Rafale & MMRCA News and Discussions-9 August, 2014

arthuro · Post by **arthuro** » 16 Feb 2015 00:20

Rafale export for Quatar imminent ?

How many aircraft will be delivered [to Egypt] in 2015?
[...]
Reportedly, for the Egyptian contract, 6 aircraft will be taken on Dassault production line in 2015, 3 before August. Le Canard Enchaine wrote that these 3 devices could actually be loaned. Dassault must build this year mainly Rafale B, originally intended for the instruction of pilots and French nuclear missions.
In the corridors of the Ministry of Defence, sources say that an announcement for a Rafale contract in Qatar for 24 aircraft would be "imminent". Would some of these these Rafale also be levied on the Dassault production line in 2015? It's possible. No submissions on the fact that the current planes on the assembly line are equipped with equipement that can not be exported (government links, software, NATO links, etc.). Before to be sold to Egypt, these aircraft must be "défrancisés." How long does it take?
[..]

http://www.lepoint.fr/editos-du-point/j ... 178_53.php

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 16 Feb 2015 00:25

arthuro wrote:The 30 new F16 block 60 on order were ordered before US pressures which are also reported on the Egyptian side. Probably the UAE would have make another decision if it was possible to get a time machine. Too late for them.

The US has made no official protest or disapproval of the Libyan strike. And the general official position discouraging 'outside interference' in Libya was presented in a joint statement issued by five countries including France.

F35 or SH are often brought as "speculative" alternative for MMRCA. Given US links with Pakistan and its support against the Taliban (and given their record in the middle east...), they would certainly have a say on how India could use their weapons against Pakistan.

That was just to say that US fighter jets aircrafts, whatever their merits, are not a serious option for India in the end. I was not speaking of F35 for ME but making an echo to previous debates about MRCA.

So out of the blue, you want discuss the F-35 for MMRCA on the thread? Again?

For India, the Rafale is a financial disaster waiting to happen. As and when the directive from the MoD comes through, alternatives will be found, whatever they may be.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 16 Feb 2015 02:35

F35 or SH are often brought as "speculative" alternative for MMRCA. Given US links with Pakistan and its support against the Taliban (and given their record in the middle east...), they would certainly have a say on how India could use their weapons against Pakistan

Someone has missed the morning news.

* France and India are moving in the opposite directions. France (along with the UK) have been "assigned" to manage the Gulf, while India has been chalked in for the IOR+Pacific region (which is why one should see a lot of investment in the IN from nations who has similar interests)
* Check out talk + walk from US politicos (all in open source). Your above statement will never hold any water - you need to read up. (It does not mean India has a blank check, but it does mean that India is in a far better position - and will be for years to come - than even a few years ago. All that makes old analysis irrelevant (support/links for Pakistan, etc))
* France should be happy dealing with the likes of Egypt/UAE/etc and that is fine. India is no longer in that league - granted it will take some time for everyone to recognize that (and India to act that a way too)

* Good to hear and see that this sale to Egypt is going through. Dassault lives for a few days more

* There is *nothing* new in your recent posts

This article is wrong on one point

It is wrong on many points. The one point is a French view. Many points is the Indian view.

Wrong: The title itself.

Time Plays Against India in Rafale MMRCA Program

* On time: A decision should be made within a month - before Modi leaves for France + Germany
* On options (and therefore time): India does have options. Perhaps not perfect options, but options nonetheless
* On IAF: IF the Rafale is bought (and I think it will be) IAF will get what they tested - which did not include the F3 components, which France is trying to hard sell (and make more money)
* 126 @ $11 billion

He jokingly added that having Dassault guarantee HAL’s work “cannot be a problem, because it was not included in the original RFP” and so cannot be added retrospectively.

I know. When there is nothing of substance to say on such serious matters .................. one jokes. Normal.

I think the Rafale will come, but, I also think that neither side will be happy. Nor will the IAF. The only good thing that will happen is that the IAF will get her squadron numbers up.

JMTs.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 16 Feb 2015 03:29

Any guesses why the bid was sketchy, yet selected.

http://www.business-standard.com/articl ... 056_1.html

Even as three Rafale fighters line up in Bengaluru for eye-popping aerobatics displays at the Aero India 2015 exhibition this week, senior ministry of defence (MoD) sources say the proposal to buy the French fighter is "effectively dead".

The reason: During three years of negotiations between Dassault and MoD officials in the so-called "contract negotiation committee" (CNC), it has emerged that Dassault's bid was actually higher than that of the Eurofighter Typhoon, not lower as the MoD had announced on January 31, 2012.

Dassault had submitted a sketchy commercial bid, and when the CNC obtained details from the French company to arrive at the actual cost of the Rafale, the figures added up to significantly more than had originally been estimated.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 16 Feb 2015 03:30

Matches the PTI report

http://www.business-standard.com/articl ... 263_1.html

Recalling the last month's meeting between Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar and his French counterpart, sources said French "were told categorically to stick to the RFP".

"The ball is in France's court," the sources said adding that if the "RFP is adhered to, the deal can be wrapped up soon".

They claimed that while the deal was initially for about Rs 42,000 crore, French are seeking a higher price now. This, the sources said, has put the price at a "little more than double the cost".

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 16 Feb 2015 03:33

Deals with oily-rich sheikhdoms and states is far easier than dealing with democracies like India.There is plenty of "grease" that will be applied! France watching the delay in the Indian deal has made quick moves to secure Dassault's survival in a region where they have valued old customers. NR may also be spot on reg. roles to be played by France in the region.

Pl. check out the latest edition of Vayu ,also available on the Net,reg. the LCA.AM P.Rajkumar,who was its project head for a long time, is liberally quoted.I'm afraid it is going to be a dampener for many who expect the bird to be in service soon. It is clearly said that both the IAF and IN want only the definitive MK-2 to be produced in large qty. It will take a few more years for MK-1 to attain operational capability too,and that considerable redesigning of the Mk-2 would be needed,with perhaps even canards to be added.

With that scenario,one can clearly understand the IAF's urgent desire to get the Rafale deal sealed. The MIG-21 sqds. that have served us for more than 50 years,an incredible feat,will be retiring in large qty. very shortly and there are no replacements on the horizon. With the news of the Rafale deals for Egypt and probably Qatar,the IAF may have to import more MKIs if they want to maintain numbers and support,if the Raffy deal is further delayed or aircraft procurement also delayed .Raffy production was I think somewhere between 16-24/yr. (any light on this?).So we may have to indeed wait until the pharaohs and sheikhs get their birds first.

VinodTK · Post by **VinodTK** » 16 Feb 2015 03:43

arthuro wrote:Rafale export for Quatar imminent ?

http://www.lepoint.fr/editos-du-point/j ... 178_53.php

This bad news for India, PAF will get its poilets to train on Quatar's Rafael's and against them in their f16's giving them a leg-up on how to tackle IAF Rafael's

member_28756 · Post by **member_28756** » 16 Feb 2015 04:30

Philip wrote:Deals with oily-rich sheikhdoms and states is far easier than dealing with democracies like India.There is plenty of "grease" that will be applied! France watching the delay in the Indian deal has made quick moves to secure Dassault's survival in a region where they have valued old customers. NR may also be spot on reg. roles to be played by France in the region.

.

Egypt is not oil rich and its actually quite poor.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 16 Feb 2015 04:53

Egypt is not oil rich and its actually quite poor

which is why egypt is funded by the oil-rich states.

member_28756 · Post by **member_28756** » 16 Feb 2015 05:00

NRao wrote:
Egypt is not oil rich and its actually quite poor
which is why egypt is funded by the oil-rich states.

And the US.

http://time.com/3710118/egypt-rafale-fi ... et-france/

World Egypt

The Real Reason Egypt Is Buying Fighter Jets From France

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 16 Feb 2015 05:52

Every little thing helps:

But France has been “desperate” to sell the Rafale after twenty years, Alterman says. While Egyptian media has reported that Gulf states have funded recent Egyptian military deals, French banks will put up financing for more than half of the purchase price. And though it’s unclear what Egypt is paying per plane, Alterman says it’s likely that France is already providing a steep discount to Egypt to notch the first sale as it negotiates a much larger order of 126 planes with India. “My guess is that they’re not paying list, or anything like it,” he says.

Fun times.

So, $10 billion? Or would steep mean $9 billion?

abhik · Post by **abhik** » 16 Feb 2015 08:23

Steep discount? Last I read the deal cost around 5 billion USD, i.e about 200 million USD per plane.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 16 Feb 2015 09:53

Oooh! So Parisian bankers are providing the Pharaoh Fat Al Sissy with a handsome discount for his toy girls...he difference to be made good by the poor taxpayer from India!

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 16 Feb 2015 10:36

Rafale proposal 'effectively dead' as Dassault bid not cheapest

Even as three Rafale fighters line up in Bengaluru for eye-popping aerobatics displays at the Aero India 2015 exhibition this week, senior ministry of defence (MoD) sources say the proposal to buy the French fighter is "effectively dead".

The reason: During three years of negotiations between Dassault and MoD officials in the so-called "contract negotiation committee" (CNC), it has emerged that Dassault's bid was actually higher than that of the Eurofighter Typhoon, not lower as the MoD had announced on January 31, 2012.

Dassault had submitted a sketchy commercial bid, and when the CNC obtained details from the French company to arrive at the actual cost of the Rafale, the figures added up to significantly more than had originally been estimated.

The confusion is due partly to MoD inexperience with "life cycle costing" (LCC). The global tender for 126 medium multi-role combat aircraft (MMRCA) was the first time the MoD was awarding a contract based on LCC. This meant the winner would not be the fighter with the cheapest purchase price; instead the chosen fighter would be the one that was cheaper to buy, fly, maintain and overhaul over its 30-40 year service life.

"An inexperienced MoD, working off incomplete and sketchy details provided by Dassault, had incorrectly adjudged the Rafale cheaper. Now, after three years of obtaining clear figures from the French, we find India would be paying significantly more than had been initially calculated," says an official in the CNC.

Contacted for comments, the MoD has not responded.

The MoD has been backing away from the Rafale for two months now. On December 30, 2014, Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar admitted for the first time there were "complications" in the negotiations with Dassault, and outlined the IAF's alternatives.

"The Sukhoi-30MKI is an adequate aircraft for meeting the air force's needs", said Parrikar.

Last week the prime minister was pointedly distanced from the Rafale. On Saturday, an unusual MoD press release denied a newspaper report that the PM would fly in the Rafale during the Aero India 2015 air show at Bangalore this week.

"It is clarified that there is no plan for the Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi to fly in any fighter jet. The news item is incorrect, misconceived and is not based on facts", stated the MoD.

This is the second time the MoD has gone wrong in LCC evaluations. As Business Standard reported on Saturday ("Defence ministry official questions whether Pilatus was cheapest trainer", February 14) an internal MoD noting last month sharply questioned the award of a contract for 75 PC-7 Mark II basic trainer aircraft to Swiss company, Pilatus. There too, the LCC was calculated incorrectly.

Significantly, that noting, signed by AR Sule, the MoD's "Finance Manager (Air)", who handles financial aspects of military aircraft purchases, alerts the defence minister to issues with LCC evaluation in the MMRCA tender.

Sule writes: "The issue (with LCC calculations) may be brought to the notice of the RM (Raksha Mantri) as two high value cases of IAF based on LCC model are at CFA (competent financial authority) approval stage."

Dassault's impending loss, however, will not be the Eurofighter Typhoon's gain. Eurofighter GmbH has maintained an expensive presence in Delhi for the last three years, just in case Dassault's bid encounters trouble. But Parrikar has made it clear that procurement procedures do not permit the second-placed vendor, i.e. Eurofighter GmbH, to be awarded the contract in place of the "preferred vendor", i.e. Dassault.

Dassault was adjudged winner of the MMRCA tender through a two-stage process. In the first stage the IAF ruled out on April 27, 2011 four of the six competing fighters. Boeing's F/A-18E/F Super Hornet; Lockheed Martin's F-16IN Super Viper; Saab's Gripen NG, and the Russian MiG-35 were adjudged not to have met the IAF's performance requirements.

In the second stage, the commercial bids of the remaining two vendors -Dassault's Rafale, and the Eurofighter Typhoon - were compared on a "life cycle basis" to select the lower bidder. On January 31, 2012, the Rafale was chosen as the cheaper of the two options, a decision that the MoD is now walking away from.

A senior official familiar with the Rafale contract negotiations says, "Given the value of this contract, it was always going to be scrutinised in detail. No MoD official is willing to endorse a Rs 100,000 crore contract with Dassault when it seems as if Rafale is not even the cheapest option".

This means the IAF would have to look elsewhere for fighters to increase its depleted squadrons from the current 35 to the authorised 45 (with 18 fighters in each squadron).

Besides enlarging its Sukhoi-30MKI fleet from the 272 fighters HAL will build by 2018, the IAF could order more indigenous Tejas Mark I fighters, over and above the 40 now on order from HAL. The IAF could also intensify its co-development of the Indo-Russian Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft (FGFA) with Sukhoi.

For Dassault, an Indian cancellation would be a serious blow. The French air force and navy, dogged by budget cutbacks, have reduced their planned Rafale numbers from 310 to just 180. On Friday, Egypt announced it would buy 24 Rafale fighters, becoming the first and only overseas buyer for Dassault.

"India will take longer than Egypt," said Eric Trappier, the chief executive officer of Dassault on Friday.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 16 Feb 2015 10:45

Ah......

So the process of canceling the Rafale begins.

deejay · Post by **deejay** » 16 Feb 2015 10:55

With the news that French are selling Rafales to Egypt and possibly to Qatar(?) it is clear that Dassault has started hedging for a possible cancellation of the Indian deal. This also supported by the news links provided by Karan of developments in India.

While I will wait for the final announcement of the burial of the deal, the present delay and 'voices' are more than an indication that the deal is DEAD.

This from the PTI link:

Recalling the last month's meeting between Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar and his French counterpart, sources said French "were told categorically to stick to the RFP".

and

They claimed that while the deal was initially for about Rs 42,000 crore, French are seeking a higher price now. This, the sources said, has put the price at a "little more than double the cost".

Dassault did not comment on queries sent by PTI to it.

If one looks at the Ajai Shukla article on BS (linked by Karan and posted by Brar) there are some important indicators on what replaces Rafale:

Dassault's impending loss, however, will not be the Eurofighter Typhoon's gain. Eurofighter GmbH has maintained an expensive presence in Delhi for the last three years, just in case Dassault's bid encounters trouble. But Parrikar has made it clear that procurement procedures do not permit the second-placed vendor, i.e. Eurofighter GmbH, to be awarded the contract in place of the "preferred vendor", i.e. Dassault.

and

This means the IAF would have to look elsewhere for fighters to increase its depleted squadrons from the current 35 to the authorised 45 (with 18 fighters in each squadron).

Besides enlarging its Sukhoi-30MKI fleet from the 272 fighters HAL will build by 2018, the IAF could order more indigenous Tejas Mark I fighters, over and above the 40 now on order from HAL. The IAF could also intensify its co-development of the Indo-Russian Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft (FGFA) with Sukhoi.

I think this thread is on its last stages.

RoyG · Post by **RoyG** » 16 Feb 2015 11:01

Finally...we need to get over this sh*t show and pour money into LCA, AMCA, engine development, AWACS, etc. and rope in the private industry. The bear is smiling. Expect 60-70 more Su-30 mkI to be signed.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 16 Feb 2015 13:22

Mes amis,would it be hurtful to our French pals if we opened bottles of champagne to celebrate the cancellation of the deal? Would Prosecco or desi sparkling wine be more appropriate? Would vodka be the drink of choice if more Sukhois are ordered? May we have some thought on this most important decision please?

Will · Post by **Will** » 16 Feb 2015 15:07

Well we as usual have shot ourselves in the foot. Due to some stupid way the tender was setup it seems we cant go for the Eurofighter now. Also since the other aircraft in the fray were rejected due to technical reasons there is no way that one can go for any of those. That leaves us just two and a half options.. more sukhois which will make the IAF top heavy, The F-35 or the LCA Mk1(which the IAF does not want). Who wants to bet on the F-35?

kit · Post by **kit** » 16 Feb 2015 15:16

Will wrote:Well we as usually have shot ourselves in the foot. Due to some stupid way the tender was setup it seems we cant go for the Eurofighter now. Also since the other aircraft in the fray were rejected due to technical reasons there is no way that one can go for any of those. That leaves us just two and a half options.. more sukhois which will make the IAF top heavy, The F-35 or the LCA Mk1(which the IAF does not want). Who wants to bet on the F-35?

Not me ! ..For the same reason the Egyptian president chose the Rafale !

Who wants to tie up one third their air force to some other country s strategic whims ?!

member_20453 · Post by **member_20453** » 16 Feb 2015 15:34

Great news, hope this deal falls flat on its ass, I for one always knew the French kiss was always too good to be true, too much make up on a back alley hooker, we were too stupid to see behind the layers. Let's just go ahead and order another 78 MKI to the take the numbers to 350 MKI and an immediate order of 50 more MK-1 LCA and dash full speed ahead on the LCA MK-2.

I think we need the 1st LCA MK-1 squadron to be deployed and eventually used at the TACDE for evolution of fighter tactics and aggressor roles in training exercises. The next 2 LCA MK-1 squadrons as LIFT trainers for the IAF, 1 squadron for the Navy as Lift trainers too. Taking numbers of 20 fighters per squadron, 1 for TACDE + 2 LIFT for IAF + 1 LIFT for Navy + another 10 for Airshow display team. We are looking at a an order of 90 LCA Mk-1. I think HAL + private industry need to come together to have an massive joint new factory with an expanded build rate, delivering 30 aircraft per year is a must. We must have an increase from the current 8-16 next year to 30 per year by 2018. LCA MK-2 must hit the skies by 2017.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 16 Feb 2015 16:28

The most idiotic thing is how EF can't be procured or negotiated with. What kind of dunces wrote this procurement fiasco?

And also how did a vendor exactly get away with providing sketchy info & the CNC announced it as L-1 and then goes looking for info?

What a high farce. This has UPA expertise written ALL over it. No further explanation required. I bet Subbu Swamy is grinning right now.

Vishnu · Post by **Vishnu** » 16 Feb 2015 16:39

Hi ..., there has been no decision to cancel the Rafale deal at the moment. Just last week, a special representative of the French government came here to take forward the negotiations and while there has been no breakthrough .... there has been no breakdown in talks either ... Representatives of Dassault remain convinced the deal will go through and both the Air Force and Dassault indicate that they haven't received anything to suggest that the deal is dead.

That being said, there is no guarantee at all that this is going to happen. I have always argued ... elsewhere ... that the Rafale, though the best fighter in the mix, was always likely to be too costly and the Gripen was the right choice. Many saw that as an anti-LCA attitude .. I LOVE the LCA and the hope it brings ... but have always believed we should have signed on the Gripen C/D years ago, had decent numbers by now and progressively upgraded the jet as is the case with the Su-30 to the E/F standard. At one point (and this is my information) ... the Swedes were offering us the Gripen for under 50 million dollars a piece, in other words, less than the cost of upgrading a single 25 year old Mirage 2000. These numbers are always debatable so take it for what its worth - nothing definitive.

The LCA Mk-2 would have been a boost for indigenous capability and would have existed side by side with the Gripen when it eventually entered service ...

Just my two penny bit.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 16 Feb 2015 16:40

Gripen would have been equally facile as it neither has the payload/range of a Su/Rafale and it would have been pushed for, to kill the Tejas.

srai · Post by **srai** » 16 Feb 2015 16:53

Will wrote:Well we as usually have shot ourselves in the foot. Due to some stupid way the tender was setup it seems we cant go for the Eurofighter now. Also since the other aircraft in the fray were rejected due to technical reasons there is no way that one can go for any of those. That leaves us just two and a half options.. more sukhois which will make the IAF top heavy, The F-35 or the LCA Mk1(which the IAF does not want). Who wants to bet on the F-35?

Bottom line is there is no money for new foreign aircrafts ... not for 126 (+options) @ over $150+ million per aircraft. Plus, add billions more for weapons package and infrastructure (production, lifecycle support and squadron). Then, more billions for customizations and MLUs. Initial deal would just be a tip of an iceberg.

More affordable option is to get more of aircrafts that are already in service and already have ongoing local production: Su-30MKI and LCA Mk.1. So what the IAF becomes "top-heavy" with more Su-30MKIs? It's not like the Rafale is a "cheap" fighter to operate; more like a twin-engined "heavy-medium" fighter, which means operational costs are not exactly that much cheaper (especially when you factor in almost 2x upfront purchase cost per unit as compared to Su-30MKI). For the IAF to get to 40+ squadrons, it needs many budget fighters (1/3); multi-role LCA Mk.1 at $30 million/unit with "fuel-sipping" F-404 engine is a perfect candidate and should be ordered in larger quantities (at least 6 squadrons). More capable LCA Mk.2, which can almost be considered a "medium" fighter, won't be entering squadron service in numbers for another decade. But when that is ready, order them in large quantities too (at least 10 squadrons).

On top of more Su-30MKI and LCA Mk.1, the IAF should scour for more second-hand Mirage-2000s, MiG-29s and Jaguars. Upgrade these to the same IAF's UPG standards. A few more squadrons could be added this way relatively quickly and cheaply.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 16 Feb 2015 16:55

Well said srai.

Vishnu · Post by **Vishnu** » 16 Feb 2015 17:00

Karan ... This is the time honoured we should get the nicest, shiniest, best fighter out there. Look where thats gotten us. Zippo.

The Gripen is a class below the Rafale though some debate that. It would have been a supplement to the Sukhoi, given us the numbers, come with its own set of nifty capabilities and been affordable. Ditto for the MiG-35.

In the real world, our budgets don't allow us to touch the skies with glory ! We needed to have gotten the job done.

Cheers.

Vishnu · Post by **Vishnu** » 16 Feb 2015 17:04

As an Air Force and Government ... we should have had to ability to say, `The LCA will go on, come what may,' but we need another aircraft till the LCA becomes what we want it to become. Instead, different lobbies said the Gripen etc would kill the LCA and we went for Gold instead. And hence, we are where we are.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 16 Feb 2015 17:07

Vishnu, I am saying we dont buy the Gripen either but stick to the proven Sukhoi and induct more Tejas Mk1 as needed to round out the lower end. The quantum of funds spared could help accelerate Tejas development and improve Su-30 serviceability.

We don't need shiny Gripens which would then be the camel in the tent and try to supplant our Tejas with claims of "already there, proven capability etc". Ditto for the MiG-35 etc.

Gripen team runs a slick PR campaign. The hard facts and numbers dont support them & their claims, let alone being equal to the Rafale. Check out the Swiss eval for specifics.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 16 Feb 2015 17:10

Vishnu wrote:As an Air Force and Government ... we should have had to ability to say, `The LCA will go on, come what may,' but we need another aircraft till the LCA becomes what we want it to become. Instead, different lobbies said the Gripen etc would kill the LCA and we went for Gold instead. And hence, we are where we are.

LOL at your claims that "LCA will go on come what may" - real world please? Same way Arjun went on, come what may while the T-90 ate its pie? Till the Arjun becomes what "we want it to become", with death rays and hovercraft ability, meanwhile lets keep ordering the rival...oops no orders left for the Arjun.

You claim lobbies said the Gripen would kill the LCA, whereas of course all those who support the Gripen, despite the risk of it supplanting the LCA, are not lobbying, have not had freebies, easy access from the SAAB PR team, have not been influenced in any manner and are as pure as the driven snow.

And of course they manage to influence the folks who think that the Gripen and LCA can coexist & dont see the obvious conflicts & those guys go around repeating the Gripen PR points.

Its good for India & Indian procurement, that the Gripen did NOT supplant the LCA in the Indian lineup - as has often been done with Indian products in the past, innocuously, aided along with anodyne statements like the above.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 16 Feb 2015 17:16

Vishnu wrote:Hi ..., there has been no decision to cancel the Rafale deal at the moment. Just last week, a special representative of the French government came here to take forward the negotiations and while there has been no breakthrough .... there has been no breakdown in talks either ... Representatives of Dassault remain convinced the deal will go through and both the Air Force and Dassault indicate that they haven't received anything to suggest that the deal is dead.

That being said, there is no guarantee at all that this is going to happen. I have always argued ... elsewhere ... that the Rafale, though the best fighter in the mix, was always likely to be too costly and the Gripen was the right choice. Many saw that as an anti-LCA attitude .. I LOVE the LCA and the hope it brings ... but have always believed we should have signed on the Gripen C/D years ago, had decent numbers by now and progressively upgraded the jet as is the case with the Su-30 to the E/F standard. At one point (and this is my information) ... the Swedes were offering us the Gripen for under 50 million dollars a piece, in other words, less than the cost of upgrading a single 25 year old Mirage 2000. These numbers are always debatable so take it for what its worth - nothing definitive.

The LCA Mk-2 would have been a boost for indigenous capability and would have existed side by side with the Gripen when it eventually entered service ...

Just my two penny bit.

hi Vishnu. Unfortunately, it seems that we must resign to the fact that the MRCA procurement has been bungled up. And for this fiasco, the IAF and the MoD are equally to be blamed.

As for the Gripen C/D, while it is a good fighter, it isn't what it is made out to be. It is reliable, cheap to operate and maintain and those are great attributes, but even the F-5 had those. But the massive hype and hoopla surrounding it were exposed as being just that-a myth, by the Swiss evaluation. Please read the leaked report. The F/A-18 C/D outperformed the Gripen C/D handily in most departments and there is almost a generational gap between the two. Nevertheless, a handy fighter and the Gripen E/F will be a potent fighter, but already it's empty weight is heavier by nearly a 1000 kgs than what Saab promised in ppt presentations when it was just a paper design.

You of all people should surely realise that if the Gripen made it's way into the IAF in any way whatsoever, the Tejas would have been killed. as simple as that. Just look at the HTT-40/PC-7 Mk2 face-off. The only service with the foresight and the commitment towards indigenisation is the Navy, and even they would have been forced to abandon the LCA-Navy and fund a Sea Gripen if the IAF Mk2 version was abandoned.

the IAF would any day opt for an imported weapon NOT designed specifically to its requirements, as long as it didn't have to deal with the teething issues and development headaches that are part and parcel of any new product being inducted for the first time.

Any incremental differences between the LCA Mk2 and the Gripen E/F can be made up over time through software and hardware upgrades, all developed in-house. In short, the only good thing that came out of the MRCA competition IMO, was that the Gripen didn't make it, since the IAF had its sights quite firmly on two far superior platforms- the Rafale and the Typhoon. The Swiss evaluation report clearly bears out on why the IAF down selected these two jets as opposed to the Gripen that was offered. The Gripen E/F was high on promise, but the problem was too many capability enhancements were in the pipeline and not on the Gripen C/D that was evaluated. The risk was judged as being too high to accept versus what the Rafale and Typhoon had demonstrated during evals. Which saved the LCA's ass.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 16 Feb 2015 17:20

Vishnu wrote:Karan ... This is the time honoured we should get the nicest, shiniest, best fighter out there. Look where thats gotten us. Zippo.

The Gripen is a class below the Rafale though some debate that. It would have been a supplement to the Sukhoi, given us the numbers, come with its own set of nifty capabilities and been affordable. Ditto for the MiG-35.

In the real world, our budgets don't allow us to touch the skies with glory ! We needed to have gotten the job done.

Cheers.

The Gripen E/F was sold at $150 million apiece, program cost, to the Brazilians. Affordable?

With a unit cost of $60 million, $20 million for each major overhaul (and 2 scheduled major overhauls over it's lifetime), the Su-30MKI would still be cheaper even if one took into account the delta difference for fuel costs over 6000 hours (the airframe lives of both the Su-30MKI and Gripen). And for that, you get nearly twice the payload and range of the Gripen with the attendant second seater to reduce pilot workload and improve some missions' effectiveness.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 16 Feb 2015 17:26

Kartik, well needed interjection of hard facts there.

What of the dubious range to payload claims from the Gripen side? Comparisons to Rafale, for that matter any heavy fighter are dubious at best. As pointless as saying F-16s can match F-15s. Yeah sure, at some points of the performance envelope, mission profiles, less said the better about the overall function.
But they ran a slick PR campaign and got enough folks to buy into their propaganda for sure.

For those who "love the LCA", its not about running a couple of puff pieces on the jet but having a hard nosed appreciation of what the program is up against. Support the program as it deserves to be supported, not out of some emotion and then turn around & play cheerleader for its rival which seeks to supplant it.

Vested interests who don't want the LCA to succeed & India to gain a proper aerospace capability in the long term & also angling for the 200 odd light fighters that need replacement in the short term. There is no other fighter in that category bar the Gripen (leave the JF-17 & its antecedents aside).

Of course, they will claim to support Indian programs on the one hand (as long as the Indian budget provides), provide some limited tech support for LCA, AMCA and simultaneously play up the Gripen (to kill the LCA) on the other hand. Its how things are done.

If we see the NLCA Mk2, its firmly entering Gripen E/F territory. Would it exist if there was a Gripen E/F and a ready naval version was offered, far earlier (on paper) than ADA etc? Navy's commitment to indigenization apart, this constant push is the main thing.

And we have folks telling us how Gripen is not going to affect the LCA, yeah sure.

Facts, with some time & effort, the LCA can squarely upscale to the Gripen E/F territory. Not a good thought for the folks who are pushing that platform.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 16 Feb 2015 17:34

And this much acclaimed PR rubbish of SAABs unique datalink, avionics on Gripen etc etc etc. Played up by a media which doesn't even dispassionately evaluate their claims but takes them at face value.
Pray tell us, do the French, Americans, Israelis, British, Russians dont have datalinks? That they are not now available from worldwide OEMs who integrate them with a variety of WCS and weaponry?
The LUSH harrier has (in its extremely limited airframe), a datalink & silent BVR capability. The customized Project ODL for the IAF will feature much the same. Point being 90% of whats on the Gripen can be either acquired or developed in the relatively short term working with a variety of vendors.
The Swiss didn't put the Gripen as anything special either. They rated the Rafale higher. Tomorrow, the JSF's datafusion will be higher than that on the Rafale. Thats how things are and how they develop.

These are things we are building & installing on our LCAs as well. The main aim of these foreign procurements is to stymie local development and offer lollipops as TOT which are next to worthless. HAL learns nothing from doing a build to print of some swedish computer and assembling cards by rote. But hey, lets purchase and "wait for the perfect LCA". Meanwhile, all the medium-light slots get filled by the Gripen and we are told, no problem guys, lets work on the AMCA instead. Be happy with the errr.. 40 LCAs you have in service.

I mean, the strategy isn't even subtle.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 16 Feb 2015 17:43

Kartik wrote:
Vishnu wrote:Karan ... This is the time honoured we should get the nicest, shiniest, best fighter out there. Look where thats gotten us. Zippo.

The Gripen is a class below the Rafale though some debate that. It would have been a supplement to the Sukhoi, given us the numbers, come with its own set of nifty capabilities and been affordable. Ditto for the MiG-35.

In the real world, our budgets don't allow us to touch the skies with glory ! We needed to have gotten the job done.

Cheers.
The Gripen E/F was sold at $150 million apiece, program cost, to the Brazilians. Affordable?

With a unit cost of $60 million, $20 million for each major overhaul (and 2 scheduled major overhauls over it's lifetime), the Su-30MKI would still be cheaper even if one took into account the delta difference for fuel costs over 6000 hours (the airframe lives of both the Su-30MKI and Gripen). And for that, you get nearly twice the payload and range of the Gripen with the attendant second seater to reduce pilot workload and improve some missions' effectiveness.

Costs apart what about the much ballyhooed transfer of tech? Per the DPP?

Arguably worthless in the long term, but still.

Can Gripen (Sweden) guarantee Selex (Anglo-Italian firm) will share source code & Tx/Rx modules of its AESA radar with the Indians? The very Indians who are themselves making their own fighter AESA, have a range of AESAs in service/development & may be prospective rivals?

Engines are Ge414s - pretty much derived from the same baseline on what we are building on the LCA Mk2 (oh, noes the LCA Mk2 and Gripen E/F are very different).. TOT there? At least for the LCA, even in Mk1 we have 60% indigenization of the overall platform by LRUs.

Can Gripen guarantee that the huge amount of components in the jet, are not sanctioned if India decides that its n-deterrent needs support & conducts another round of N-tests?

How much of the stuff in the Gripen is actually Swedish?? And of that...

What if India and Pak have a war & the Greens in Sweden decide that they have to prevent nuclear escalation? The big reason we buy from France is that at least its an independent power, with Thales, Safran, Dassault all under its own control. Here, not so.

Questions, questions. Brochure claims aside, a fighter which is merely system integrated together like the Gripen with components from the whole world coming together, is not exactly a signal of reliability for geopolitically challenged states like India.

Vishnu · Post by **Vishnu** » 16 Feb 2015 18:04

Karan ... You don't like the Gripen .. thats fine. But each and every point you have on the Gripen can be countered with other "facts," for example details on the Brazilian evaluation of the jet. So, lets not restart a debate thats been done to death. Thats not my intention.

The point I make is about a price/capability compromise that India should have made eons ago. I argue that this decision should have been made five-six years ago and the platform that should have been considered was either the `relatively' inexpensive MiG-35 or the Gripen C/D (not the E/F). Nothing was done so we all sit pretty now. Neither was the LCA nearly as evolved as it is now 5-6 years back.

The argument that the Gripen will kill the LCA is spinmastery at its best ... fuelled by those with an agenda. And yes, in a deal like this, everyone has an agenda or at the very least an argument. So ultimately, it boils down to fanboy-ism or favouritism with or without incentives.

Therefore, as a country, govt and Air Force, we needed the maturity to pick an MMRCA based on what we could afford while sticking to our guns of developing the LCA Mk-2 without worrying about what anyone was saying. For that, we needed a government policy, vision and public statement. We got none. So, after all these years, we slog it out on the internet, playing out our little games of competitive patriotism.

Any how ... I think Kartik's solution of procuring more Sukhois is the only available solution at the moment.

By the way, Karan, in having interacted more with the PR set up of all these companies, I can also tell you each and everyone is as slick as the other.

Anyway, cheers

Sagar G · Post by **Sagar G** » 16 Feb 2015 18:14

Vishnu wrote:Karan ... You don't like the Gripen .. thats fine. But each and every point you have on the Gripen can be countered with other "facts," for example details on the Brazilian evaluation of the jet. So, lets not restart a debate thats been done to death. Thats not my intention.

Gripen didn't make it to the final list based on IAF's technical evaluation, FACT !!!

Gripen wasn't the first choice of Brazil, FACT !!!

When Gripen didn't pass IAF's evaluation why do we need to reconsider it based on the evaluation parameters of a foreign airforce ??? Are you saying that IAF has been incompetent in evaluating the MMRCA jets ???

Sagar G · Post by **Sagar G** » 16 Feb 2015 18:18

Karan M wrote:What of the dubious range to payload claims from the Gripen side?

Sauce

Combat radius

The maximum combat radius for Gripen E on an air-to-ground mission is approximately 1500 km. Such a sortie involves flying to a target releasing A/G weapons and returning to home base. The actual combat radius depends on how the configuration of the carried external stores and the type of profile flown. Gripen E has a combat radius well in parity with most competitors.

And IAF lived happily ever after

Vishnu · Post by **Vishnu** » 16 Feb 2015 18:22

Sagar G wrote:
Vishnu wrote:Karan ... You don't like the Gripen .. thats fine. But each and every point you have on the Gripen can be countered with other "facts," for example details on the Brazilian evaluation of the jet. So, lets not restart a debate thats been done to death. Thats not my intention.
Gripen didn't make it to the final list based on IAF's technical evaluation, FACT !!!

Gripen wasn't the first choice of Brazil, FACT !!!

When Gripen didn't pass IAF's evaluation why do we need to reconsider it based on the evaluation parameters of a foreign airforce ??? Are you saying that IAF has been incompetent in evaluating the MMRCA jets ???

True ... no one is saying reconsider anything ... that cant be done but yes, I do base some of my arguments in having spoken to pilots who have either evaluated the jets or senior officers who have read the assessments. Ultimately, the downselect could have gone any way ... but this isnt at all to suggest that the Rafale is poor. Its brilliant.

But yes, this is all hypothetical and far fetched. But one reality remains - all these years later, we sit without a single MMRCA.

Just expressing my frustration. As are we all.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 16 Feb 2015 18:32

Vishnu wrote:Karan ... You don't like the Gripen

I am just countering the spin that the G-team has engaged in dear sir.. if you don't like that, can't help it.
Nothing against the Gripen per se.

.. thats fine. But each and every point you have on the Gripen can be countered with other "facts," for example details on the Brazilian evaluation of the jet. So, lets not restart a debate thats been done to death. Thats not my intention.

Oh certainly, bring the debate on facts Vishnu. We revel in facts anyhow!

FWIW, the Gripen did not score above the Rafale in technical evals in Brazil...you are welcome to provide any and every detail in specific which points out the reverse. The Gripen won based on a complex mix of industrial offset requirements & cost! Issues closer at heart to Brazil which has no mil program like the LCA to run its industry along & match its success in the commercial arena with Embraer.

PS: Which hot conflict does Brazil have in its area?

Not exactly a stirring argument there as versus for a country like India which a) has a competing platform of its own in development and b ) needs more capability for its AF.

The argument that the Gripen will kill the LCA is spinmastery at its best ... fuelled by those with an agenda. And yes, in a deal like this, everyone has an agenda or at the very least an argument. So ultimately, it boils down to fanboy-ism or favouritism with or without incentives.

Oh come on..

Two fighters both in very similar weight classes, with similar subsystems & even the same engineS, one sold by a firm with a long history of slick marketing & overclaim (Swiss eval), one fighter which just like the other has been classed as a light fighter till date (Gripens A-D), are not going to compete with each other & to point this out is to have an agenda.

One may well ask, who has the agenda?

The person who points out that the competing fighter from outside has a chance to supplant local industrial capability?

Or the person who pushes for the aforesaid fighter, with claims of don't worry guys, this is just an interim thing, lets import away for some unspecified capability...lets wait for the LCA till it develops... of course, when the LCA develops, no guarantee that it has any open orders to fill. Mere coincidence, no doubt.

Even as rtd AF Guys make the claim the LWF fighter needs a rethink and we should be all MMRCA.

Meanwhile, some folks would have us believe that the camel would never plonk itself in the Arabs tent (just like the Arjun, T-90), and India has an infinite budget to procure both Gripens and LCAs.

If this is not spinmastery at its best (or worst), what is??

Pushing for a foreign product which directly competes with ones own local endeavour with no clear appreciation of its benefits or capabilities.

Seriously, Vishnu, spare us the claims on fanboyism and favouritism, when you are unable to rebut the straight forward points that have never been in Gripens favour.

It did not meet the IAF's MMRCA requirement.

It brings further costs into an industry with little tangible benefit (claiming offsets & TOT is meaningless when the same funds can be directly provided to India's pvt/public industry, instead of this roundabout "subsidy" sort of scheme).

It competes with the LCA & its future development.

It was proven in third party evals (Swiss f.e. whose reports are publicly available) to have been comprehensively ranked lower vis a vis the then Rafale.

Its a hodge podge of various third party systems where TOT or political security for non sanctionable supplies can't be guaranteed

By the way, Karan, in having interacted more with the PR set up of all these companies, I can also tell you each and everyone is as slick as the other.

I sort of doubt that. Because one firm has managed to get far more folks to shill for its dubious claims than the other. The attacks against the LCA whilst extolling the Gripen in India were not mere happenstance either

Any how ... I think Kartik's solution of procuring more Sukhois is the only available solution at the moment.

Err, not just the "available solution" but the most cost effective and rational one. Given Su's are very capable, are being built locally, have a significant local supply chain & can & will be upgraded at a fraction of the cost of buying new Rafales.