Rafale & MMRCA News and Discussions-9 August, 2014

[NRao]

I know someone laughed at this, but, all the sensors are of no use unless one has the crazy bandwidth to share all that info. Build that capability along with the rest. Perhaps India has that capability, but I have not read about it anywhere.

[member_28722]

I am surprised to see so many posts on ToT not mentioning the below

1. ToT will not be useful just for Rafale. It is not limited to designing Rafale's production line in HAL. It will allow us to develop local supply chain and jump from 0 to 4.5 generation in medium aircraft category

2. Rafale ToT is not the same as ToT we got from Russians on Su30MKI. The intent behind MKI deal was not to develop Indian manufacturing. There is no need for local partner, there is no offsets clause. Both are needed for Rafale

3. Rafale is genuine and state of the art western 4.5 tech. Absorption of such technology benefits LCA and MCA greatly. It also gives us an alternate way to improve our aviation industry if the reports of Russian stonewalling on PAKFA are 100% accurate.

If the deal and ToT are negotiated properly Rafale may end up being the last major combat aircraft deal we need. It will obviously be costly now, but worth it in the long run.

---------------------

OT rant alert

Also, many posts here give too much credit to the Chinese. They are definitely ahead of us today in some aviation fields, but posters here put them ahead of Russians and Americans. They are at least a decade behind both technologically in every aspect of defence industry.

J20 and J31 are a long way off from squadron strength and yet here, both are rated to be equivalent to F22 and F35 respectively. If J20 and J31 are from the scratch tech, then they will face the same problems which the Americans did and will take a longer cycle. If they are copied tech then they will not perform at same level. We cannot take positives from both arguments and then use it to call the Rafale outdated in 2025.

It was only in 2013 that PRC developed a fully local AESA radar. KJ-3000 and J-10B both have versions of it.
(Its predecessor KJ2000's specs were boosted up to avoid the humiliation of Phalcon cancellation. I don't believe PRC can develop a Phalcon type radar in scratch in less than 3 years, which is what they claimed to have done with KJ2000)

Haven't we also a working local AESA around the same time. We also have 100% indigenous aerial weapons either developed or in last stages of development. Rafale deal will only add to all our developments and not derail them

Rant over

---------------------

[Viv S]

I am surprised to see so many posts on ToT not mentioning the below

1. ToT will not be useful just for Rafale. It is not limited to designing Rafale's production line in HAL. It will allow us to develop local supply chain and jump from 0 to 4.5 generation in medium aircraft category

We already have a supply chain servicing two 4th gen aircraft - Su-30MKI & Tejas. The 'generation' of an aircraft is not dependent on its weight class.

2. Rafale ToT is not the same as ToT we got from Russians on Su30MKI. The intent behind MKI deal was not to develop Indian manufacturing. There is no need for local partner, there is no offsets clause. Both are needed for Rafale

- HAL is producing more Sukhois annually, than Dassault is producing Rafales. We've already got a fairly decent manufacturing base.
- Dassault's tie-up with the Reliance is hardly going to help matters.

3. Rafale is genuine and state of the art western 4.5 tech. Absorption of such technology benefits LCA and MCA greatly. It also gives us an alternate way to improve our aviation industry if the reports of Russian stonewalling on PAKFA are 100% accurate.

By definition, a 4.5 gen aircraft is not state-of-the-art. Its a bridge to 5th gen aircraft at best. The Rafale's only state-of-the-art aspect is its ESM suite. And that too isn't best-in-class either.

- Its coming too late to be of any use to the Tejas program.
- Its coming too early to be relevant in 2030, when the AMCA is due to enter service.

If the deal and ToT are negotiated properly Rafale may end up being the last major combat aircraft deal we need. It will obviously be costly now, but worth it in the long run.

Only if one subscribes to the idea that stealth is 'useless' (despite the fact that every air forces is investing heavily in it).

Also, many posts here give too much credit to the Chinese. They are definitely ahead of us today in some aviation fields, but posters here put them ahead of Russians and Americans. They are at least a decade behind both technologically in every aspect of defence industry.

They've caught up with the Russians in every sphere except for propulsion. Chinese R&D is driven by far larger budgets and a far far more robust private industry.

Ten years ago, the China were the biggest arms importers in the world. Today, it is fourth behind Saudi Arabia. Annual arms imports are a minuscule fraction of its total defence outlay ($2bn of $135bn+). And of what it imports (engines, helicopters, large transports), it has well funded programs running to deliver domestic alternatives for.

And while they're still well behind the Americans, they're on their way to catching up. The economics factors are in their favour. Its only a question of time.

J20 and J31 are a long way off from squadron strength and yet here, both are rated to be equivalent to F22 and F35 respectively. If J20 and J31 are from the scratch tech, then they will face the same problems which the Americans did and will take a longer cycle. If they are copied tech then they will not perform at same level. We cannot take positives from both arguments and then use it to call the Rafale outdated in 2025.

No one has rated them to be equivalent to the F-22 & F-35. They aren't. But sticking the Rafale as an addendum to the LM jets, doesn't bring it into the same category. Whether we like it or not, the J-20 and J-31 are both designed to be LO in the EM spectrum at least. Their avionics will continue to evolve. And perhaps most importantly, they will continue to be cheaper than the Rafale while being built in far larger numbers.

It was only in 2013 that PRC developed a fully local AESA radar. KJ-3000 and J-10B both have versions of it.

The French introduced their first fighters AESA in late 2010. The Russians have still not fielded one operationally.

(Its predecessor KJ2000's specs were boosted up to avoid the humiliation of Phalcon cancellation. I don't believe PRC can develop a Phalcon type radar in scratch in less than 3 years, which is what they claimed to have done with KJ2000)

The cancellation of the Phalcon sale happened 15 years ago. And the KJ-2000 has been succeeded by the KJ-3000 which

Haven't we also a working local AESA around the same time. We also have 100% indigenous aerial weapons either developed or in last stages of development. Rafale deal will only add to all our developments and not derail them

The Rafale is budgeted at upwards of $20bn. Meanwhile, the Tejas is budgeted at $1.5bn ($4bn if you include the Mk2). Doesn't look like we're capitalizing on the cost effectiveness of indigenous equipment.

[member_28722]

We already have a supply chain servicing two 4th gen aircraft - Su-30MKI & Tejas. The 'generation' of an aircraft is not dependent on its weight class.

No we don't ... several components of both are still imported. Both are fully assembled in India.

- HAL is producing more Sukhois annually, than Dassault is producing Rafales. We've already got a fairly decent manufacturing base.

Numbers are dependent on need and not capability.

- Dassault's tie-up with the Reliance is hardly going to help matters.

Agreed, but that was not my point. Improving our aviation industry was not a major objective of Sukhoi deal (at least not mentioned publicly). It is one of the major intents of Rafale deal.

By definition, a 4.5 gen aircraft is not state-of-the-art. Its a bridge to 5th gen aircraft at best. The Rafale's only state-of-the-art aspect is its ESM suite. And that too isn't best-in-class either.

Rafale and EF were the only fighters to score kills against Raptors. Both HUD and SPECTRA are state of art. By general consensus Western>Russian>Chinese in the tech department. I would consider a 4.5 gen western aircraft very much equal to a Chinese 5th gen.

- Its coming too late to be of any use to the Tejas program.
- Its coming too early to be relevant in 2030, when the AMCA is due to enter service.

Improvement of our aviation industry and supply chain w.r.t western tech standards will benefit all aircraft period.

If the deal and ToT are negotiated properly Rafale may end up being the last major combat aircraft deal we need. It will obviously be costly now, but worth it in the long run.

Only if one subscribes to the idea that stealth is 'useless' (despite the fact that every air forces is investing heavily in it).

You are missing my point. I am talking about improvement of industry here to a point where we don't need to go outside for future anything.

They've caught up with the Russians in every sphere except for propulsion. Chinese R&D is driven by far larger budgets and a far far more robust private industry.

No they haven't. All PLAAF and PLAN aircraft are essentially Russian copies. They have zero original design, engines or weapons. There is no substitute for experiences gained from scratch development. LCA has benefited Indian industry more than the Sukhoi knockoffs will benefit Chinese.

Ten years ago, the China were the biggest arms importers in the world. Today, it is fourth behind Saudi Arabia. Annual arms imports are a minuscule fraction of its total defence outlay ($2bn of $135bn+). And of what it imports (engines, helicopters, large transports), it has well funded programs running to deliver domestic alternatives for.

And while they're still well behind the Americans, they're on their way to catching up. The economics factors are in their favour. Its only a question of time.

Economic success does not guarantee technological development else Apple devices would be 100% manufactured in China today.

No one has rated them to be equivalent to the F-22 & F-35. They aren't. But sticking the Rafale as an addendum to the LM jets, doesn't bring it into the same category. Whether we like it or not, the J-20 and J-31 are both designed to be LO in the EM spectrum at least. Their avionics will continue to evolve.

The only way Rafale will be outdated by 2025 is if the PLAAF birds are equivalent to F35. If they are not then Rafale is not outdated. It can't be argued both ways.
Rafale is a benchmark for best 4.5 gen and F-35 is a benchmark for 5th gen. if J31 and J20 are not as good as F-35 then a proven 4.5 gen is a good match.
They may be designed to be LO but there is no proof that their design parameters have actually been achieved.

And perhaps most importantly, they will continue to be cheaper than the Rafale while being built in far larger numbers.

This statement is a classic example of overrating the Chinese
J31 had its maiden test flight in 2012 and F35 in 2006. It took US 12 years to go from test flight - LRIP - Full production. Yet you expect PLAAF to achieve the same in lesser time, with copied tech, engine problems and possessing no genuine 4th gen design (all copies)
Between them the J20 and J31 barely have a few 100 hours of testing. The F35 underwent 1000s of flights and hours of testing before induction.

If they do build them in 100s so fast, then they will be considerably inferior to F-35 and we should have nothing to worry about.

It was only in 2013 that PRC developed a fully local AESA radar. KJ-3000 and J-10B both have versions of it.

The cancellation of the Phalcon sale happened 15 years ago. And the KJ-2000 has been succeeded by the KJ-3000 which

The point was that we had a desi AESA radar ready by the time KJ3000 was. So we are not behind them in radar aspect. It stands

The Rafale is budgeted at upwards of $20bn. Meanwhile, the Tejas is budgeted at $1.5bn ($4bn if you include the Mk2). Doesn't look like we're capitalizing on the cost effectiveness of indigenous equipment.

Aviation tech efficiency cannot be reasoned to how we manage fuels in our cars. My entire post is about the usefulness of absorbing Rafale technology in long run. The cost is $20bn is across 10 years, which is not very high for our airforce budget.
Is there any government or IAF source claiming that Rafale is too costly? TBH I have seen that only posters here go ballistic about it
(E.g. Vikramditya deal has well documented details of cost unhappiness from Navy and Govt. Yet to see anything coming even close to that for Rafale)
The main haggling point with Rafale is extent of technology transfer. Money does not seem to be an issue from IAF or Govt point of view, yet it dominates all discussions here

[NRao]

No we don't ... several components of both are still imported. Both are fully assembled in India.

NO ToT will ensure a 100% made in India. It cannot. There is bound to be a few things that are cheaper to get from the native nation.



On supply chain, the complexity comes in when a supplier has to build to specs. And in the case of the Rafale the specs come in from france. No French company is going to part with a 100% of the details. Just cannot expect that to happen. So, there too some of the "stuff" will still come from France. And the way they will control that is that they will ask for an exorbitant price to transfer that knowledge.


The Rafale will help with manufacturing techniques.

Design is too late. And supply chain is a ghutna stuff - a lot of patient leg work, takes years to build, but no need to rely on anyone for it. Sc helps as far as MRO, parts restocking, just-in-time parts, etc. And, in some cases the technologies to make those parts.

Will the manufacturing help for the AMCA - I think it would. France is detail oriented and that will help - IF Indians pick that up too. But, if the jugad mentality continues that God help.

[member_28722]

NO ToT will ensure a 100% made in India. It cannot. There is bound to be a few things that are cheaper to get from the native nation.

Cheaper yes, but w.r.t defense a local, bit more expensive, component is better than dependence on another nation.

On supply chain, the complexity comes in when a supplier has to build to specs. And in the case of the Rafale the specs come in from france. No French company is going to part with a 100% of the details. Just cannot expect that to happen. So, there too some of the "stuff" will still come from France. And the way they will control that is that they will ask for an exorbitant price to transfer that knowledge.

That depends, we already have a developing experience with Su30MKI and LCA. Rafale should help in improving and absorbing more tech into the local manufacturing. That is the intent. It is achievable.

Design is too late.

We don't need design. LCA is already there, so is AMCA.

And supply chain is a ghutna stuff - a lot of patient leg work, takes years to build, but no need to rely on anyone for it. Sc helps as far as MRO, parts restocking, just-in-time parts, etc. And, in some cases the technologies to make those parts.

Yes, but we need to develop a local supply chain and solid manufacturing base. IMHO, instead of developing it with Russian tech only, an impetus of western tech will make a base more competent.

Will the manufacturing help for the AMCA - I think it would. France is detail oriented and that will help - IF Indians pick that up too. But, if the jugad mentality continues that God help.

Hopefully it won't. At least that doesn't seem to be intent of IAF and Government.

[NRao]

Cheaper yes, but w.r.t defense a local, bit more expensive, component is better than dependence on another nation.

The MKI still imports ingots of some alloys from Russia. India can do it. Russia just does it more cheaply. Simple.

On supply chain, the complexity comes in when a supplier has to build to specs. And in the case of the Rafale the specs come in from france. No French company is going to part with a 100% of the details. Just cannot expect that to happen. So, there too some of the "stuff" will still come from France. And the way they will control that is that they will ask for an exorbitant price to transfer that knowledge.

That depends, we already have a developing experience with Su30MKI and LCA. Rafale should help in improving and absorbing more tech into the local manufacturing. That is the intent. It is achievable.

Nothing to depend upon. No nation parts with everything. The problem: "Rafale improving": you are hiding behind and feeling very comfortable behind too broad a term.

We don't need design. LCA is already there, so is AMCA.

You do. For the next gen. Thus FGFA.

Besides if that is the argument, then try this: For "design" you have the LCA and AMCA. In manufacturing you have the LCA, MKI, MiG-21, Jags, Gnat, what else? No comparison. So, you *really* have no need for a Rafale for "manufacturing" - by your argument!!

And supply chain is a ghutna stuff - a lot of patient leg work, takes years to build, but no need to rely on anyone for it. Sc helps as far as MRO, parts restocking, just-in-time parts, etc. And, in some cases the technologies to make those parts.

Yes, but we need to develop a local supply chain and solid manufacturing base. IMHO, instead of developing it with Russian tech only, an impetus of western tech will make a base more competent.

The issue is not Russian or French or US. It is Indian. You can rely on another for technologies, how to get it done. but the "chain" itself you only need yourself. Roads, delivery systems (YES, UPS/FedEx/loacl mail systems/etc, we use all of them in SC - teh software is written to use everything - the cheapest possible - costs are updated every day), proper street addresses (which is problem in India) (the new intelligent cities will help here), road conditions (weight a road can take), type of vehicles used for delivering and a ton of other factors.

A very good source is a 3 hour vid on YT on the Airbus' biggest plane (it escapes me right now). Check out what it means to "deliver".

India is at least a decade behind if not more. And, no one in France or Russia can help. Only Indians. Make it India.

Will the manufacturing help for the AMCA - I think it would. France is detail oriented and that will help - IF Indians pick that up too. But, if the jugad mentality continues that God help.

Hopefully it won't. At least that doesn't seem to be intent of IAF and Government.

IAF and Gov are just two of the three. ALL have to be in proper step to move forward. Cannot be viewed from the view of any one/two of them.

[member_28722]

The MKI still imports ingots of some alloys from Russia. India can do it. Russia just does it more cheaply. Simple.

I have already stated that an Indian expensive alternative > Foreign cheaper dependence. If we have the raw material we should look to have the whole part made in India. Expensive at first but cheaper/better in long run.

Nothing to depend upon. No nation parts with everything. The problem: "Rafale improving": you are hiding behind and feeling very comfortable behind too broad a term.

You are missing my point. We have no western impetus in our developing chain. Su30MKI is Russian with Israeli/Indian stuff, LCA is Indian. Both are being western tech. Rafale tech absorption will improve it

You do. For the next gen. Thus FGFA.

Besides if that is the argument, then try this: For "design" you have the LCA and AMCA. In manufacturing you have the LCA, MKI, MiG-21, Jags, Gnat, what else? No comparison. So, you *really* have no need for a Rafale for "manufacturing" - by your argument!!

You are not getting my argument
India has already developed a working design from scratch (is improving on it by itself) and is working towards developing a second one. We can take the design part by ourselves from here We don't need Rafale to teach us how to design. That was the point. It stands

The issue is not Russian or French or US. It is Indian. You can rely on another for technologies, how to get it done. but the "chain" itself you only need yourself. Roads, delivery systems (YES, UPS/FedEx/loacl mail systems/etc, we use all of them in SC - teh software is written to use everything - the cheapest possible - costs are updated every day), proper street addresses (which is problem in India) (the new intelligent cities will help here), road conditions (weight a road can take), type of vehicles used for delivering and a ton of other factors.

A very good source is a 3 hour vid on YT on the Airbus' biggest plane (it escapes me right now). Check out what it means to "deliver".

India is at least a decade behind if not more. And, no one in France or Russia can help. Only Indians. Make it India.

The video is on Netflix I think.
The challenge is to develop our aviation industry and local supply chain to allows us to maintain a technological edge / parity with PLAAF. If you have a better/faster way to help us catch up / develop technologies which will benefit Indian aviation as a whole, you are welcome to make it.

[brar_w]

Rafale and EF were the only fighters to score kills against Raptors. Both HUD and SPECTRA are state of art. By general consensus Western>Russian>Chinese in the tech department. I would consider a 4.5 gen western aircraft very much equal to a Chinese 5th gen

Not correct. Super Hornets have on a few occasions gotten gun kills on the F-22. Rhino Pilots have released some pictures as well, and they are on the internet for all to see. I have posted them once before on this thread but months ago. I believe F-15C's have also scored kills on the F-22 in WVR. All the kills by the Rhino, Typhoon, Rafale and the Eagles were in WVR where one does not need an Electronic Warfare Suite. In WVR a lot depends upon tactics, weapons, HMD's and what scenarios and assumptions one is working on. Needless to say, if a Super Hornet or any other non-stealthy fighter was to merge with the F-22 in an engagement starting form BVR there would be a strain on the Fuel state given how much kinematic freedom the Raptor would enjoy due to it having a very low RCS and a passive suite whereby it can practice EMCON. The others would not have this opportunity. This is one of the main reasons that stealth in fighters by its mere presence with the opponent, forces you to have it as well.

[Viv S]

No we don't ... several components of both are still imported. Both are fully assembled in India.

And we'll be importing components for the Rafale as well. In fact, the first few dozen Rafales delivered by will be mere assemblies of SKDs and CKDs.

- HAL is producing more Sukhois annually, than Dassault is producing Rafales. We've already got a fairly decent manufacturing base.

Numbers are dependent on need and not capability.

Doesn't change the fact that our manufacturing capability is quite decent.

Agreed, but that was not my point. Improving our aviation industry was not a major objective of Sukhoi deal (at least not mentioned publicly). It is one of the major intents of Rafale deal.

Ascribing it a motive, does not translate into revolutionary changes on ground.

Rafale and EF were the only fighters to score kills against Raptors. Both HUD and SPECTRA are state of art. By general consensus Western>Russian>Chinese in the tech department. I would consider a 4.5 gen western aircraft very much equal to a Chinese 5th gen.

Who says Rafale and EF are only fighters to score 'kills'? Look around, you'll find F-16s, SHs and F-15Cs with F-22 kill markings (and you might want to also look up what the kill ratio for exercises involving the F-22 was).

The Rafale and EF results you've read about were all registered in carefully scripted WVR setups created to enhance 'cooperation' and 'friendly relations'. When real world conditions have been imposed, the F-22 has been utterly dominant, with nothing else coming close. Western 4.5 gen aircraft all trace their roots back to the 80s and feature no significant LO capability, which the baseline J-20 and J-31 bring to the table.

BTW the F-35, EF and Gripen E all have the HUD projected onto their HMDs. Despite its lovely colour display, the Rafale's HUD still stands at a disadvantage vis a vis its contemporaries.

Improvement of our aviation industry and supply chain w.r.t western tech standards will benefit all aircraft period.

We can improve our aviation industry and supply chain without paying through our nose for spoon-feeding by the French.

You are missing my point. I am talking about improvement of industry here to a point where we don't need to go outside for future anything.

Regardless of how much learning Dassault bestows on Reliance, we'll still have to import a 5th fighter. The Rafale won't cut mustard against what's flying in 2025.

No they haven't. All PLAAF and PLAN aircraft are essentially Russian copies. They have zero original design, engines or weapons. There is no substitute for experiences gained from scratch development. LCA has benefited Indian industry more than the Sukhoi knockoffs will benefit Chinese.

Its the J-10 not the J-11 that is the cornerstone of its fighter aviation development effort. And allegations of Lavi tech aside, its not a clone of any Sukhoi aircraft. Nor are the J-20 & J-31. More importantly, the aircraft's avionics were developed indigenously and they've spent a decade refining them over several variants of their aircraft.

Point being, they've achieved critical mass across the spectrum of fighter technologies with the exception of the propulsion. The engines are the only significant component imported from Russia, the rest is produced completely in-house. Just iterative development for the same will take them past the Russians, given their funding and larger private industry.

Economic success does not guarantee technological development else Apple devices would be 100% manufactured in China today.

Xiaomi, Huawei, Lenovo and Haier probably don't limit their manufacturing to China either.

The only way Rafale will be outdated by 2025 is if the PLAAF birds are equivalent to F35. If they are not then Rafale is not outdated. It can't be argued both ways.

The Rafale isn't going to be outdated by 2025 anymore than the Mirage 2000 is today. The issue is it doesn't bring the technological edge over the opposition that an aircraft its price should bring. And in an situation where the opponent can outspend you 4-to-1, that is a recipe for failure.

Rafale is a benchmark for best 4.5 gen and F-35 is a benchmark for 5th gen. if J31 and J20 are not as good as F-35 then a proven 4.5 gen is a good match.
They may be designed to be LO but there is no proof that their design parameters have actually been achieved.

The Rafale may have a great EW system, great flight performance and a good MMI, but it also has a mediocre radar, no HMDS (a simple one may be installed for export units), and its IRST has been omitted for performance issues in the most recent iteration. So lets go easy on the 'benchmark' characterization.

And it doesn't matter if the F-4 was the benchmark for 3.5 gen fighters, the J-10 will still be a better aircraft because it was designed from ground up for a different level of performance.

The J-31 may not have achieve the level of LO capability that their aiming, but it'll still be far more than the near zero LO capability that the Rafale brings to the table.

This statement is a classic example of overrating the Chinese
J31 had its maiden test flight in 2012 and F35 in 2006. It took US 12 years to go from test flight - LRIP - Full production. Yet you expect PLAAF to achieve the same in lesser time, with copied tech, engine problems and possessing no genuine 4th gen design (all copies)
Between them the J20 and J31 barely have a few 100 hours of testing. The F35 underwent 1000s of flights and hours of testing before induction.

1. The X-35 first flew in 2000. The F-35 went into series production seven years later in 2007.
2. Fifteen years ago, China was still manufacturing evolved MiG-21s and J-8s. Today, they're developing the third iteration of the J-10 fighter and have flown multiple prototypes of 5th gen aircraft.

So yes, I think they can comfortably put their designs into production by 2020. They may or may not declare an IOC before an update (you may want to check up how capable the Rafale F1 was at IOC).

If they do build them in 100s so fast, then they will be considerably inferior to F-35 and we should have nothing to worry about.

Correction, F-35 operators may have nothing to worry about, but they're worrying anyway.

The point was that we had a desi AESA radar ready by the time KJ3000 was. So we are not behind them in radar aspect. It stands

The KJ-3000 has just started induction. If you're referring to the KJ-2000, then you're mistaken, we didn't have a desi airborne AESA radar ready in the same time-frame. If you're referring to ground-based AESAs then to be fair, you better compare them with ground-based Chinese AESAs (looking into their SAM systems), rather than with their AEW&C systems.

Aviation tech efficiency cannot be reasoned to how we manage fuels in our cars. My entire post is about the usefulness of absorbing Rafale technology in long run.

We've been absorbing ToT for 50 years. There's nothing about the Rafale deal that's going to bring that cycle to an end. What core competencies we've created today are products of investments in domestic projects not in licensed production. And any future the domestic industry is to have will be created only by a national effort behind it, not by a cheque written out to Dassault and filtered through Reliance & Co.

The cost is $20bn is across 10 years, which is not very high for our airforce budget. Is there any government or IAF source claiming that Rafale is too costly?

TBH I have seen that only posters here go ballistic about it

We can scrounge around and manage $30bn too if we had to. Does that mean we should go through with the purchase if the new number now emerges as $30bn?

(E.g. Vikramditya deal has well documented details of cost unhappiness from Navy and Govt. Yet to see anything coming even close to that for Rafale)
The main haggling point with Rafale is extent of technology transfer. Money does not seem to be an issue from IAF or Govt point of view, yet it dominates all discussions here

What do you suggest this was about -

MoD mulls downsizing Rafale contract

Struggling to pay the heavy cost of the deal, the ministry of defence (MoD) is considering an option of down-sizing the deal from 126 to 80 fighter jets.

According to officials, who are privy to the development, defence ministry has asked the French government to revise the price structure because the deal has gone much beyond the expected lines. And during course of negotiations with the Dassault, which manufactures Rafale jets, the defence ministry has been asking for price revision. Due to difference of opinion, the cost negotiation committee, which was set up in February 2012 to work out the modalities for the deal, has not been able reach conclusion and the committee is yet to submit its report to the ministry.

The deal has far exceeded the officially sanctioned budget of $12bn, which means for any new approval the file must go back for approval to the MoF.
They've simply put the resolution in cold storage but as the negotiations proceeds there will likely be more pushes-and-pulls to come.

[member_28722]

OSF and PIRATE both have ability to track targets 50km out. That's hardly WVR.

[brar_w]

OSF and PIRATE both have ability to track targets 50km out. That's hardly WVR.

The foreign engagements have all focused on WVR engagements, not starting out far apart and entering at each's advantage as they would say. The raptor's WVR losses to a to of fighters (not all) have been attributed to its lack of HMD and HOBS missile, which it really should have given that it has the TVC and high AOA capability to really utilize such capability. That has continuously been pushed out into the future because that money is spent better elsewhere. Outside of the Euro-birds, the Raptor pilots have openly talked about gun kills on them by F-15 Pilots. If you followed DOZER, on fence check before he got reprimanded by the USAF for talking about stuff that he should have avoided (he broke no law as far as I know) he mentioned this as well. Moreover, he also mentioned that they began a change in the training routine with F-15's and F-18E/F's whereby they did not bother with BVR without having at least some F-22s on the RED side because such lopsided engagements really provided no "training" to either side.

[NRao]

You are missing my point.

You are not getting my argument

Nope. I get them both.

I am disagreeing.

The Rafale will get India only so much. What it will afford India is a better rafale - if India does chose do so. But, it will not help in the design for sure. It iwll help partially in supply chain. Manufacturing is perhaps where it will help the most, but even there I think there are better technologies than what France has on the table.

Out-of-the-box: Why is India not relying on the umpteen NRIs in manufacturing? Just wondering. There are tons in automation, robotics, etc - we have NRI experts in robotics (for IoT) by the dozens in our company alone. There have got to be a huge number to pull from.

[VijayN]

Hmm, very interesting piece of news

https://ca.news.yahoo.com/boeing-says-f ... ector.html

Canada said in September it would extend the life of its fighters to 2025 from the previous 2020 end-date. That could be bad news for Boeing, which is seeking orders to keep its F/A-18 production line running past 2017.

(Am getting my popcorn)

[brar_w]

The rafale has virtually zero chance in Canada, its between Boeing and Lockheed, and it is highly likely that Boeing will loose out.

[VijayN]

^ I posted this article for the benefit of some of the folks who perhaps still see FA/18 having a chance at the MMRCA (Not withstanding, the deal is almost close to done).

Boeing does not seem to have further orders on hand beyond 2017, what happened to the Super Hornet idea and the US Marine fielding additional fighters? Looks like end of the road here.

[brar_w]

The US Marines have a firmly established accusation program for the F-35B coupled with other extension programs for their classic hornets. I do not think boeing is investing in the Super Hornet for India. I fully expect the Analysis of Altnerative for the FA-XX fighter that is going to begin within the US Navy in Q1 of next year to recommend buying more EA-18G's thereby de-risking development. The Line will produce more growlers but I seriously doubt there would be any more international sales unless someone in the ME orders some.

[Austin]

More on Rafale via AFM

SERPENTEX 2014

http://imageshack.com/a/img538/3875/7TWhzW.jpg
http://imagizer.imageshack.us/a/img674/3264/pXKmTI.jpg
http://imagizer.imageshack.us/a/img674/4656/76YbPV.jpg
http://imageshack.com/a/img673/4775/LLDbpf.jpg

[SaiK]

My thinking is that the Rafale will come, but at a reduced cost.
I do not think this gov will leave the IAF hanging and rightly so.
Let us see.

Cost reduction by numbers.. I think Rafale needs to be reminded that they can't chew a customer. The customer is free to move another friendly supplier or build all by himself., or worst case change requirements totally!

Neither France nor IAF can justify the cost of Rafale.

[Paul]

Sent a series of tweets to Modiji and PMOIndia asking him to cancel the Rafale and invest in Tejas, Cruise missiles (take off the A2G burden off the IAF) and improve serviceability of SU30s. Suggest other BRFites do the same.

These messages will surely find their way to him.

[member_24684]

Sent a series of tweets to Modiji and PMOIndia asking him to cancel the Rafale and invest in Tejas, Cruise missiles (take off the A2G burden off the IAF) and improve serviceability of SU30s. Suggest other BRFites do the same.

These messages will surely find their way to him.

Sir that's more than 160 words ..but you can do this

Bring the Rafale ASAP @narendramodi @pmoindia

[shiv]

I'm not sure why this discussion is even happening. The Rafales are going to come. Let's talk about something different.

[member_20317]

The customer is free to move another friendly supplier

Taking 10 more years of tests...................and why not?

or build all by himself.,

By now even our enemies are tired of the threat.

or worst case change requirements totally!

Then why did they waste the past 10 years testing something they did not really need. Or do you imply that it was merely a desire without being a need.

[SaiK]

having lost 10 or x years does not mean invest in something really without applying logic.

i think, our past experiences and mistakes must be corrected for future, and take a 1-2 year max purchase cycle to delivery of products and services to defence preparedness. you are not only exposing that you were weak for the past 10 years, but also pointing that 10 years of no such use meaning, the requirments were vague.

if the requirements failed us, why not revisit it?

[member_26622]

Requirements were set before China started flying their stealth aircrafts - leap frogging the typical US>Russia>China sequence. This MMRCA should have been called off eons ago - it's persistence blatantly shows that Rafale has promised a lot of people a lot of commission $$$.

Requirements are like dinosaurs - what's needed is continuously upgradable platforms in today's age aka agile development. Try doing that with French payrate which even they themselves cannot afford

[member_28722]

And we'll be importing components for the Rafale as well. In fact, the first few dozen Rafales delivered by will be mere assemblies of SKDs and CKDs.

The first 18 yes, you are assuming for the rest. We didn't even do that 14 years ago and our industry has improved with Su30MKI experience.

Doesn't change the fact that our manufacturing capability is quite decent.

Of course it is, but decent cannot maintain edge with PLAAF. World class western tech impetus will allow it to.

Ascribing it a motive, does not translate into revolutionary changes on ground.

Perpetually focusing on negatives of a deal does not remove its overwhelming positives.

Who says Rafale and EF are only fighters to score 'kills'? Look around, you'll find F-16s, SHs and F-15Cs with F-22 kill markings (and you might want to also look up what the kill ratio for exercises involving the F-22 was).

The point being that Rafale/EF (multirole) were able to score kills against F22 air superiority, puts good odds for them against J31 (a watered down F35 which is a watered down F22)

We can improve our aviation industry and supply chain without paying through our nose for spoon-feeding by the French.

Only with Russian tech, which has its limits. If you want world class western standard 4.5 gen, then French are the only option.

Regardless of how much learning Dassault bestows on Reliance, we'll still have to import a 5th fighter. The Rafale won't cut mustard against what's flying in 2025.

Flying in USAF yes. It will do overwhelm what's flying in PAF and also retain edge against majority of what will fly in PLAAF.

Its the J-10 not the J-11 that is the cornerstone of its fighter aviation development effort. And allegations of Lavi tech aside, its not a clone of any Sukhoi aircraft. Nor are the J-20 & J-31. More importantly, the aircraft's avionics were developed indigenously and they've spent a decade refining them over several variants of their aircraft.

Cornerstone? There are more J11 variants than J10s even though the later has been in production for a decade. Agains even after 10 years there are no indications of a carrier variant of J10 even though its smaller and more suited for carrier operation, instead that role goes to the bigger J15.

Point being, they've achieved critical mass across the spectrum of fighter technologies with the exception of the propulsion. The engines are the only significant component imported from Russia, the rest is produced completely in-house. Just iterative development for the same will take them past the Russians, given their funding and larger private industry.

If only all this was really so simple as writing it. They took 10 years to go from J10 to J10B and yet will take only 6 to go from J31 to production.

Xiaomi, Huawei, Lenovo and Haier probably don't limit their manufacturing to China either.

And their capabilities are also very less compared to an IPhone in a well connected environment.

The Rafale isn't going to be outdated by 2025 anymore than the Mirage 2000 is today. The issue is it doesn't bring the technological edge over the opposition that an aircraft its price should bring. And in an situation where the opponent can outspend you 4-to-1, that is a recipe for failure.

ToT costs, western tech costs. Try exploring how much it would cost us to get ToT for JSF from Americans.
$20bil is lifecycle cost, not purchase cost. Its probably equal to what we would spend if Su30MKI was brought in similar deal.

The Rafale may have a great EW system, great flight performance and a good MMI, but it also has a mediocre radar, no HMDS (a simple one may be installed for export units), and its IRST has been omitted for performance issues in the most recent iteration. So lets go easy on the 'benchmark' characterization.

We will get Rafale with AESA and the post 2012 fixed OSF. Don't see any problems with both.

And it doesn't matter if the F-4 was the benchmark for 3.5 gen fighters, the J-10 will still be a better aircraft because it was designed from ground up for a different level of performance.

You are comparing jets built almost 50 years apart and different generations.

The J-31 may not have achieve the level of LO capability that their aiming, but it'll still be far more than the near zero LO capability that the Rafale brings to the table.

Rafale is not being taken as a J31 counter, we have FGFA for that. if you want to compare Rafale compare it with J10/J11 etc...

1. The X-35 first flew in 2000. The F-35 went into series production seven years later in 2007.
2. Fifteen years ago, China was still manufacturing evolved MiG-21s and J-8s. Today, they're developing the third iteration of the J-10 fighter and have flown multiple prototypes of 5th gen aircraft.

Incorrect
https://www.f35.com/about/history

In December of 2006, the F-35 completed its first flight. Over the next few years, flight and ground test articles of all three variants rolled off the production line and began collecting test points. The first production F-35 conducted its first flight in February of 2011 with deliveries of the aircraft beginning that very same year

I was actually placing J31 at F35 2006 level. If you are placing J31 2012 at X-35 level, then its even worse. You expect SAC to achieve in 6/8 years what took LM 18. Check the Procurement table in F35 wiki article. The F35 is expected to hit 100s production in 2018 only.
Please, enough of the blatant overrating.

Correction, F-35 operators may have nothing to worry about, but they're worrying anyway.

Comments from actual pilots
http://news.usni.org/2014/11/05/u-s-pil ... -f-22-f-35
Eventually J31 will probably be will be where F35 is today. But that eventuality will not happen before 2025.

The KJ-3000 has just started induction. If you're referring to the KJ-2000, then you're mistaken, we didn't have a desi airborne AESA radar ready in the same time-frame. If you're referring to ground-based AESAs then to be fair, you better compare them with ground-based Chinese AESAs (looking into their SAM systems), rather than with their AEW&C systems.

You missed my point. Please read my posts again.

We've been absorbing ToT for 50 years. There's nothing about the Rafale deal that's going to bring that cycle to an end. What core competencies we've created today are products of investments in domestic projects not in licensed production. And any future the domestic industry is to have will be created only by a national effort behind it, not by a cheque written out to Dassault and filtered through Reliance & Co.

It is because of lack of core competencies that we need to write the cheques. Also post Su30 deal we have developed several local capabilities, so its already taking a different direction. Rafale will allow us to do more and even better.

We can scrounge around and manage $30bn too if we had to. Does that mean we should go through with the purchase if the new number now emerges as $30bn?

What do you suggest this was about -

MoD mulls downsizing Rafale contract

Struggling to pay the heavy cost of the deal, the ministry of defence (MoD) is considering an option of down-sizing the deal from 126 to 80 fighter jets.

According to officials, who are privy to the development, defence ministry has asked the French government to revise the price structure because the deal has gone much beyond the expected lines. And during course of negotiations with the Dassault, which manufactures Rafale jets, the defence ministry has been asking for price revision. Due to difference of opinion, the cost negotiation committee, which was set up in February 2012 to work out the modalities for the deal, has not been able reach conclusion and the committee is yet to submit its report to the ministry.

The deal has far exceeded the officially sanctioned budget of $12bn, which means for any new approval the file must go back for approval to the MoF.
They've simply put the resolution in cold storage but as the negotiations proceeds there will likely be more pushes-and-pulls to come.

And yet inspite of all your points and doom-gloom scenarios, people far more sensible than you and me selected the Rafale as best choice and are going forward with purchasing it.

[VijayN]

I'm not sure why this discussion is even happening. The Rafales are going to come. Let's talk about something different.

+100. We should be talking about how the french birds are going to be accommodated in the IAF harem, and everything else about them. I am happy to throw in a few bottles of french wine to keep us motivated (Bought OTS by the way )

[Viv S]

The first 18 yes, you are assuming for the rest. We didn't even do that 14 years ago and our industry has improved with Su30MKI experience.

Of course we did that 14 years ago. I'm not assuming anything. That's how licensed production has always proceeded.

Of course it is, but decent cannot maintain edge with PLAAF. World class western tech impetus will allow it to.

Perpetually focusing on negatives of a deal does not remove its overwhelming positives.

The Rafale started being delivered 14 years ago. By the time the IAF takes deliveries, it will have been in service for 18 years. Its futile to expect to be cutting edge. And the PLAAF, as has been posted before will be delivering J-10Cs from 2016 at a rate of 30 aircraft annually (not include J-16s), so that's a worthy indicator of what sort production rate can be expected from the J-20 & J-31.

Who says Rafale and EF are only fighters to score 'kills'? Look around, you'll find F-16s, SHs and F-15Cs with F-22 kill markings (and you might want to also look up what the kill ratio for exercises involving the F-22 was).

The point being that Rafale/EF (multirole) were able to score kills against F22 air superiority, puts good odds for them against J31 (a watered down F35 which is a watered down F22)

That point has no significance at all. The Rafale didn't score anything against the F-22 in an air superiority contest. Most setups were guns-only WVR designed to give them a fighting chance and by no means representative of actual combat conditions. As to the others -

Aviateurs Si les français sont largement is étalés sur les "Toles" rafale aux mises par leurs Typhoon britanniques lors du dernier exercice ATLC aux UAE, peu de choses ont dites sur la confrontation between Dassault delta le et les américains F22A Presents été sur place. Lors des hors engagements of visuelle portée, Raptor les américains n'ont même pas leurs Daigne allumer radars, invisibles restant au au Spectra RBE2 et des tout en Rafale localisant précision avec les émissions électromagnétiques français du chasseur, sécurisant ainsi d'leurs tirs Amraam the distance de sécurité. The au moins deux reprises, if sont aussi les F22A "enroulés" avec les en Rafale combat rapproché, chaque fois un Assurant to "gun kill" sans big difficulté ". - Air & Cosmos

<translation>If the French airmen were widely discussed on their confrontations with the British Typhoons last year, little has been said about the UAE ATLC exercise, where the Dassault delta confronted the American F22A. When engaging beyond visual range, the US Raptors did not even deign to turn on their turn radars, remaining invisible to RBE2 and Spectra of the Rafale, while pinpointing the electromagnetic emissions of the French fighter, thus securing their fire solution for the AMRAAM securely. Twice at least, the F22A also "rolled" with the Rafale in close combat, each time securing a 'gun kill' without much difficulty.</translation>

Only with Russian tech, which has its limits. If you want world class western standard 4.5 gen, then French are the only option.

Only if you want to buy 4.5 gen aircraft (by definition no longer world class) at 5 gen prices.

Flying in USAF yes. It will do overwhelm what's flying in PAF and also retain edge against majority of what will fly in PLAAF.

The PLAAF will have at least as many J-20s and J-31s as we have Rafales. And the aircraft that the Rafale has an edge against i.e. J-10 will far far outnumber it.

Cornerstone? There are more J11 variants than J10s even though the later has been in production for a decade. Agains even after 10 years there are no indications of a carrier variant of J10 even though its smaller and more suited for carrier operation, instead that role goes to the bigger J15.

The J-11 evolved from a license production contract for the Su-30, so yes the J-10 and not the J-11 is the cornerstone of the Chinese aviation industry. It doesn't matter if its been 10 years, the J-10 was never intended to be employed as a carrier aircraft anymore than the F-16 was.

If only all this was really so simple as writing it. They took 10 years to go from J10 to J10B and yet will take only 6 to go from J31 to production.

The J-10 went into production just five years after the first flight of the prototype. So yes, the J-31 can comfortably be put in production by 2020. The J-31B in turn might not come before 2025.

Xiaomi, Huawei, Lenovo and Haier probably don't limit their manufacturing to China either.

And their capabilities are also very less compared to an IPhone in a well connected environment.

Far more capable, dollar for dollar.

ToT costs, western tech costs. Try exploring how much it would cost us to get ToT for JSF from Americans.
$20bil is lifecycle cost, not purchase cost. Its probably equal to what we would spend if Su30MKI was brought in similar deal.

- The ToT is not shortcut to developing domestic capabilities as our long storied history with it proves. The same capital (we're paying extra for ToT) invested directly in the domestic industry would yield far far better results.
- $20 bil is the acquisition cost NOT the life-cycle cost. Nor does it include munitions. The actual life-cycle cost over 40 years will be in excess of $50bn (assuming an operating cost of $20K/hr and a modest $75M/unit MLU).

We will get Rafale with AESA and the post 2012 fixed OSF. Don't see any problems with both.

The performance with an AESA is mediocre. The PESA on the other has range comparable to the Tejas Mk1's MMR. And the latest Rafale F3's OSF does not have an IR channel, nor is an OSF upgrade planned for the F3R.

And it doesn't matter if the F-4 was the benchmark for 3.5 gen fighters, the J-10 will still be a better aircraft because it was designed from ground up for a different level of performance.

You are comparing jets built almost 50 years apart and different generations.

The last F-4E was delivered in 1981. And its separated by 20 years from the J-10 only because the Chinese industry was a late starter. And yes they belong to different generations, that's the point. They're designed to deliver different levels of capability.

Rafale is not being taken as a J31 counter, we have FGFA for that. if you want to compare Rafale compare it with J10/J11 etc...

Which would have made sense if the Rafale deliveries had begun in 2010. As things stand, the bulk of the MMRCA order is to be delivered between 2020 and 2025 by when the J-10 will likely have been withdrawn from production and replaced by the J-20 and J-31.

That said, the J-10B & J-16 cost less than half as much as the Rafale and the Chinese have a defence budget that's more than three times larger than ours. So if you were to go ahead and compare it against five or six J-10/11/16s, its not likely to come off well.

I was actually placing J31 at F35 2006 level. If you are placing J31 2012 at X-35 level, then its even worse. You expect SAC to achieve in 6/8 years what took LM 18. Check the Procurement table in F35 wiki article. The F35 is expected to hit 100s production in 2018 only.
Please, enough of the blatant overrating.

The F-35 went into production seven years after the first flight of the prototype. And their hitting the 100+ production in 2018, because that is how the US procurement is structured. The production line itself doesn't not have any such limitation. If they wanted to they could have hit that figure in 2012 itself, albeit with compromises in cost efficiency.

Eventually J31 will probably be will be where F35 is today. But that eventuality will not happen before 2025.

No its not likely to be at F-35 levels even in 2025. But in an air to air role, even the early variants will outmatch the Rafale, which in turn will be in production 2018-2026.

You missed my point. Please read my posts again.

I've read your points. "Your statement - It was only in 2013 that PRC developed a fully local AESA radar" is factually incorrect as ground, ship and air based AESAs were in production long before that.

It is because of lack of core competencies that we need to write the cheques. Also post Su30 deal we have developed several local capabilities, so its already taking a different direction. Rafale will allow us to do more and even better.

What capabilities we've developed have been primarily because of the Tejas and domestic upgrade programs, not because of any ToT we've purchased.

And yet inspite of all your points and doom-gloom scenarios, people far more sensible than you and me selected the Rafale as best choice and are going forward with purchasing it.

It may be staffed by sensible people but the services and MoD are both organisations that operate in a bureaucratic manner. The first RFI for the MMRCA was issued in 2001 and then reissued in 2004. Its now 2014 and the aircraft will arrive no earlier than 2018. Unless you're suggesting that all is going as per plan, its clear that the system isn't infallible (even if bureaucratic inertia finally handicaps us with the Rafale).

[brar_w]

The F-35 went into production seven years after the first flight of the prototype. And their hitting the 100+ production in 2018, because that is how the US procurement is structured. The production line itself doesn't not have any such limitation. If they wanted to they could have hit that figure in 2012 itself, albeit with compromises in cost efficiency.

There is no reason why the target full rate of production could not have been hit just after a few LRIP blocks were delivered. The reason the 100+ production rate is going to have to wait is because LEGALLY speaking neither of the three services can place a full rate of production order until the relevent milestones have been met through testing. You need to meet a specific milestone in system maturity and testing before you can kick of LRIP (Lincenced production) similarly you need to demonstrate and have a certificate of maturity by hitting the next milestone before you can start ordering large scale aircraft @ the desired full rate of production.

This is the reason why the JPO is going ahead and making provisions in its rules that allow International customers to go ahead and enter into Multi_Year deals with Lockheed through the JPO. Earlier everyone was going to wait till the USAF, USMC and the USN did this since these three services cannot do it until the jet has been given clear certification to enter FSP. They have now realized that most international customers do not have such laws in their countries so they are going to go ahead and allow them to enter into multi-year contracts to enjoy the benefits of EOS. So in a nutshell, the large scale production of the F-35 (as if reletive to pretty much every other program the F-35's production even at LRIP isn't large enough ) is limited by testing not by their ability to crank up the production process.

[member_26622]

I like how IAF AND IMPORT BABUS HERE SAY THAT 'TOT' WILL ENABLE INDIA BUILD NEXT GEN AIRCRAFT >> RAFALE IS NEEDED blah blah blah

If this is anywhere close to True, then the Indian plane better not be built by HAL, given the way IAF and HAL relations are standing today. It just symbolizes why we were enslaved for 1000 years, we prefer foreign head (plane) over Indian head (plane).

Of course IAF knows so much about manufacturing planes now that they can confidently come to this conclusion is really amazing. All the TOT behind MIG's, SU-30 MKI, Jaguar BUILT BY HAL did absolutely zero compared to home grown Tejas. But In India, we trust the blind to lead the way anyways

Of course - we have plenty of money to spend 20~50 billion on Rafale wine. Our largest trading partners and source of foreign income is Russia and France correct? No? Without US opening up for out-sourcing, we would have been guess so much better off.

[Indranil]

Reissuing fatwa against F-35 discussion on this thread. At most, discussion on the MMRCA contenders will be entertained.

[member_28722]

I am going to merge some of your comments before replying as we are saying the same thing two three times in same post

Of course we did that 14 years ago. I'm not assuming anything. That's how licensed production has always proceeded.

We got 50 of an order of 300, does not mean we will also get 50 out of 126. Its basic maths

That point has no significance at all. The Rafale didn't score anything against the F-22 in an air superiority contest. Most setups were guns-only WVR designed to give them a fighting chance and by no means representative of actual combat conditions. As to the others -

We are getting diverted into F22 vs Rafale discussion
The point was that you constantly bring up J31 vs Rafale. F22 can do what it can do because of years of software research which has gone into the program.
The French have also invested similarly in Rafale
The Chinese have not invested so much in anything except J10. Yes eventually the J31/J20 will be a major threat for us, but definitely not before 2030.

Only if you want to buy 4.5 gen aircraft (by definition no longer world class) at 5 gen prices.

And how many 5th gen are actually operational. Only 1. Majority of air forces have 4 or 4.5 so, yes both are very much still world class. Price is not the point, technology is.

The J-11 evolved from a license production contract for the Su-30, so yes the J-10 and not the J-11 is the cornerstone of the Chinese aviation industry. It doesn't matter if its been 10 years, the J-10 was never intended to be employed as a carrier aircraft anymore than the F-16 was.

The J-10 went into production just five years after the first flight of the prototype.

Actually I was comparing their cornerstones to other similar current cornerstones.
India -- Tejas
French -- Rafale
Russia - Flanker
Swedes -- Gripen
All 4th gens have introduced a carrier capable variant within a decade of the airforce variant and some started out as carrier capable from intent. It is surprising to see PRC not even planning to have a carrier capable 'cornerstone' project, more than a decade after the first J10 rolled out. And this too after the Israelis did the design work for them .

Far more capable, dollar for dollar.

Sorry for the bluntness, but what are you smoking? Please don't compare in India because we have no infrastructure to utilize the abilities of Apple devices (For that matter Galaxy series also). I personally like Galaxy more than Apple but credit is where its due

- The ToT is not shortcut to developing domestic capabilities as our long storied history with it proves. The same capital (we're paying extra for ToT) invested directly in the domestic industry would yield far far better results.
- $20 bil is the acquisition cost NOT the life-cycle cost. Nor does it include munitions. The actual life-cycle cost over 40 years will be in excess of $50bn (assuming an operating cost of $20K/hr and a modest $75M/unit MLU).

Why to assume 20K per hour when Gripen is 3k/hr? There won't be 6 time jump between them. Western aircraft are also more effecient. The rupee has devalued by almost 50% since 2000, so what was worth $10 bil during planning will be $15bil today anyhow & $15 bil is also the figure quoted in some recent article. You can google it.

The performance with an AESA is mediocre. The PESA on the other has range comparable to the Tejas Mk1's MMR. And the latest Rafale F3's OSF does not have an IR channel, nor is an OSF upgrade planned for the F3R.

Reliable source for both please ... A 200km aesa radar is hardly mediocre; and we have project Uttam for the local Rafale if we need to.

The last F-4E was delivered in 1981. And its separated by 20 years from the J-10 only because the Chinese industry was a late starter. And yes they belong to different generations, that's the point. They're designed to deliver different levels of capability.
Which would have made sense if the Rafale deliveries had begun in 2010. As things stand, the bulk of the MMRCA order is to be delivered between 2020 and 2025 by when the J-10 will likely have been withdrawn from production and replaced by the J-20 and J-31.

Its baseless to compare last F-4 with first J10. And you cannot compare their capabilities, just as you can't compare Rafale and J31. Its pointless.
You are constantly assuming PRC industry and plans to go like clockwork while ours flounders in shambles.

The Rafale started being delivered 14 years ago. By the time the IAF takes deliveries, it will have been in service for 18 years. Its futile to expect to be cutting edge. And the PLAAF, as has been posted before will be delivering J-10Cs from 2016 at a rate of 30 aircraft annually (not include J-16s), so that's a worthy indicator of what sort production rate can be expected from the J-20 & J-31.

The PLAAF will have at least as many J-20s and J-31s as we have Rafales. And the aircraft that the Rafale has an edge against i.e. J-10 will far far outnumber it.

That said, the J-10B & J-16 cost less than half as much as the Rafale and the Chinese have a defence budget that's more than three times larger than ours. So if you were to go ahead and compare it against five or six J-10/11/16s, its not likely to come off well.

So yes, the J-31 can comfortably be put in production by 2020. The J-31B in turn might not come before 2025.

The F-35 went into production seven years after the first flight of the prototype. And their hitting the 100+ production in 2018, because that is how the US procurement is structured. The production line itself doesn't not have any such limitation. If they wanted to they could have hit that figure in 2012 itself, albeit with compromises in cost efficiency.

No its not likely to be at F-35 levels even in 2025. But in an air to air role, even the early variants will outmatch the Rafale, which in turn will be in production 2018-2026.

1. We cannot compare numbers with China, their requirement is ~2000, ours is 840.
2. The USAF will have more 5th gen compared to Chinese. But will PLAAF numbers be enough to deter a US air invasion. Yes. Same applies to IAF vis-a-vis PLAAF.
3. I don't doubt their production rates. I don't rate a substandard/almost 5th gen very highly compared to a mature 4.5 gen and the J31 in 2018 will be a very substandard version. SAC quality is not rated highly even on Chinese forums.
4. J20 is still prototype only. Its not even flown for 100s of hours. Too early to talk about mass production.
5. Flying an aircraft in Shenyang and airshows is different from the harsh operations on the 4500 mtr high Tibet Plateau. You are assuming that the 2018-J31 will be deployed in Tibet. Won't happen.

I've read your points. "Your statement - It was only in 2013 that PRC developed a fully local AESA radar" is factually incorrect as ground, ship and air based AESAs were in production long before that.

I had mention the platforms in same or another post and since we are on airpower topic, aerial radar was implied. Regardless, I meant aerial radar and we deployed CABS right after the EJ3000. The point stands.

What capabilities we've developed have been primarily because of the Tejas and domestic upgrade programs, not because of any ToT we've purchased.

Incorrect. The local manufacturing of Sukhoi parts is well documented. Its a good learning experience. It shows as we are giving design inputs to FGFA.

It may be staffed by sensible people but the services and MoD are both organisations that operate in a bureaucratic manner. The first RFI for the MMRCA was issued in 2001 and then reissued in 2004. Its now 2014 and the aircraft will arrive no earlier than 2018. Unless you're suggesting that all is going as per plan, its clear that the system isn't infallible (even if bureaucratic inertia finally handicaps us with the Rafale).

I would agree if UPA was still in power, but since the current government has not scrapped the deal (and yes they have scrapped a few arms deals) and going ahead with it, this argument doesn't hold weight.

[brar_w]

Actually I was comparing their cornerstones to other similar current cornerstones.
India -- Tejas
French -- Rafale
Russia - Flanker
Swedes -- Gripen
All 4th gens have introduced a carrier capable variant within a decade of the airforce variant and some started out as carrier capable from intent. It is surprising to see PRC not even planning to have a carrier capable 'cornerstone' project, more than a decade after the first J10 rolled out. And this too after the Israelis did the design work for them

Many reasons could exist. It could be that their carrier roadmap is quite slow which would be one logical explanation. Carrier aviation and running and operating blue water carriers is a tough business. IN has been doing this for a while, its really tough to do something especially when you have to learn everything. Their internal timelines for the 2nd or 3rd carrier could be so far off into the future that they may see no real reason to develop another carrier aircraft and simply move over to the J31 for the future.

http://www.wantchinatimes.com/news-subc ... 0&cid=1101

http://www.wired.com/2013/03/stealth-china-carrier/

[Viv S]

We got 50 of an order of 300, does not mean we will also get 50 out of 126. Its basic maths

Please revise your figures. Our contract was for license assembly of 140 aircraft (augmented by a later order of 40 more). Of those almost half (Phase I-III) have been built from SKD and CKD kits. It wasn't until Phase IV that the production was indigenized. Even assuming a more aggressive effort for the Rafale, at least a third of the 108 aircraft we're manufacturing will be kit-built. Tejas Mk2 production will be in full swing well before the Rafale's indigenous production begins.

We are getting diverted into F22 vs Rafale discussion
The point was that you constantly bring up J31 vs Rafale. F22 can do what it can do because of years of software research which has gone into the program.
The French have also invested similarly in Rafale
The Chinese have not invested so much in anything except J10. Yes eventually the J31/J20 will be a major threat for us, but definitely not before 2030.

The F-22 can do what it can do primarily because its fields a VLO airframe. And while the Chinese will progressively upgrade their J-31s with newer avionics, no amount of French investment in the Rafale will alleviate its lack of low observability.

Only if you want to buy 4.5 gen aircraft (by definition no longer world class) at 5 gen prices.

And how many 5th gen are actually operational. Only 1. Majority of air forces have 4 or 4.5 so, yes both are very much still world class. Price is not the point, technology is.

How many Rafales are actually in Indian service at the moment? None.

However by the time Rafale deliveries begin, the list of countries operating 5th gen aircraft will include -

1. US
2. UK
3. Norway
4. Netherlands
5. Italy
6. Turkey
7. Israel
8. Japan
9. South Korea
10. Australia.

By the time domestic production of the Rafale begins, those countries will be joined by -

11. Canada
12. Denmark
13. Singapore
14. Russia
15. China

(With 16. Belgium and 17. Finland right behind.)

Actually I was comparing their cornerstones to other similar current cornerstones.
India -- Tejas
French -- Rafale
Russia - Flanker
Swedes -- Gripen
All 4th gens have introduced a carrier capable variant within a decade of the airforce variant and some started out as carrier capable from intent. It is surprising to see PRC not even planning to have a carrier capable 'cornerstone' project, more than a decade after the first J10 rolled out. And this too after the Israelis did the design work for them .

UK/Germany - Eurofighter
US - F-15
US - F-16

The Gripen entered service in 1997 (2002 for the C/D). So the 'within a decade' part doesn't hold water either. Bottom-line the presence or absence of carrier capability is no reflection on the aircraft's performance.

Far more capable, dollar for dollar.

Sorry for the bluntness, but what are you smoking? Please don't compare in India because we have no infrastructure to utilize the abilities of Apple devices (For that matter Galaxy series also). I personally like Galaxy more than Apple but credit is where its due

Credit nothing. Nobody who's using an Apple is particularly concerned about value-for-money. No even moderately budget-conscious person anyway. And every Chinese brand mentioned delivers better value per dollar than your Apple. (So do both Indian brands for that matter.)

Why to assume 20K per hour when Gripen is 3k/hr? There won't be 6 time jump between them. Western aircraft are also more effecient.

Don't believe everything you find on google.

This is from the Swiss evaluation of the Gripen E -

Vu les résultats des examens effectués pendant l'évaluation, le DDPS estime à quelque 102 millions de francs les coûts annuels d'exploitation du Gripen une fois l'introduction terminée. Coûts d'exploitation du Gripen en millions de francs
Staff 24
Maintenance 51
Carburant 21
Charges d'exploitation de l'immobilier 6
Coûts annuels récurrents après l'introduction 102

Les coûts d'exploitation du Gripen sont inclus dans le plafond des dépenses de l'armée et seront inscrits et soumis à approbation chaque année dans le budget du domaine départemental Défense et dans celui d'armasuisse Immobilier.

Calculation for 22 Gripens flying 180 hours annually with an operational availability of 75%. One Swiss franc is approx equal to one US dollar.

Personnel costs: $5,500/hr
Fuel costs: $5,300/hr
Maintenance costs: $12,800/hr

Total annual operating cost: $25,000/hr.

Even accounting for lower personnel costs and falling fuel costs, rest assured $20,000/hr is a relatively modest estimation for the Rafale.

The rupee has devalued by almost 50% since 2000, so what was worth $10 bil during planning will be $15bil today anyhow & $15 bil is also the figure quoted in some recent article. You can google it.

That's absurd. The USD-INR exchange rate has no effect whatsoever on the dollar value of the contract.

Reliable source for both please ... A 200km aesa radar is hardly mediocre; and we have project Uttam for the local Rafale if we need to.

Reliable source is Jean-Michel Guhl. The PESA's range is about 100km. Same as the MMR's.

As for the RBE-2AA, the development called for a range increase of 50% over the baseline version i.e. 150km. Some sources put it at 180km. In either case, by the standards of its contemporaries like the Irbis E, Captor-E, APG-79, APG-81 etc, its most definitely mediocre.

And no, replacing it with the Uttam will not fix the basic deficiency of a relatively small antenna.

Its baseless to compare last F-4 with first J10. And you cannot compare their capabilities, just as you can't compare Rafale and J31. Its pointless.
You are constantly assuming PRC industry and plans to go like clockwork while ours flounders in shambles.

I don't have to assume that the PRC's plans will go like clockwork to know that the J-20 & J-31 are LO designs (even if not VLO like the F-35), they will be cheaper than the Rafale, will be produced at far higher rates and will feature avionics that are constantly upgraded. The J-10 already scores on three out of four aspects and while it may not field an EW suite as sophisticated as the Rafale's, it still delivers far better value for the same budget.

1. We cannot compare numbers with China, their requirement is ~2000, ours is 840.
2. The USAF will have more 5th gen compared to Chinese. But will PLAAF numbers be enough to deter a US air invasion. Yes. Same applies to IAF vis-a-vis PLAAF.
3. I don't doubt their production rates. I don't rate a substandard/almost 5th gen very highly compared to a mature 4.5 gen and the J31 in 2018 will be a very substandard version. SAC quality is not rated highly even on Chinese forums.
4. J20 is still prototype only. Its not even flown for 100s of hours. Too early to talk about mass production.
5. Flying an aircraft in Shenyang and airshows is different from the harsh operations on the 4500 mtr high Tibet Plateau. You are assuming that the 2018-J31 will be deployed in Tibet. Won't happen.

1. They aren't going hold back their strength in a conflict against India. To say nothing of a two front war.
2. The US and allies will collective have more than enough numbers to face off China (it'll be much tougher if the air war takes place over/around the Korean peninsula). Probably not enough for power projection though. Same doesn't apply to the IAF, which will be inducting 4th gen fighters at less than half the pace of their 5th gen fighter induction.
3. 'Substandard' with the F-35 as the benchmark perhaps. The Rafale for all its maturity is still lugs around an airframe very observable to enemy air and ground based radars.
4. The PAK FA hasn't flown that many more sorties. It goes into production in 2016.
5. Ten years ago, the very idea of a Chinese stealth fighter was met with derision on this forum viz. 'won't happen'. And the problem with operating in Tibet is air density, which can be overcome with greater excess thrust. Infrastructure is arguably better than in the Indian NE. And for all the talk of it being a third pole, fact is temperatures in Tibet aren't quite that low (north of the Himalayan ranges). Its colder in Chicago today, than it is in Lhasa.

I had mention the platforms in same or another post and since we are on airpower topic, aerial radar was implied. Regardless, I meant aerial radar and we deployed CABS right after the EJ3000. The point stands.

Fine we'll stick to aerial radars. The KJ-200 and KJ-2000 are both AESAs and have been in service for about a decade. The first DRDO AEW&C will be delivered next year. The first fighter AESA was delivered with the J-16 last year IIRC, while the J-10B/C will receive it in 2015-16. The Uttam AESA will be delivered with the Mk2 post-2020. Like it or not, fact is they have a lead in it.

What capabilities we've developed have been primarily because of the Tejas and domestic upgrade programs, not because of any ToT we've purchased.

Incorrect. The local manufacturing of Sukhoi parts is well documented. Its a good learning experience. It shows as we are giving design inputs to FGFA.

'Good learning experience' has been thrown around since the first MiG-21 went into production in 1966. The FGFA will employ the same airframe, same avionics and same propulsion as the PAK FA. Our 'design inputs' will consist of integrating a non-Russian HMDS, LDP, MFD, refueling pod and Indian datalink & IFF.

I would agree if UPA was still in power, but since the current government has not scrapped the deal (and yes they have scrapped a few arms deals) and going ahead with it, this argument doesn't hold weight.

The delays and developments in the deal are owed less to political interference and more to IAF overreach and bureaucratic apathy in the MoD. Neither of which have changed with the swearing of the new govt. All the same, lets see.

[deejay]

...
The delays and developments in the deal are owed less to political interference and more to IAF overreach and bureaucratic apathy in the MoD. Neither of which have changed with the swearing of the new govt. All the same, lets see.

I am not so sure about this. The politics of the things and the money involved is just too big for the most 'regimented' lot in these disciplines to stay away, at least for most of the period in question. The new dispensation must be watched keenly for 'signs' but I wouldn't look over 'political interference' as a cause for delay in the last ten years.

[NRao]

Why India needs to rethink the Rafale deal

[Will]

Well as far as the Russian amby's comments go they are just a case of sour grapes. Does he think that the Mig-29 which didn't even make the cut would have fared better against the Chinese flankers ?

[SaiK]

It’s a matter of disgrace that we are the biggest importer of arms.” He also said that India’s security is more than tanks and aircraft.

now tell me who said this?

[Vivek K]

Can India conduct an independent and sovereign procurement program or the dependence upon former suppliers and the importance of keeping them happy cloud decision making?

[VijayN]

Can India conduct an independent and sovereign procurement program

Can you elaborate? And while doing so, pls. suggest how India can achieve that with the current breed of suppliers in the mix (Reason - Choice of such supplier are limited).