Rafale & MMRCA News and Discussions-9 August, 2014

[RKumar]

-Gripen integrates critical components fromvarious countries which will not be transferred to brazil (AESA, FSO, MAWS, engines etc...) while for instance India will manufacture&assemble close to 100% of the rafale locally, including critical elements like AESA radar.
-Brazil will build only some parts of the gripen like the wings, the rest will be manufactured by SAAB. India is supposed to manufacture almost everything France does for the rafale.
-Most of Gripen E development is done with prototypes under construction due to fly in 2015, cooperation with AKAER or Embraer is thus quite limited now.
-India beneficiates from decades of rafale program R&D and will be free to add new capabilities on its own without France permission which is unlikely with the Gripen due to complex international layout with US/UK/Italian and Israeli components.

150M$ a Gripen for Brazil makes the MMRCA deal look cheap especially considering :

-The rafale is a bigger aircraft with more reach and more punch than the Gripen.
-The scope of the MMRCA deal goes far beyond the Brazilian deal with full manufacturing&assembly of rafale aircrafts with associated intellectual property vs limited development remaining, limited manufacturing for Brazil gripens as well as open questions regarding ToT of critical elements of the Gripen.

You are trying to cut the deal as per your wishes.
- You are mixing ToT and R&D knowledge transfer. It takes 5-7 years before prototypes are real fighting machines and Brazil will be learning and having access to the R&D data from SAAB. There is nothing that sort of will happen for us.
- One of the main reason for this deal was to get access to western production technology for LCA production line. And this is not required anymore.
- There is a big difference between 5.4 vs 20 billion. By the value it self, we can expect to get 4x more technology transfer.
- All know this deal gonna cost us 30-40 billion in the end including support infrastructure, maintenance depots, training, simulators, armament and the list goes on ... there will be n additional contracts which are not foreseen or being told to keep the initial contract costs down.
- There is no R&D knowledge handover for the engines or ASEA beside the code.
- I don't believe in adding capabilities without French help except integrating newer missiles.

To be honest, I don't trust French on this deal as they are blowing hot and cold air over technology sharing from the day Rafale was selected as L1. Personally, I am all for cancelling this deal. If this deal is signed at the end, either IAF wants it or IAF wants it.

In either case it will take another 4-5 years before Rafale is fit to fight for India.

[kit]

for the Frenchies who cant guarantee their rafales

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-05-1 ... ripen.html

India certainly deserves a sovereign guarantee for their buy whoever makes it and billions in penalties to make sure that they keep it... every billion that goes out of india counts !!

[kit]

i would rather the Rafale deal is cancelled if the french cant give what india wants

[NRao]

Again, for the nth time, the rafale at $20 billion is not worth it. Simple as that. Does not matter what was said years ago.

All I can agree with is that the IAF needs planes. That is about it.

DOes not even matter what was agreed upon.

If 20 billions is too expensive for India which aircraft could afford India within MMRCA requirements (ToT, indigenous building, high performance requirement) ?

Do you realize that even the Gripen was sold in Brazil at 150M$ a piece !!!! (5.4 Billion dollar for just 36 copy). That would be close to 20 billions dollar for 126 airframe for a much lighter aircraft than the rafale. To go further, the Brazilian deal is less complex as much less things will be built indigenously.

And some need to realize that comparing flyaway costs with costs of an entire deal is just stupid...When I read prices of Mig etc...I just had a smile on the naive comparison.

20 billions for 126 aircarfts is nothing shocking and even surprisingly cheap compared to the last Gripen deal in Brazil considering rafale capability and the fact that India gets decades of R&D and the tooling to build the aircraft.

If it is still too expensive for India then just buy rafales of the shelf and cut the price by more than 50%.

OK, let us reboot.

1) No one has (ever?) argued that the Rafale is a bad plane, in fact pretty close to 90% or so would agree that this is a great plane for the IAF. So, that is not a topic for discussion. That the IAF needs more planes *now* is a given too, not a point for discussion. OK? Those two points are out (avoid posting articles that say so) (we *all* know that).

2) That leaves two other: cost and ToT

So, let me ask you an old question that I have been asking for eons:

3) Would this deal - no matter at what cost ($7 or 25 billion) relieve India of any and all dependencies pertaining to the ToT for the Rafale? So, if France is providing ToT for X, Y, Z, will India never have to go back to an outside entity in the future for those technologies?

We can take this discussion to the next level once you answer that question.

____________________________________

On Brazil + Grippen.

Those arguments you (and most others) make are silly, childish, .... So as an example:

India HAS the LCA in hand. What does Brazil have as an equivalent?

Purchasers (individuals and nations) categorize risk: When you and me buy an Audi, we both may buy the same model with pretty much the same features, but we assign different weights to different features. So, you may buy an A4 because of fuel economy and I may buy it because it fits in my garage better than an alternative. So, a Brazilian decision can never be compared one-2-one with an Indian one. It is plain silly.

So can we please leave these Brazilian, Swiss, what-not purchases out of this Indian MMRCA decision?

[eklavya]

Sir, using words like "silly" and "childish" is not warranted.

arthuro was providing a useful pricing point against which to compare the Rafale acquisition. And that too in the context of your comment about Rafale being too expensive.

You and your neighbour may want an A4 for different reasons, but you would still compare the price.

There are no domestic examples within India to compare the price of the Rafale. The LCA is not remotely in the same class. So, if we are talking about price, foreign examples are necessary. Simple.

[NRao]

Sir,

When one keeps repeating the same crap, it is. There is nothing new in what he has been saying - for eons. saying something once or twice is fine. But every time and has no bearing on the discussion? Then it becomes silly and childish.

[NRao]

You and your neighbour may want an A4 for different reasons, but you would still compare the price.

Oh boy, you are nearly there. close.

It is the other way around.

The price we pay *may* be the same, but for totally different reasons.

So, Brazil may pay as much or more for a Grippen than India for the Rafale, but the *reasons* would be totally different and therefore the price paid is not worth discussing.

[NRao]

There are no domestic examples within India to compare the price of the Rafale. The LCA is not remotely in the same class. So, if we are talking about price, foreign examples are necessary. Simple.

There is.

That is *the* point. It is NOT "simple".

Let that gent respond to my question and we can take the discussion to the next step.

[member_20292]

There are no domestic examples within India to compare the price of the Rafale. The LCA is not remotely in the same class.

Once you invest 2o billion USD in making LCAs of various tranches ...it will be as good or better than the Rafale.

With the 2o bn USD investment ...you will create a very good aircraft development infrastructure in India. This we have to do anyways...since we will be the worlds second largest economy and a rival to China for many years ahead.
So ...why not start now ...on this road of self sufficiency? Airframe is ours ...we can integrate all the gadgets that we want into it...in due course of time our efforts will bear fruit.

[member_20292]

most of the 2o bn usd is going to be spend on electronics infrastructure which we desperately need anyways.

[arthuro]

You are trying to cut the deal as per your wishes.
- You are mixing ToT and R&D knowledge transfer. It takes 5-7 years before prototypes are real fighting machines and Brazil will be learning and having access to the R&D data from SAAB. There is nothing that sort of will happen for us.
- One of the main reason for this deal was to get access to western production technology for LCA production line. And this is not required anymore.
- There is a big difference between 5.4 vs 20 billion. By the value it self, we can expect to get 4x more technology transfer.
- All know this deal gonna cost us 30-40 billion in the end including support infrastructure, maintenance depots, training, simulators, armament and the list goes on ... there will be n additional contracts which are not foreseen or being told to keep the initial contract costs down.
- There is no R&D knowledge handover for the engines or ASEA beside the code.
- I don't believe in adding capabilities without French help except integrating newer missiles.

To be honest, I don't trust French on this deal as they are blowing hot and cold air over technology sharing from the day Rafale was selected as L1. Personally, I am all for cancelling this deal. If this deal is signed at the end, either IAF wants it or IAF wants it.

In either case it will take another 4-5 years before Rafale is fit to fight for India.

I am not mixing anything.

-First of all the rafale is still a work in progress with a new standard under development and te next one (F4) already with long term R&D allocation. I honestly don't know every detail of the rafale MMRCA deal but there is plenty of R&D work for the years to come and I can't see a reason why India could not be part of it. When I say India will get benefits from R&D I meant that it will get an immediate benefit of the billions invested by France by getting a mature working product although always being incrementally developed.

-Your point on 5.4 billon vs 20 billion makes no sense considering the difference of jets ordered in both deal and the capability difference which also must weight a certain price.

-Engine and radars : it is much more than source codes as we speak here of a full indegeneous manufacturing unlike the Gripen for Brazil where only some parts of the airframe will be manufactured in Brazil (like the wings).

-India will be able to undertake its own development for the rafale without asking permission. With source codes and manufacturing capabilities, there is no reasons it would not be able to do so.

You can believe it or not, but the indian MoD stated on the recorded that ToT and offsets requirements where met in the negotiations.

[Vivek K]

It would have made more sense to buy technologies that we were lacking in from the French to enhance the LCA. Why are we so scared of our own capabilities?

[arthuro]

OK, let us reboot.

1) No one has (ever?) argued that the Rafale is a bad plane, in fact pretty close to 90% or so would agree that this is a great plane for the IAF. So, that is not a topic for discussion. That the IAF needs more planes *now* is a given too, not a point for discussion. OK? Those two points are out (avoid posting articles that say so) (we *all* know that).

2) That leaves two other: cost and ToT

So, let me ask you an old question that I have been asking for eons:

3) Would this deal - no matter at what cost ($7 or 25 billion) relieve India of any and all dependencies pertaining to the ToT for the Rafale? So, if France is providing ToT for X, Y, Z, will India never have to go back to an outside entity in the future for those technologies?

We can take this discussion to the next level once you answer that question.

one 3) again why India would not be able to develop the rafale on its own :

-It has the intelectual property with the source codes.
-...And India manufactures virtually everything which gives quite an intimate knowledge of the bird.

Look BAE or Israelis...They upgrade aircrafts which are not their own (F16 for instance)...Why couldn't India further develop the rafale if they are capable of.


____________________________________

On Brazil + Grippen.

Those arguments you (and most others) make are silly, childish, .... So as an example:

India HAS the LCA in hand. What does Brazil have as an equivalent?

Purchasers (individuals and nations) categorize risk: When you and me buy an Audi, we both may buy the same model with pretty much the same features, but we assign different weights to different features. So, you may buy an A4 because of fuel economy and I may buy it because it fits in my garage better than an alternative. So, a Brazilian decision can never be compared one-2-one with an Indian one. It is plain silly.

So can we please leave these Brazilian, Swiss, what-not purchases out of this Indian MMRCA decision?

Your argument are not intelligible to me...It makes no sense.

Listen, Brazil pay 150M$ for:

-a lighter single engine aircraft
-with much less in-house manufacturing and work...(only the wings and final assembly is done in Brazil + some minor integration testing since the prototypes with all systems are already under construction)

Usual rafale prices that we can read in the press for India range from 120M$ to 150M$.
-Considering the scope of MMRCA with full indegeneous manufacturing and full ToT on every critical systems this is quite a bargain compared to the Gripen deal in Brazil.

Without knowing every details this remain quite an interesting and valuable benchmark. Those deal are not cheap and 20 billions seems appropriate for such a deal.

If India cannot leverage on ToT and if the deal is too expensive then I say : just by rafales off the shelf and the deal will go back to half of the current price.

[arthuro]

It would have made more sense to buy technologies that we were lacking in from the French to enhance the LCA. Why are we so scared of our own capabilities?

Have you read/watched IAF meeting on the LCA ?

[Cain Marko]

^Vivek, yes, but then the expense for some of these esoteric tech would probably be so exhorbitant that folks woule complain and say, "we should just have bought the entire platform, it would even allay the falling sqd strength.." basically this is a no win situation.

Either we need some of these exhorbitant techs (for whatever reason -AMCA? and admittedly the French do have some secret sauce to come up with such a capable and versatile fighter at such a low weight penalty) and fork over the dollars as the last major fighter import

Or

We don't need anything in terms of tech, be it production or performance related and simply need to address falling numbers, in which case the Rafale Should be dropped and another less expensive route be pursued- whether that is a mix of mki+lca or some fulcrum variant or whatever.

@*%# pita typing via a mobile!

[Victor]

The way I understand it, the French are perfectly willing to give us "full ToT" in the true meaning of the term and to take full responsibility for delivery schedule and quality of 100% Indian-made Rafales. I believe the arguments center around who and what the "us" and "Indian-made" stand for--HAL or some other Indian entity. They would be perfectly willing to guarantee output from someone like Reliance who they would coach, build up and control from day one. OTOH if I'm not mistaken, Dassault's study of HAL has convinced them that taking unlimited responsibility for HAL-made aircraft quality and schedule is akin to selling France for this contract. I don't expect them to budge on this and if that's what we are hoping, I've got to say we are nuts. If they do budge on this, I will run in my neighborhood in a loincloth at 2am in my driveway.

In the end, the French and Dassault essentially want to do a lobotomy on Reliance Aerospace and I'm curious why we should not welcome that wholeheartedly.

[kmc_chacko]

Can anybody can tell me composure of IAF by 2030. i.e., type of fighters & quantity

[member_20292]

1. because Reliance does not have the engineering genes to learn anything of this sort anytime soon.

2. Tata, might have better temperament and attitude towards engineering.

3. HAL is an excellent organization. Look, one reason why Rafale is so expensive is that Dassault is itself inefficient. Engineering salaries in France are lower than in the US, and this should balance out with the lower production runs.
HAL is the lead integrator , take it or leave it. Reliance and all will come in for ToT as and when required.

[member_20292]

...Why couldn't India further develop the rafale if they are capable of.

____________________________________

On Brazil + Grippen.

If India cannot leverage on ToT ...

Precisely my point.

My 20 billion US is better spent on building up my electronics infrastructure , from the ground up. Everything except for fabs, I can build up with this money. Small Research centers, small scale electronics industries for the manufacture of chips, all of that.

I very much want the money to flow in, and force HAL to move better , faster and with more confidence.

ToT will be a very expensive way , and a wasteful way, and a non perennial way of creating the ecosystem, according to me. The royalty payments are going to be nose bleedingly expensive.

This is clear from the 2 billion we are paying for the mirage upgrade. IMA modular architecture is great, but , we should develop this ourselves. Both the force, the money and the vision is required.

The IAF will have to be patient.

[Cain Marko]

The IAF will have to be patient.

But then sir, what has IAF ever been other than "patient" in every sense of the word.

Patient as in waiting without much hope: Hawks (25 odd years), MMRCA (15 years and running), LCA (25 years in the making).

In fact the IAF has been so damned patient that it is in risk of becoming a patient - as in mareez.

This is not to absolve them of their penchant for gold plated maal, and surely they have been remiss at certain times when home made products needed some hand-holding. But then there is a lot of back and forth involved when it comes to that issue and it takes two to tango. Iirc it was not IAF's desire for a goldplated LCA (read VKS tales) but technocrati delusions of grandeur.

I dare say, asking the IAF to be patient is akin to rubbing the proverbial salt in ze wounds.

[Viv S]

If 20 billions is too expensive for India which aircraft could afford India within MMRCA requirements (ToT, indigenous building, high performance requirement) ?

How about the PAK FA?

An even more pertinent question is, should India put the cost effectiveness of the aircraft as secondary to the level of ToT delivered? When 50 years of ToT driven license production hasn't revolutionized the Indian defence industry, what's different this time? The ToT approach might allow HAL to mark up great profits, pay its employees bonuses and route (the Indian taxpayer's) money back to the MoD in the form of dividends, but how does that help nullify the PLAAF's huge numerical advantage?

Do you realize that even the Gripen was sold in Brazil at 150M$ a piece !!!![/b] (5.4 Billion dollar for just 36 copy). That would be close to 20 billions dollar for 126 airframe for a much lighter aircraft than the rafale. To go further, the Brazilian deal is less complex as much less things will be built indigenously.

This is the weirdest point you've made so far.

- The Gripen is costing Brazil over $150 mil each.
- The Brazilians found the Gripen far cheaper than the Rafale.

Just how does this help make the case for the Rafale? Only goes to provide basis for the reports putting the MMRCA's costs far in excess of $20bn.

Now if you could prove that the Tejas had a cost in excess of $100 mil, you'd have a viable case.

And some need to realize that comparing flyaway costs with costs of an entire deal is just stupid...When I read prices of Mig etc...I just had a smile on the naive comparison.

What prices? $60 mil? Because that's the acquisition cost, not the flyaway price.

If it is still too expensive for India then just buy rafales of the shelf and cut the price by more than 50%.

Really? 50%? Assuming the current cost is $160M ($20bn/126), 50% would reduce the cost to $80M. You think India could get the aircraft, spares, support infrastructure, training, incidentals for $80M each, while still ensuring a reasonable profit margin for Dassault & Co.?

And if we are to buy an aircraft off-the-shelf just why would you recommend India buy an aircraft that no one else seems willing to buy? Much better to buy the far superior F-35 for the same cost or wait for the PAK FA. Upgrade the Sukhois and get the Tejas in strength at the lower rung to free up the Su-30MKIs for other roles.

[brar_w]

Engineering salaries in France are lower than in the US, and this should balance out with the lower production runs.

Not sure whether there is a great deal of difference in terms of aerospace engineer's cost "to the employer" once everything is said and done. It used to be a case that your median salaries were around the 40-60$/hour mark depending upon what sort of sub-industry you were catering to. The overall cost structure for all the jobs (i.e engineering and others) should not be very different and may in fact be higher in western europe for some firms) but like you also said, the economies of scale works totally against them since the best way to reduce that aspect is to spread it out through volume. The aerospace worker (non engineer) salaries are usually based on a multiple of MW, and in this case the MW is about 1000$ per annum greater in France than the US while an average work week has about 17 more work hours for an average US worker than an average french worker (47 compared to 30). The best way to lower cost even with wages going up is to produce in volume, and there is really no alternative to this (unless you go 100% robotic)..You can see this price reflection either in F-16 vs its european peers (M2k mostly), AMRAAM and MICA costs, or costs of european equivalents in general compared to their american counterparts that get procured in volumes.

[Viv S]

I dare say, asking the IAF to be patient is akin to rubbing the proverbial salt in ze wounds.

What is done is done. History is past, this is where we are now. I don't see how anyone can justify IAF cribs about the Tejas not being refined enough (it costs $26M for heaven's sake) while extending the MiG-21's retirement to 2021.

The same story as with the Arjun, unpalatable until upgraded with X/Y/Z features, meanwhile steady stream of orders for the T-90 which can't seem to handle the desert heat in daytime, leaving them to approach DRDO for an AC. And how many orders for the Mk2 after all the new fancy upgrades? About 120.

[NRao]

one 3) again why India would not be able to develop the rafale on its own :

-It has the intelectual property with the source codes.
-...And India manufactures virtually everything which gives quite an intimate knowledge of the bird.

Look BAE or Israelis...They upgrade aircrafts which are not their own (F16 for instance)...Why couldn't India further develop the rafale if they are capable of.

: rotfl :

Let us forget the entire content of this thread and get to the point: THE goal is to have France buy an Indian plane in 2040.

So, how exactly is the updating of 1980s code going to help achieve this goal?

[arthuro]

This is the weirdest point you've made so far.

- The Gripen is costing Brazil over $150 mil each.
- The Brazilians found the Gripen far cheaper than the Rafale.

Just how does this help make the case for the Rafale? Only goes to provide basis for the reports putting the MMRCA's costs far in excess of $20bn.

Now if you could prove that the Tejas had a cost in excess of $100 mil, you'd have a viable case.

What's weird between a cost difference between what is announced and what is actually signed ? Actually Dassault offer was 4billions initially. Now the Gripen deal is finally worth 5.4 Billions

France’s $4 billion proposal for 36 Rafale fighter jets, made by a consortium led by Dassault Aviation SA (EPA:AM), was rejected for cost reasons. The government has not specified if it has decided on any of the other contestants, the F/A-18 Super Hornet from Boeing Company (NYSE:BA) and the Gripen made by Sweden’s Saab (STO:SAAB-B).

http://www.ibtimes.com/brazil-says-no-4 ... ab-1510708

In most cases the price tend to inflate. One can see that the 20 Billion figure we see for MMRCA (the most common) is nothing extraordinary for the rafale. Given the difference of capability and scope of the deal, 25 Billions would not be shocking after all.

As far as the F35 is concerned it is much more expensive to buy and operate and would never fit MMRCA requirement.

[arthuro]

one 3) again why India would not be able to develop the rafale on its own :

-It has the intelectual property with the source codes.
-...And India manufactures virtually everything which gives quite an intimate knowledge of the bird.

Look BAE or Israelis...They upgrade aircrafts which are not their own (F16 for instance)...Why couldn't India further develop the rafale if they are capable of.

: rotfl :

Let us forget the entire content of this thread and get to the point: THE goal is to have France buy an Indian plane in 2040.

So, how exactly is the updating of 1980s code going to help achieve this goal?

1980...This was an impact impactfull comment. Thanx.

[Victor]

1. because Reliance does not have the engineering genes to learn anything of this sort anytime soon.

According to which aerospace-industrial expert? (I"m assuming you're not one). Dassault is willing to bet the house on Reliance and I don't see where the likes of you or I come into the picture.

2. Tata, might have better temperament and attitude towards engineering.

Well, if that's what it takes to get Rafale into IAF quickly, so be it. Let's get it moving.

HAL is an excellent organization.

Rani Mukherji is my girlfriend.

...take it or leave it...

I wouldn't be so confident (there is almost always an embarrassing deflating that follows). If it were so easy for either party, this would have been wrapped up or dumped a long time ago. We can be certain that there is a lot of give and take going on behind the scenes.

[JTull]

HAL is an excellent organization.

Rani Mukherji is my girlfriend.

[Victor]

I don't see how anyone can justify IAF cribs about the Tejas not being refined enough (it costs $26M for heaven's sake)

You know this for a fact even before it's entered full production? I pray that Tejas isn't cheaply made as that would give me even less confidence in it. AFAIK, almost nothing in the aircraft is cheaper than anywhere else--engine, electronics, alloys etc. In fact, a lot of this stuff is probably more expensive for us. So what makes up the difference? We're talking $50 million+ at least per plane. Do firang engineers' salaries make up 2/3 the cost of a fighter?

[Cain Marko]

What is done is done. History is past, this is where we are now. I don't see how anyone can justify IAF cribs about the Tejas not being refined enough (it costs $26M for heaven's sake) while extending the MiG-21's retirement to 2021.

Not so easy to forget the past - people, it seems have been truly traumatized. But one hopes that the newer gen of AF rank are more pro-desi. More importantly, can HAL/ADA guarantee any timelines? They have hardly met, even remotely, a single waypoint timewise, and that is after their announcement in 2010 iirc that they were going on a "warfooting" for the LCA. This tareekh pe tareekh attitude will rightfully give IAF planners nightmares. I don't think they are happy to extend the Mig-21's, but see very little choice in that it will probably take HAL et al., another 5 years to deliver a single sqd of mk1s. IOWs, mk1s are not going to come fast enough for the IAF to let go of the 21s. Expect the first 40 Mk1s to come in by 2020++. So what choice do they have other than extend the Mig-21's service? It is not like HAL is just waiting in the aisles to mass produce LCAs. Nor is the MRCA any where close.

Ultimately, we can perhaps blame the IAF for being snooty and bent towards phoren maal; but the delays which are so commonplace - hell it took ADA a good two years to just decide what engine to go with for the mk2, who is to blame for that? Can the IAF be assured that if they place an order for another 126mk1s, these will be delivered post-haste? If it takes them 2030 to get those birds delivered, would it not be more prudent for them to focus on the mk2 instead? Even the mk2 at that point might not necessarily be so attractive, let alone a 4 gen bird which might need an MLU as soon as it comes off the line so as to be competitive. So perhaps it is not such a bad idea to stick with 40 mk1s and refocus on the mk2, which hopefully they can start producing by circa 2020-22..

In the meanwhile, some MRCA type will be necessary because HAL is going to struggle to deliver even 40 LCA mk1 by 2020

The same story as with the Arjun, unpalatable until upgraded with X/Y/Z features, meanwhile steady stream of orders for the T-90 which can't seem to handle the desert heat in daytime, leaving them to approach DRDO for an AC. And how many orders for the Mk2 after all the new fancy upgrades? About 120.

I think it is too early and possibly a bit pessimistic to compare IA's Arjun saga with the LCA for the very fact that the Arjun mk2 came about years after the mk1 was being produced en masse. The tejas mk2 otoh, has been on the cards well before mk1's development is completed. Let us hope IAF doesn't play such games. I think having Modi at the helm might help here.

But overall, I agree with the larger point that more Tejas should be ordered, especially the mk2 version. A clear cut MOU or some such guarantee should be given by the IAF that once ASRs are met, 200+ Mk2s will be ordered. And if, HAL/ADA move a little quicker on achieving FOC and SP deliveries, perhaps more Mk1s can also be ordered. But at the current rate, it is doubtful that FOC for the mk1 will be any time before mid 2015, which means HAL will have about 36 birds to deliver - will be interesting to see how long it takes to do the same. IOWs, the longer it takes to get going, the smaller is the window of opportunity for the mk1, esp. because the mk2 is supposed to be ready by 2020. Of course, if for whatever reasons, there are delays in the mk2 development, additional mk1s are likely.

[Viv S]

What's weird between a cost difference between what is announced and what is actually signed ? Actually Dassault offer was 4billions initially. Now the Gripen deal is finally worth 5.4 Billions

And that nixes the Gripen as an alternative presumably.

In most cases the price tend to inflate. One can see that the 20 Billion figure we see for MMRCA (the most common) is nothing extraordinary for the rafale. Given the difference of capability and scope of the deal, 25 Billions would not be shocking after all.

Reasons for price escalation are irrelevant. What matters is, is it worth $25 billion? That's $200 million per Rafale.

Would one Rafale deliver greater net combat capability than three J-10Cs? Or two J-20s? What if it goes up against six J-10Cs or four J-20s? [Keep in mind that China can afford to spend at least $2 (if not $3) for every $1 that India spends on defence.]

As far as the F35 is concerned it is much more expensive to buy and operate and would never fit MMRCA requirement.

Same acquisition cost, 50% higher operating cost, far cheaper weapons complement. And yes, it'll never fit the MMRCA requirement, but unlike the Rafale it can actually reduce the gap between the IAF and PLAAF. Fact is, the F-35 will worry the Chinese, the Rafale will not.

And even if we disregard that, it still leaves the PAK FA in contention. High performance, local production, low RCS.

[arthuro]

Reasons for price escalation are irrelevant. What matters is, is it worth $25 billion? That's $200 million per Rafale.

Would one Rafale deliver greater net combat capability than three J-10Cs? Or two J-20s? What if it goes up against six J-10Cs or four J-20s? [Keep in mind that China can afford to spend at least $2 (if not $3) for every $1 that India spends on defence.]

With that reasoning of course it can't compete in numbers if you stick to MMRCA requirements. But you forget that India has another thing in mind : remaining independent with indigenous control of the rafale and capitalizing on rafale technology. This has a price.

I know you would prefer off the shelf purchase of F35 and LCA mK2 or PAK-FA but that's simply not going to happen and I am not willing to loose my time discussing everyone own dreamt alternative. For once but I won't elaborate further but basically : LCA not capable enough and little confidence from IAF operational. As far as F35 you automatically become tight to US policy with virtually no independence.

On F35 price I still disagree : it is still far more expensive off to buy and operate, especially with current $/Euro exchange rate.

[Viv S]

You know this for a fact even before it's entered full production?

The price quoted by HAL for the first batch of 20 aircraft is Rs 162 crore. And the MoD tried to argue that it should only cost $20M as estimated in 2006 by HAL (less than what we pay for the Hawk AJT).

I pray that Tejas isn't cheaply made as that would give me even less confidence in it. AFAIK, almost nothing in the aircraft is cheaper than anywhere else--engine, electronics, alloys etc. In fact, a lot of this stuff is probably more expensive for us. So what makes up the difference? We're talking $50 million+ at least per plane. Do firang engineers' salaries make up 2/3 the cost of a fighter?

How did you arrive at this $50 million figure? 45% of the Tejas is imported. That's $12 mil total. About $6 mil for the engine and $6 mil for everything else (most of the electronics are domestic BTW).

[vishvak]

<SNIP>
How did you arrive at this $50 million figure? 45% of the Tejas is imported. That's $12 mil total. About $6 mil for the engine and $6 mil for everything else (most of the electronics are domestic BTW).

Is this serious? This probably means that Tejas costs about $12m +₹Ym. The only thing to count is is the foreign component cost which is no more than $12m. If this (or nearly this) is true then Tejas Mk2 should be pursued God speed. No wonder the Chinese are producing so many fighter jets.

[Viv S]

With that reasoning of course it can't compete in numbers if you stick to MMRCA requirements.
But you forget that India has another thing in mind : remaining independent with indigenous control of the rafale and capitalizing on rafale technology. This has a price.

Eh?

*You guys are doomed against the Chinese. If you're going down, why not go down flying an 'independent indigenously controlled' Rafale?*

Being swamped by Chinese fighters is a rather steep price to pay frankly.

I know you would prefer off the shelf purchase of F35 and LCA mK2 or PAK-FA but that's simply not going to happen and I am not willing to loose my time discussing everyone own dreamt alternative.

Very crucial difference here mate. You couldn't care less what the result of an Indo-China war is, while it matters deeply to me (and others on the forum).

For once but I won't elaborate further but basically : LCA not capable enough and little confidence from IAF operational. As far as F35 you automatically become tight to US policy with virtually no independence.

Capable enough for something that costs less than $30M? It sure is. Unfortunately the IAF has no real involvement in the financial aspect; a crucial weakness of the system (where most procurements are handled on a piecemeal basis).

What's the US policy on China? What's the French policy when it comes to China? And how's the PAK FA not an independent choice?

On F35 price I still disagree : it is still far more expensive off to buy and operate, especially with current $/Euro exchange rate.

Exchange rates are short term, aircraft production spans decades. Also, I suggest you pop over to the JSF thread and take a look at the recent updates on cost.

[Cain Marko]

In terms of any purchase here on, I think sticker shock is a given as indicated by:

- Brazil's purchase of Gripen
- latest IN submarine tender
- cost of potatoes in delhi (INR 45 per kg)

To expect any MRCA type to come in way less than $ 20 billion looks unlikely what with deep TOT, offsets, weapons, production lines et al...Looks to me that this can be seen as India's last real non-desi purchase, as such prices will go up a tad more, and we may just have to swallow it. At this point, no matter what, some purchase is on the cards - it is too late to really order the Tejas mk1 in great numbers - since the mk2 is on its way, and sqd strength has to be increased. At 30 odd sqds, INdia is in no shape to deal with a two front war.

[Vivek K]

CM, respectfully, that is a very poor argument. The LCA is ready. It can be ordered in numbers and will be available before the foreign aircraft. The only question is are we ready to believe in ourselves? From the IAF's point of view, it seems not.

[Cain Marko]

^ Vivek - what argument are you pointing to? The price of the MRCA or the induction of mk1 LCA.

I assume it is the second one, which is - the window for the mk1 keeps getting smaller, so will try to support it:


Are you sure LCA mk1 is ready? Has FOC been reached? Have all test points been cleared? What kind of roles can it currently play?

Say, it is ready to be inducted as a mud mover at present with some A2A. What kind of delivery rates are we looking at? Realistically speaking can HAL do more than 40 in the next 5 years? Can HAL deliver fast enough to stem the drop in numbers? Based on past history, very, very doubtful. Expecting it to produce a fledgling LCA which is still being figured out in terms of setting up production, that too in numbers is dreaming - something that the IAF cannot base its operational planning on - hence the need to keep the 21s.

What is the point in ordering additional mk1s when the mk2 is supposed to be ready concurrently?

In any case, I do feel that the MRCA cost should be driven down, either by buying a cheaper bird (MKI) or reducing numbers or both. By the time the MRCA starts creeping in, the LCA 2.0 should be ready, and if not a highly developed version of the mk1 will be.

[Vivek K]

Guptaji, past experience has shown a similar timeline with a foreign aircraft. So why the hesitation in buying locally produced weapons? Going by the Arjun saga, the Marut's demise, it isn't very difficult to predict the LCA's fate.

[Victor]

I think IAF may be ready to induct 200 LCA mk1s today if the GoI pays for them and the induction doesn't block the MMRCA or delay the development and production of LCA mk2. However GoI will do no such thing because it is irresponsible in the extreme.