and Rafale.

Another reason to believe that the process was more technical than strategic or TOT based, as I read in news when Gripen need Swedish govt. permission for some weapon trial or something. Because of this reason, the trial date has to be postponed. To this point, an IAF technical committee person responded that we are not going to let Gripen loose tender because of some crazy government rule. More reason to believe that MMRCA first round was technical evaluation rather than TOT reasons.

[SaiK]

One has to be very careful in analyzing the "offering" of an a/c to IAF, and sending an aircraft that is different to be offered for testing. We sidelined the main contention.. ie, why blame IAF for having failed many a/cs on certain parameters (still details are awaited) and the blame is they are lying. That is not an acceptable discussion.

We are speculating of course on the parameters they failed. The fact is they failed, and rest all we discuss here are assumptions only.

Now, I can do a reverse spin lie on USA, saying that what they are promising to offer is not what they want to sell us 'cause they sent us an older version of the aircraft that is not exactly what IAF wants to test with in the first place. why?

There is no end to speculations - IAF has to base it on what a/cs were sent in for trials, and not based on the future available offers. This is the truth.

[Rakesh]

This discussion is pointless and is going nowhere. Will have to lock this thread and start a new one.