Rafale & MMRCA News and Discussions-9 August, 2014

krishna_krishna · Post by **krishna_krishna** » 11 Apr 2015 06:24

Guru's my two nay paisa. This was a token of friendship to franchise to bail out dassault, see this is exactly number that Qatar was supposed to get but the french government refused dissolute to deliver it to them hence this question. The MMRCA is still on the cards depending upon how finches behave along with our very own vayu seen.

One thing is for sure now IAF importer would be silenced, they would be forced to absorb more either Su30 or tedious to make up the numbers. Our PM has done really good bargain to get something from this.

ink: awdnews.com/top-news/11413-france-to-suspend-sale-of-36-rafale-fighter-jets-to-qatar.html

According to Al-Masry Al-Youm, an Egyptian daily newspaper, the French ambassador in Cairo has informed the Egyptian officials that Paris will delay the delivery of 36 Rafale jets to Qatar until the end of 2020 due to Doha's unwavering support for fanatic Islamic rebels in war-torn Syria. Mr. Nicolas Galey, the French ambassador in Cairo, has purportedly told Egyptian foreign minister that Paris fears that Qatar – as one of the primary supporters of Muslin Brotherhood– might help Al Qaeda-affiliated groups with French-made military weaponry.

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 11 Apr 2015 06:26

Calculated political push, not regular process led to Rafale deal; all you need to know

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 11 Apr 2015 06:27

RoyG wrote:
Cain Marko wrote:108 are still be negotiated. We may just end up getting 108+36 =144.
One thing is clear, which you have rightly pointed out. We can't afford this kind of sh*t again. It is imperative that we build up our industrial capabilities and start growing some spine. Rope in the privates and get cracking.

I hope and believe that the "negotiations" for the remaining 108 will continue just as they have been for the last many years, continually and interminably. I am guessing here that Modi & Co. mean precisely this but could not get away from the Rafale entirely and hence took the least painful route forward.

The speculation above seems to be supported by the way the deal went - from 126 Rafales worth $ 25 billion to to 63 and finally to 36.

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 11 Apr 2015 06:30

Times of India

Direct purchase of 36 fighters will alter original Rafale deal

"France has agreed to fast-track the deliveries and give us better terms for the outright purchase and longer maintenance support for the jets. Finding the money for this contract should not be a problem since it will have to be paid in instalments linked to deliveries,"

The "politico-strategic" decision of negotiating the direct purchase of 36 Rafale jets that was taken by Prime Minister Narendra Modi just before he left for Paris on Thursday afternoon, will lead to a "modification" of the original deadlocked $20 billion MMRCA (medium multi-role combat aircraft) project for 126 fighters, said sources.

Nikhil T · Post by **Nikhil T** » 11 Apr 2015 06:32

Cain Marko wrote:I am not sure what the R&D is all about - this deal went sour the day the UPA allowed a multi-vendor process. Under the circumstances the only better outcome might have been a complete cancellation, and I am not sure if that would have been a better outcome for a variety of reasons.

I am just so glad that we won't be spending $ 25 billion for 126 Rafales - now that would have been wasteful!

Now the focus should be on bringing the Tejas online - Mk1 followed by Mk2. Around 2020 the Pakfa follows and by 2030 get the AMCA ready to replace the fulcrums and M2Ks.

We don't know if this order is replacement for the MMRCA contract.

Two things.
1. If this is separate from larger 126 Rafale contract (as is being implied officially): Then the Rafale quickie that we just did totally ruins our ongoing negotiations for the larger deal. Sure the GoI is saying that the terms and conditions will be the same as that of the larger deal, but I've done fair bit of negotiations to know that the basic premise of a negotiation is that both parties are willing and able to walk away from the table, if they want. Now with all this pomp and show of an Indian PM's state visit to France, can we walk away from the table if Dassault acts smart? No, we can't. And this is why we've gifted away our leverage. The ink on the larger contract has already been put in for the Indian side.

2. If this is the only Rafale deal: Then this is even more ridiculous. We've added a new type of aircraft, with its own logistics and requiring a lot of spadework for developing best practices for pilots, technicians etc. Even more importantly, we've squandered an opportunity to get ToT - all the AESA, engine and manufacturing knowhow we could have gotten. Finally, we're paying through our nose because there are no economies of scale - just wait till we ink the weapons package and spares contracts. Not to mention our loss of face internationally for the 8 year long MMRCA tender giving way to Govt-to-Govt deal like FMS.
If we had to just ink a one-off package deal for 2 squadrons, MiG-35 would've made more sense - cheaper and compliant with existing infrastructure.

Sigh. The MMRCA continues to get more disappointing and painfully funny by the day.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 11 Apr 2015 06:34

shukla wrote:Calculated political push, not regular process led to Rafale deal; all you need to know

Until 10 hours ago this news portal had no clue what was going to happen. And now, 10 hours later they have an article laying open all the internal logic used in making a deal they did not know about less than 12 hours ago.

This is what Presstitution means, and if Shobhaaa De-aaay is happy to be one she is welcome to join the oiseaules

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 11 Apr 2015 06:40

Cain Marko wrote: But in general yes, supply chain issues have been the nagging problem with Russian gear. However, I don't see the Pakfa being dropped, perhaps numbers can be reduced if we can get the AMCA online with reasonable capability and in time.

No the PAKFA will not be dropped, but serviceability goes far beyond "supply chain issues" into realms of time between overhaul and ease of servicing. These are the results of design philosophy and materials choice philosophy from ground up. You can choose a titanium pin for a part deep inside an aircraft that you need not look at for 5000 hours. Or you can use stainless steel pins that require fatigue checks every 1000 hours requiring 3 days off the flight line. Multiply that by 20 other similar cost/technology choices and you have two vastly different machines at the end - with one being much more expensive than the other.

ravip · Post by **ravip** » 11 Apr 2015 06:47

[Post deleted by Moderator - rohitvats]

ldev · Post by **ldev** » 11 Apr 2015 06:47

But that has been the predominant Russian design principle for its aircraft from Soviet days. Large number of aircraft able to operate with rudimentary support from austere airfields with poor service availability which is compensated by the large numbers. That worked well when Soviet aircraft cost a fraction of Western aircraft and is best exemplified by the total number of MIG 21s HAL built and the total number that crashed. The problem today is that Russian aircrafts' price inflation has made them almost as expensive as Western aircraft without a corresponding improvement in serviceability, hence the SU-30MKI languishing at 50%-60%.

Have to commend Narendra Modi on a bold decision. He has broken the logjam. I don't think that deal for 126 aircraft can be signed in the form in which it was submitted for the RFP.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 11 Apr 2015 06:48

I wonder if there is security imperative to this outright buy. With WEST Asian islamic states getting more and more peaceful by day, South Asia may be next on agenda by no Gooder geopolitical geostrategic manipulators. What kind of shit can hit the fan in near future where India might have to get involved to minimize the damage?

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 11 Apr 2015 06:51

I do not think tot of aesa radar or engine hot section is on table anywhere. Even in su30 they are imported.

Euros do not share it among themselves either. RR owns the hot sec of ej200 and MTU and hispano suiza only get complete module to glue in.

There is no alternative to Anupam on Tejas and kaverixx on testbed and amca

ravip · Post by **ravip** » 11 Apr 2015 06:57

[Deleted by Moderator - rohitvats]

RoyG · Post by **RoyG** » 11 Apr 2015 06:59

It wont make any sense to by 36 outright and cap the order. Modi knows what he is doing. Let more details trickle out. I think the Rafale deal is pretty much done for the 108 and it may have been conditional on signing for the 36.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 11 Apr 2015 07:10

ldev wrote:But that has been the predominant Russian design principle for its aircraft from Soviet days. Large number of aircraft able to operate with rudimentary support from austere airfields with poor service availability which is compensated by the large numbers. That worked well when Soviet aircraft cost a fraction of Western aircraft and is best exemplified by the total number of MIG 21s HAL built and the total number that crashed. The problem today is that Russian aircrafts' price inflation has made them almost as expensive as Western aircraft without a corresponding improvement in serviceability, hence the SU-30MKI languishing at 50%-60%.

Absolutely. The MiG 21s front wheel used the same tyres as Russian tractors, and the GSh 23 gun is a use and throw - after some 2500 rounds or so.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 11 Apr 2015 07:15

RoyG wrote:It wont make any sense to by 36 outright and cap the order. Modi knows what he is doing. Let more details trickle out. I think the Rafale deal is pretty much done for the 108 and it may have been conditional on signing for the 36.

Excuse my choice of words, but "Modi knows what he is doing" is the worst reasoning I have heard till now. Why does he have to pander to Dassault's demands? Hollande says, let him speak. Why not? He is doing Hollande's job!

I see no reason to bypass the procurement procedure. The procurement procedure was held up because we were not getting what we set out to. There was no requirement for this pandering, and if I may add "glory-seeking".

We have done this mistake in the past with piecemeal orders, and we have done it again. We missed the bus with the Mirages, Mig-29s and Mirages (when we forego the assembly line). And now this!!!! We keep finding out ways to help others maintain their talent pool at the price of developing our own. We saved the Migs, the Sukhois and now Dassault! Atleast we REALLY needed the Migs and the Sukhois at that time. Now we have alternatives!

I have always supported the purchase of Rafale, but not this way. This is plain stupidity. Who in their right minds loses bargaining chips on the negotiation table!!! We have found an axe to hit our legs on. I will say no more.

arunsrinivasan · Post by **arunsrinivasan** » 11 Apr 2015 07:44

Suraj · Post by **Suraj** » 11 Apr 2015 07:45

indranilroy wrote:I have always supported the purchase of Rafale, but not this way. This is plain stupidity. Who in their right minds loses bargaining chips on the negotiation table!!!

The answer to that question probably lies not in this deal, but in the state of the PAK-FA deal and AMCA. GoI probably feels that unless it demonstrates resolve to pick another vendor and avoid continued dependency on the Russians, we'll further screw up our 5th Gen development efforts, whether it be AMCA or PAK-FA. Ideally though, I'd have preferred if we bought a stage in Dassault itself as part of these negotiations.

sudeepj · Post by **sudeepj** » 11 Apr 2015 07:49

indranilroy wrote:
I have always supported the purchase of Rafale, but not this way. This is plain stupidity. Who in their right minds loses bargaining chips on the negotiation table!!! We have found an axe to hit our legs on. I will say no more.

Stupidity was when rafale was declared the winner of the competition without nailing down all the details. Once that happened, they were bound to charge an arm and a leg for the fighters. What has happened now is a separate contract to buy 36 fighters, which we have said we want. There is going to be a separate negotiation for these 36. The position in the MMRCA contract is unchanged from the earlier situation.

IAF has managed 2-3 squadrons of one aircraft type earlier. Somehow, they have landed in that situation again after complaining a lot about it. The blame lies more on the brass than on the topis. Spit some more on the LCA..

For the MMRCA, we should invite another round of bids with all aspects of the bid nailed down. Let everyone put their best offer on the table and decide. After Rafale was chosen in the MMRCA, it became virtually a single vendor situation, with said vendor changing every term in the contract into something that favored them.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 11 Apr 2015 07:56

pandyan wrote: The problem is even if manufacturing base is state of art, it still cannot make what rafale needs because the equipment, process, controls will be totally different between the two. So, what we produce may look the same, feel the same but may not be the same from quality and reliability perspective. So, whoever is manufacturing should create a copy of OEM infrastructure to replicate. even then other factors like climate control, humidity etc may play a role resulting in slightly different process resulting in a slightly different product with slightly different characteristics.

This may be why Dassault was making a fuss about taking responsibility for HAL built aircraft.

pandyan wrote: what I dont understand is why is HAL not investing in automatic composite/fiber laying machine even for LCA line? this is something under their control and they can independently dictate level of automation.

I don't know much about this - but it appears like India "jumped the gun" with composite tech. It may be that you develop and perfect your composites first - forming parts manually and as a second step invest in machinery. India developed composites tech along with LCA. In fact one of the aims of LCA was to develop in house competence in composites (along with other things like FBW etc). That is why LCA has been a long long experiment - starting with technology unavailable in India. And while we developed composites the west went on to automate and standardize their composites laying tech - ensuring that we remain 10-15 years behind despite learning to make useful composites.

In fact I suspect that we could not have thought of Rafale/EF if we did not already have competence in other techs that we developed for LCA

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 11 Apr 2015 08:08

Cain Marko wrote:Viv, we can go round and round in circles about this forever. Point is, F-35 is not in discussion from all that we hear. More importantly, there are numerous arguments against it too. In terms of the MRCA contenders, I think this is pretty much the closest to the best deal we could have practically hoped for.

How much discussion was there until now about the whole deal being junked in favour of two squadrons off-the-shelf? If we're that 'flexible', why stop here? And while there are political arguments against it, with the PAK FA still a work in progress, it remains the only way to steal a march over China when it comes to stealth fighters.

In an ideal world, yes. but alas we are constrained by a rather un-ideal type world. And I blame the MOD far more than the IAF for this circus. The less said about the MOD under the UPA, the better.

For all its sins, the UPA can't be blamed for this god-awful decision today (assuming its not mere political theatre). Adopting entirely new line of logistics for a mere 36 fighters delivering capabilities that are evolutionary rather than revolutionary.

Absolutely! No argument here - but then again it is not an ideal world. I'll take 36 Rafales over 126 deliverable by God knows when and with an ungodly price and likely with very limited tech transfer to show for it.

That amounts to supporting a 'bad' decision because its better than a 'worse' decision. Not acceptable when there are 'good' alternatives available.

It is not a matter of contracts that they have been given, it is about a pretty well known quid pro quid deal that was to be in their favor since 1999 - the M2K order should have been theirs. Such things might not sit well with us now that we sit in a pretty position, but around the time of POK II, when we were hardly an economic powerhouse, their support was rather a lonely voice against almost the entire international community, and much appreciated.

They got the Scorpene deal in lieu of the Mirages. Reportedly after a (better) HDW offer had been rejected. And hugely expensive deals for the Mirage upgrade & MICAs. Plus loads of secondary deals including Turbomeca engines, Mistral AAMs, guns from Nexter, Thales TI, HMDS, MFDs, etc. Now we have contracts for A330s and nuclear reactors.

Why is that not enough to consider our 'debt' repaid? And do we factor in French lobbying for opening of EU defence exports to China into this debt equation?

member_23694 · Post by **member_23694** » 11 Apr 2015 08:14

http://ajaishukla.blogspot.in/2015/04/i ... fully.html

this article seems to be quick

anyways good going. Early induction of Rafale now and de-linking it with make in India Rafale discussions.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 11 Apr 2015 08:22

^ From the above article

The government has stayed with the Rafale, though IAF chief, Air Chief Marshal Arup Raha, clarified in Bengaluru in February that any fighter would do. "It is important we have an MMRCA. I would not say Rafale, but we need to have it [MMRCA] in the quickest possible time," Raha said. (Eurofighter? F-35?)

Air Vice Marshal (Retired) Nirdosh Tyagi, who oversaw the MMRCA contest, says it is hard to justify buying only a small number of Rafales. It makes little sense to have an air force that already has seven different fighters --- Sukhoi-30MKI, MiG-29, MiG-27, MiG-21, Mirage 2000, Jaguar and Tejas LCA --- create spare part stocks, depots and maintenance infrastructure for just two squadrons of yet another fighter type. (Screws up logistics)

“Thirty-six fighters are neither here nor there. The MMRCA was processed from the start as a 126-fighter contract, with an option for 63 more. Indigenous manufacture through technology transfer is crucial”, Tyagi says. (Where is the Tejas manufactured?)

If India contracts for 36 Rafale fighters, Dassault will be in a commanding position to negotiate favourable terms for the remaining 90 fighters. If India does not agree to Dassault’s terms, it would be left with two squadrons of Rafales, with no indigenization. (We lose whatever leverage we had left in the negotiations)

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 11 Apr 2015 08:35

sudeepj wrote:
indranilroy wrote:
I have always supported the purchase of Rafale, but not this way. This is plain stupidity. Who in their right minds loses bargaining chips on the negotiation table!!! We have found an axe to hit our legs on. I will say no more.
Stupidity was when rafale was declared the winner of the competition without nailing down all the details. Once that happened, they were bound to charge an arm and a leg for the fighters. What has happened now is a separate contract to buy 36 fighters, which we have said we want. There is going to be a separate negotiation for these 36. The position in the MMRCA contract is unchanged from the earlier situation.

IAF has managed 2-3 squadrons of one aircraft type earlier. Somehow, they have landed in that situation again after complaining a lot about it. The blame lies more on the brass than on the topis. Spit some more on the LCA..

For the MMRCA, we should invite another round of bids with all aspects of the bid nailed down. Let everyone put their best offer on the table and decide. After Rafale was chosen in the MMRCA, it became virtually a single vendor situation, with said vendor changing every term in the contract into something that favored them.

the details were purposely not nailed down because that is where the actual malai lay. Huge payments were extracted by the baboo(n)s to ensure that slyly predetermined loopholes were left open just like leakages are purposely built into any "welfare" scheme whenever any GOI starts any welfare initiative.

Just look at MNREGA, does anyone here imagine that the leakages are by mere happenstance or see it for what it actually is, a grand scheme to loot funds in perpetuity without fear of discovery or punishment?? The NAC, NGOs, the congis and the baboo(n)s have designed the scheme from ground up as a fat, succulent and evergreen sarkari teat.

Modi is out to break this nexus and shut down some of the loopholes and thus the vehement opposition and fear of the congis. What NaMo practically means by congress mukt bharat actually means squeezing out the congis by simply denying them all sources of funding and patronage thereby forcing them to wither on the vine and loose support at the grassroots level.

uddu · Post by **uddu** » 11 Apr 2015 08:35

So can we expect 106 Tejas MK-I being ordered by IAF rightaway? taking the total to the required 126 for the Mark-1. Let the IAF place the order for the Mark-1 and the production need to be ramped up at the HAL end and they must start utilizing better technology and management and must start to reach production rate of 21 aircraft per year before starting of Mark-II production. The 168 Tejas MK-II can start its production by 2021-22 with the same 21/year or more based on orders including foreign orders and by 2030 that's 15 years from now the Tejas production will come to a close. All along the way for 15 years, India can start to decommission one of Mig-21/Mig-27 squadrons and in the next 10 years these two types of aircraft can be out of IAF inventory replaced only by Tejas. The MOD, HAL and IAF must now get their acts together and start mass production of the Made in India fighter.

member_23694 · Post by **member_23694** » 11 Apr 2015 08:42

One more

http://bharatkarnad.com/2015/04/10/unex ... th-rafale/

Bottomline Rafale is for IAF and not for HAL's balance sheet.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 11 Apr 2015 08:49

Viv S wrote: And while there are political arguments against it, with the PAK FA still a work in progress, it remains the only way to steal a march over China when it comes to ~~stealth~~ fighters.

-there, Corrected

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 11 Apr 2015 08:55

dhiraj wrote:http://ajaishukla.blogspot.in/2015/04/i ... fully.html

this article seems to be quick
anyways good going. Early induction of Rafale now and de-linking it with make in India Rafale discussions.

Shukla is just another reporter.

He is saying "arbitrarily altered rules" which is a white lie. Reporters make their money from opposing business parties by saying things that cause fog and confusion. Shkla is doing the same thing. But it sets the tone for the media to say that the rules have been altered.

i bet my left testimonial that absolutely zero rules have been "altered" but I am a no-fun wet blanket and if I ran a media empire it would collapse in a millisecond

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 11 Apr 2015 09:01

Suraj wrote:
indranilroy wrote:I have always supported the purchase of Rafale, but not this way. This is plain stupidity. Who in their right minds loses bargaining chips on the negotiation table!!!
The answer to that question probably lies not in this deal, but in the state of the PAK-FA deal and AMCA. GoI probably feels that unless it demonstrates resolve to pick another vendor and avoid continued dependency on the Russians, we'll further screw up our 5th Gen development efforts, whether it be AMCA or PAK-FA. Ideally though, I'd have preferred if we bought a stage in Dassault itself as part of these negotiations.

Exactly what bargaining chips does India get vis-a-vis the PAKFA by doing this? Rafales and PAKFAs are not competitors. We have been asking them for faster delivery. They will now say, what's the rush! And are we going to ask our pilots to fly against air defences of the 2030s using Su-30s and Rafales? Best of luck!

And bargaining chips against AMCA?!! Our own AMCA, using a French jet?

Forget everything. Somebody explain to me: How does IAF become more prepared with 18 more extra jets which arrive (say) 2 years ahead?!!! And if it doesn't, why are we giving up our bargaining chips? <And please keep the argument "it was done by UPA, hence bad; and this is being done by Modi, hence good" away>. This govt. has made many a gaffe for glory. So, lets keep those arguments aside and discuss the merit of decision.

We need proven (preferably) medium weight fighters for military preparedness till Mk2s, AMCAs and PAKFAs are proven, I get it. This, I don't . I really tried hard to believe this is good. I can't find one.

vishvak · Post by **vishvak** » 11 Apr 2015 09:02

shiv wrote:
Viv S wrote: And while there are political arguments against it, with the PAK FA still a work in progress, it remains the only way to steal a march over China when it comes to ~~stealth~~ fighters.
-there, Corrected

How so? Could you put the reasoning in PAK FA thread please?

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 11 Apr 2015 09:05

Hakim,

I won't take any sides with any of the journos, their morals, their economics, etc. Just tell me how is this not true? If it is true, how can we circumvent this situation?

If India contracts for 36 Rafale fighters, Dassault will be in a commanding position to negotiate favourable terms for the remaining 90 fighters. If India does not agree to Dassault’s terms, it would be left with two squadrons of Rafales, with no indigenization.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 11 Apr 2015 09:14

There are other pressure point carrots like p75, air India a320 replacement, mrtt, p17a, AWACS,more nuclear power plants, wine import duties, srsam, aasm vs SDB, mrmp...

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 11 Apr 2015 09:18

He signed 17 deals. He could have signed one less!

arun · Post by **arun** » 11 Apr 2015 09:21

arun wrote:Shishir Gupta in Hindustan Times quoting “Senior Official” also reports that the Rafale contract is set to drastically change tack.

The tack to be adopted now is “on the basis of strategic requirement and operational necessity through the G2G route” ……….. IF ……………..“the French company is willing to lower the price per aircraft due to recovery of development costs on missiles, ammunition and sale to other countries”.

Originally planned licensed manufacture by HAL seems dead.

With price now becoming the issue, I doubt a concrete deal will be concluded during PM Modi’s France visit. At best there may be a statement of good intent about doing a deal in the future:

"After detailed analysis of the RFP and the laborious process followed by the previous government, it was evident that the entire deal could not be worked out with serious discrepancies in the negotiations that could lead to litigation in future," said a senior official.

The 2012 deal envisages 18 ready-to-fly Rafales supplied to the IAF by this year, and the remaining 108 to be manufactured under licence in India.

With the NDA government not willing to let the IAF fighter squadron strength dip into the critical zone in coming years, Prime Minister Narendra Modi and French President François Hollande will on Friday discuss ways to clinch the Rafale deal. "If the French company is willing to lower the price per aircraft due to recovery of development costs on missiles, ammunition and sale to other countries, then India could go for outright purchase of the 4.5 generation fighter through the French government route. The deal could be negotiated and signed in 2015 itself but numbers to be purchased depend on offered price. India has purchased the Lockheed Martin C-130 J Super Hercules, Boeing C-17 Globemaster and P-8I Poseidon aircraft from the US on the basis of strategic requirement and operational necessity through the G2G route," a senior official told Hindustan Times.
Shishir Gupta is talking of 40 Rafaels being purchased:

India is now seriously considering strategic purchase of up to 40 Rafales for the Indian Air Force (IAF) through the government-to-government (G2G) route on account of operational necessity
With Modi arriving in Paris, India and France set to push Rafale deal

Extract dealing with the proposed Rafale purchase from the ”Official” Joint Statement issued for our Prime Ministers visit to France.

As anticipated what has come out is a mere statement of good intent about doing a deal in the future

Meanwhile a long way to go yet with many pitfalls such as “better than conveyed by Dassault Aviation” for whom? The mercenary French or ……………. India? Then how much better should it be to whosoever is going to have it “better” to close the deal?

Wait and watch :

14. Government of India conveyed to the Government of France that in view of the critical operational necessity for Multirole Combat Aircraft for Indian Air Force, Government of India would like to acquire [36] Rafale jets in fly-away condition as quickly as possible. The two leaders agreed to conclude an Inter-Governmental Agreement for supply of the aircraft on terms that would be better than conveyed by Dassault Aviation as part of a separate process underway; the delivery would be in time-frame that would be compatible with the operational requirement of IAF; and that the aircraft and associated systems and weapons would be delivered on the same configuration as had been tested and approved by Indian Air Force, and with a longer maintenance responsibility by France.

From here:

India-France Joint Statement during the visit of Prime Minister to France (April 9-11, 2015)

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 11 Apr 2015 09:21

The 2 x Rafale Squadrons seem to have been contracted to arrest the squadron decline in 2015-2020 period.

You'll have 4 x Mig-21 M/MF, 3 x Mig-27ML and 1 x Mig-21 Bis on their way out and 4 x Su-30MKI, 2 x Tejas Mk1 and now, 2 x Rafale coming into the service. This should balance out the immediate requirement. And this immediate requirement is what is driving the Government decision.

Now, the question is what happens after 2020 in the 2020-25 when 2 x Tejas Mk2 (number produced by 2025), 4 x Rafale and hopefully, 1 x FGFA were expected to come in for 6 x Mig-21 Bison and 2 x Mig-27 UPG squadrons being phased out.

What can happen is more numbers of Tejas Mk1/Mk1.5 being ordered to make up for sheer numbers w/o getting into qualitative aspect. The IAF was relying on Rafale to make up the 42 squadron number target by 2025-27 period.

Suraj · Post by **Suraj** » 11 Apr 2015 09:32

indranilroy wrote:Exactly what bargaining chips does India get vis-a-vis the PAKFA by doing this?

I have no specific idea. I'm also looking at this from a different perspective. I'm not interested in a cathartic rant. I would like to understand what compelled a deal at this point. Possibilities:
* There's a pressing need for aircraft and force level that's adequately known only at the PM/DM level, not to us. They want to stanch immediate bleeding to have more breathing room.
* There's a quid pro quo involving France, that's not been stated openly, just oblique references made. Perhaps SSN reactor technology under the table.
* Modi's not a good international deal negotiator. Too much magnanimity.
* Inability to make progress with the Russians, or them dismissing our concerns with 'we're your only option, so we do as we wish'

On the surface, sure the deal looks bad. A PM who constantly reiterates his Make In India push, essentially puts the whole thing aside in favour of a quick transaction. There's clearly a lot more driving this .

I'm less willing to ascribe outright incompetence simply because this administration has not so far been characterized that way. However, they've done a lot of things that at initial impression sounds too like a bad idea, but as a larger picture emerges, shows that there was a greater plan afoot. Now, not everyone is expected to find all such actions acceptable, but generally, a lot of things GoI has done is very deliberate; they're not very good prior communicators of what they're doing. Not in economic policy, not in home affairs, and not in defence either. It's frustrating, but it's how this administration has been.

vishvak · Post by **vishvak** » 11 Apr 2015 09:34

The F3 R standard will not alter airframe/avionics of Rafale, most probably. Just trying to understand what is actual hindrance to procuring more LCA Mk 1, and unable to find that as far as Rafale next Gen standard is considered relatively.

nash · Post by **nash** » 11 Apr 2015 09:35

As per news channels and media reports this deal is separate from original 126 deal , this would mean :

36 + 126 or 36 + 108 or MAY be 63 +126.

This 36 option is suggested by Arun jaitely as per CNN-IBN and later re-iterated by MP but he talked about MKIs option.

Now to execute this option can means several things:

1. To give the breathing space to IAF, Dassault and above all Indian Economy, which is essential to fund other defense projects, also time to HAL to upgrade its capabilities.
2. The Indo-French Nucelar deal, which has stucked due to techno-commercial reason, and this 36 sweetener might pave the way for L&T-Areva agreement to make the Jaitapur Nuke Plant financial viable.

But yes it will bind us to Dassault, and only time will tell how GoI tackel it.

Only thing lost is Make in India of defense goods, but PM mention manufacturing of defence products by french in India. It can mean more french participation in LCA and AMCA such as automation in composites , MAY be avionics through samtel , etc .

Gyan · Post by **Gyan** » 11 Apr 2015 09:36

Modi has killed off Rafale. HAL has to now concentrate only on LCA.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 11 Apr 2015 09:43

I have a spider feel the availability % of our bison and mig27 holding has fallen below 40% and OEM spares very hard to get as ruaf does not use them anymore. Thats 200 airframes limping along on one leg.

The jag upg for all airframes seem to be on plus we made 39 new on emergency basis.

The mig29 fortunately is still in relative use around the world....

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 11 Apr 2015 09:45

Only Tejas mk1.5 can save our backsides now on numbers front.

We are competing with j10 numbers and they inducted 200 with more every qtr.

Typical hal mode of production will not do..with lengthy tendering etc. A spv with full freedom under a hardcase hyman Rickover type will be needed to push production beyond cottage industry mode