IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

All threads that are locked or marked for deletion will be moved to this forum. The topics will be cleared from this archive on the 1st and 16th of each month.
Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby Viv S » 26 Apr 2016 14:14

Austin wrote:All mililitary equipment are hardened to some extent against EMP effect but Nuclear Bomber the scale of hardening differs.

All F-16s and F-15Es are capable of nuclear strike (with the requisite wiring). Similarly, all Mirage 2000s are capable of nuclear strike. What makes you think they forgot about EMP hardening when they developed the Su-30?

Ok Rafale does not bring any thing , We need to buy JSF :P

Of course not. The F-35 is for sissies who want to get in and get out without waking the neighbours. Like cowardly cat burglars. Real men walk in tall and loud in a Rafale. Like warriors. :mrgreen:

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23385
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby Austin » 26 Apr 2016 14:48

Viv S wrote:All F-16s and F-15Es are capable of nuclear strike (with the requisite wiring). Similarly, all Mirage 2000s are capable of nuclear strike. What makes you think they forgot about EMP hardening when they developed the Su-30?


Yes with the requisite rewiring .........I am sure even Paki F-16 is nuclear capable wasnt that the reason for Pressler Sanction on them

There are boys and then there are Men.

Of course not. The F-35 is for sissies who want to get in and get out without waking the neighbours. Like cowardly cat burglars. Real men walk in tall and loud in a Rafale. Like warriors. :mrgreen:


The sissies are noisy and can wake the neighbours :mrgreen:

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby Viv S » 26 Apr 2016 22:02

Austin wrote:Yes with the requisite rewiring .........I am sure even Paki F-16 is nuclear capable wasnt that the reason for Pressler Sanction on them

The Pressler Amendment wasn't specific to the F-16, but yes the PAF F-16s are nuclear capable with free-fall bombs. I see no reason why the IAF's Su-30s shouldn't be similarly capable.

Of course not. The F-35 is for sissies who want to get in and get out without waking the neighbours. Like cowardly cat burglars. Real men walk in tall and loud in a Rafale. Like warriors. :mrgreen:


The sissies are noisy and can wake the neighbours :mrgreen:

Because the 'stealth' delivered via LO airframes (a la F-22, F-35, J-20, PAK FA, B-2)... is a scam? :-? I think I lost track of the analogy there.

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7220
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby nachiket » 27 Apr 2016 04:08

It seems we are reduced to indulging in blind speculation of ridiculous amounts to justify the enormous expense of this deal. So the Rafale is now being bought to fill the nuclear bomber role? How many Agnis could we have built for 8 billion USD? How much could a few billion dollars have helped speed along the K-series development? Or Nirbhay? Hypersonic Brahmos? All platforms which are a lot more survivable and useful as nuclear delivery vehicles than any aircraft.

Any way you cut it, this deal if it goes through is a colossal waste of resources. Ironically, the only way to partially mitigate it after the fact would be to buy several squadrons more of the Rafale. At least then the IAF wouldn't be maintaining logistics, weapons and facilities for a completely new type that makes up only two squadrons. Of course, this means we have to spend even more, a few years down the line. If we can even afford it.

Cybaru
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2480
Joined: 12 Jun 2000 11:31
Contact:

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby Cybaru » 27 Apr 2016 04:28

Ignore the sunk costs when making decisions about the future! Whats been thrown away is gone, why throw away any more to justify what was thrown away before? :)

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16404
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby NRao » 27 Apr 2016 05:19

How many Agnis could we have built for 8 billion USD? How much could a few billion dollars have helped speed along the K-series development? Or Nirbhay? Hypersonic Brahmos?


Where is the man in the loop? :twisted: for nukes you gotta have drivers.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20148
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby Philip » 27 Apr 2016 12:25

Surely an SU-34 as I've been mentioning for a few aeons is a better N-bomber than the Rafale. If one wants a really dedicated strat bomber,there are dozens of Backfires also available which though require some upgrades. The IN's LRMP Bears can also carry stand-off N-weapons,originally meant to be a strat bomber,still very much in use in that role by the RuAF today.The excuses being trotted out to justify the absurd price for the Rafales doesn't ring true and as we've seen in today's papers with the Augusta deal,may be questioned at some future time.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23385
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby Austin » 27 Apr 2016 16:37

Philip wrote:Surely an SU-34 as I've been mentioning for a few aeons is a better N-bomber than the Rafale. If one wants a really dedicated strat bomber,there are dozens of Backfires also available which though require some upgrades. The IN's LRMP Bears can also carry stand-off N-weapons,originally meant to be a strat bomber,still very much in use in that role by the RuAF today.The excuses being trotted out to justify the absurd price for the Rafales doesn't ring true and as we've seen in today's papers with the Augusta deal,may be questioned at some future time.


Philip , Su-34 is a primary tactical bomber with secondary multirole capability , As such its airframe , radar ,cockpit is optimised for the former role as bomber.

Rafale is true Omni Role Fighter which is someting IAF wanted and selected it for. From strategic pov it would be unwise to put our entire deterrent in Russian basket and IAF experience with M2K and its long relationship with Dassault will help in shaping its air based deterrent.

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7220
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby nachiket » 27 Apr 2016 23:19

Austin wrote:Rafale is true Omni Role Fighter which is someting IAF wanted and selected it for. From strategic pov it would be unwise to put our entire deterrent in Russian basket and IAF experience with M2K and its long relationship with Dassault will help in shaping its air based deterrent.

If we're depending on aircraft delivered weapons for our primary deterrent that is a disaster in itself. Never mind, which aircraft we use. If on the other hand, air-delivered weapons are to serve in a supplementary role to the primary delivery mechanism of ground and sea-launched missiles, dedicating a couple of squadrons of Su-30's makes complete sense. Especially since we have so many of them and can easily buy more for a fraction of the cost of Rafales. That does not equal "putting our entire deterrent in Russian basket".

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7763
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby Indranil » 27 Apr 2016 23:25

^^^ That is exactly what I have been saying for a while. Rafales for nuclear bum delivery makes very little sense to me. But Austin, balanced as he is, won't listen to any other argument because somebody on the inside has told him that Rafales are needed for this purpose!

To me, it is a solution looking for a problem.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16404
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby NRao » 28 Apr 2016 00:23

If a platform is nuclear capable, then Russian or not should not matter, right? It should be able to and certified to perform the job. Bombs should be agnostic to nationality.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36392
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby SaiK » 28 Apr 2016 02:04

Escaping the EMP is a big issue, if we are talking megatons. I think kilo tons should be doable. rest is logic integration.

nevertheless, I would only use an air delivery for tactical and kilo walas

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby shiv » 28 Apr 2016 05:11

Why do we need 36s Rafales to deliver nuclear bums? Do we have that many to deliver?

Shreeman
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3762
Joined: 17 Jan 2007 15:31
Location: bositiveneuj.blogspot.com
Contact:

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby Shreeman » 28 Apr 2016 05:45

There are 72 bums. For obvious reasons. Each raffle will carry two in the lottery. The bums cant be retired as that would involve downsizing strategic forces. It is said that the bums have a 36 year fuel life and the FGFA/AMCA hybrid Mk3 will take over the role in 2039 if DRDO delivers the project on schedule. Otherwise, MLU and window makers.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby shiv » 28 Apr 2016 05:52

On the question of nukes, continuing with the theme of discussing anything on this Rafale thread, the idea that someone will use an airburst nuke and get away with it is taking a huge risk. It will call for nuclear retaliation and no single airburst killer EMP is going to paralyse the entire forces of any nation despite the hype.

The most likely use of EMP would be a nation like the US with overwhelming nuclear superiority using it over NoKo and then kicking the crap out of NoKo to later claim that they were actually very humane. They only knocked out the electronics and power supply to win a conventional war and did not use nukes.

Who would argue with them? Nothing succeeds like success and the US has the success of Iraq behind it.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23385
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby Austin » 28 Apr 2016 08:35

indranilroy wrote:^^^ That is exactly what I have been saying for a while. Rafales for nuclear bum delivery makes very little sense to me. But Austin, balanced as he is, won't listen to any other argument because somebody on the inside has told him that Rafales are needed for this purpose!

To me, it is a solution looking for a problem.


Because the game is physiological as much as it is about deterrent , for most part it is physiological , A free fall bomb with nuclear weapons that is flying in our own airspace and can be deliver with adequate package as part of strike group in the event of crisis is of great physiological importance , similar to a Nuclear Bomber. Plus for the leadership it provides a last moment man in loop with adequate PAL in place , if required you can always return back is a reassurance from political pov

We have a policy/doctorine of triad established and Nuclear Bomber lets call Sub-Strategic/Tactical bomber will be an open part of triad.

Right now we really dont have a Stand Off Weapon for Rafale ( ASMP wiighs nearly 900 kg versus Brahmos Airlaunched 2.5 T ! ) , The Brahmos and Nirbhai can certainly be not carried by Rafale , The nearest weapon thats on the horizon is Brahmos-M and it can be any body baby that can prove we can Nuclearise Brahmos with a warhead size that can fit into Brahmos-M , May be we can but its an open bet. So practical we are left with free fall Nuclear Weapon for many years if not decades to come.

Rafale wont be limited to Nuclear role and will have Conventional capability like its M2K counterpart and there are also tell tale signature for such a process like IAF asking dedicated 2 Airbase for Rafale Squadron , Asking for MRO/Spares facilities at these base, Higher uptimes etc I believe eventually these two bases would have Nuclear Weapons Deployed overtly to be mated with Aircraft at short notice if required.

Who known at some point in future we may even lease/buy few bomber from Russia and these airbase would play the same role.

Thats my read of situation ofcourse time will tell if I am right or wrong.
Last edited by Austin on 28 Apr 2016 08:45, edited 1 time in total.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23385
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby Austin » 28 Apr 2016 08:43

shiv wrote:On the question of nukes, continuing with the theme of discussing anything on this Rafale thread, the idea that someone will use an airburst nuke and get away with it is taking a huge risk. It will call for nuclear retaliation and no single airburst killer EMP is going to paralyse the entire forces of any nation despite the hype.


From what I read Airburst are done to create a temporary window for nuclear attack to follow up , Now depending on the kind of EMP effect a particular yeald will create it will knock out EW , ABM system,Sensors etc that would be followed up with nuclear strike.

Advanced country has created such Enhanced Nuclear Weapons for Airburst EMP effect.

RKumar
BRFite
Posts: 1123
Joined: 26 Jul 2009 12:29
Location: Evolution is invention, explosion is destruction.

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby RKumar » 28 Apr 2016 16:25

^Austin Sir,

India has No First Use policy, so we will ship the required material only after absorbing first wave of attacks (big or small are irrelevant) . Beyond this point, if political leaders still are not able to take a decision and trust someone else's word ... then it is better India should not stand up for its rights and lets others rob our nation. Because then at least we dont have countless lives lost.

If GoI is thinking to revoke the no first use policy then it is a different ball game. In all other cases it useless excuses to import uber expensive fighters.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18650
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby Karan M » 28 Apr 2016 21:46

Austin wrote:
indranilroy wrote:^^^ That is exactly what I have been saying for a while. Rafales for nuclear bum delivery makes very little sense to me. But Austin, balanced as he is, won't listen to any other argument because somebody on the inside has told him that Rafales are needed for this purpose!

To me, it is a solution looking for a problem.


Because the game is physiological as much as it is about deterrent , for most part it is physiological


Austin saar, you mean psychological. Not physiological.

Physiology (/ˌfɪziˈɒlədʒi/; from Ancient Greek φύσις (physis), meaning "nature, origin", and -λογία (-logia), meaning "study of") is the scientific study of the normal function in living systems.


Rafale is many things, but is it living? :((

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23385
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby Austin » 28 Apr 2016 22:27

RKumar wrote:^Austin Sir,

India has No First Use policy, so we will ship the required material only after absorbing first wave of attacks (big or small are irrelevant) . Beyond this point, if political leaders still are not able to take a decision and trust someone else's word ... then it is better India should not stand up for its rights and lets others rob our nation. Because then at least we dont have countless lives lost.

If GoI is thinking to revoke the no first use policy then it is a different ball game. In all other cases it useless excuses to import uber expensive fighters.


NFU True , We will absorb the first strike but first strike can easily mean Pakistan dropping 1 Bum in Rajasthan to destroy some armour ingress into its territory or some 100 BM falling in different cities.

Unless its a Bolt from Blue Strike , Crises are gradual and we will have enough time to spread the air asset at different base but thats a different topic. I agree with the Political Part that has always been the Weakest Link in our Chain.

As far as ubber expensive goes , If MOD/IAF thinks Rafale is worth the buy for reason best known to them and perhaps a little to us then so be it , there are lot of ubber expensive buys the MOD does from time to time , When M2K was bought in 83 they said the same thing why buy such ubber expensive fighter at the expense of limited forex.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23385
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby Austin » 28 Apr 2016 22:28

Karan M wrote:
Physiology (/ˌfɪziˈɒlədʒi/; from Ancient Greek φύσις (physis), meaning "nature, origin", and -λογία (-logia), meaning "study of") is the scientific study of the normal function in living systems.


Rafale is many things, but is it living? :((


:rotfl: :rotfl:

member_20453
BRFite
Posts: 613
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby member_20453 » 29 Apr 2016 14:31

I highly doubt the Rafale being used for Nuke strike roles for the IAF, not sure if IAF will continue to be in the business of nuke weapons with SFC strictly taking over the role. I believe the 1st 36 will be used for day to day pounding needs as a workhorse (atleast I hope, if we buy the Rafale we might as well buy enough), they should add atleast another 54 , i.e 90 in total. 1 sqd at Hasimara (Eastern), 1 sqd at Bareilly (Central), 1 sqd at Lohegaon (South Western), 1 sqd at Car Nicobar (Southern), 1 sqd at Leh (Western)

If we indeed end up with 126 as they keep floating, we can base another 1 sqd at Eastern command (chubua or Barapani or Kalaikunda) and and 1 at Lakshadweep (I have feeling this base needs re-enforcing to face any threats coming from the other size of IOR) i.e 7 sqds for a nation wide coverage. If more money is found in the kitty in the early 2020s, might as well order another 54 to take the total to 180, enforcing Sirsa with 1 sqd (Western), (South Western) 1 sqd jamnagar & (Southern) 1 sqd at Sulur.

With SFC already recieving its strategic MKIs for nuke roles starting 2015, IMO this role on the MKI will be enforced with N-tipped Brahmos and perhaps a Nuke version of Glide Bomb under development. I wonder where these SFC MKIs are being based. Technically they wouldn't be part of the regular AF, the clearances of the pilots, crew would be at a higher level and their existence even on the base would be classfied to less than need to know. With strategic bunkers in all major air bases, these SFC MKI can be based anywhere and only a hand full would know where the nukes and the SFC MKI are. I believe once all SFC MKI are delivered all other IAF assets particuarly some Jags and Mirages tasked with nuke roles would be withdrawn from that role.

http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-bu ... iles-12700

The first of the new planes was handed over to the SFC in February and is believed to have undergone tests last month. Production on the second of the modified Su-30s has already begun. It is unclear when the SFC expects to receive the rest of the planes.

ldev
BRFite
Posts: 1663
Joined: 06 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby ldev » 29 Apr 2016 16:24

Karan M wrote:
Austin saar, you mean psychological. Not physiological.

Physiology (/ˌfɪziˈɒlədʒi/; from Ancient Greek φύσις (physis), meaning "nature, origin", and -λογία (-logia), meaning "study of") is the scientific study of the normal function in living systems.


Rafale is many things, but is it living? :((


That is a Freudian slip!!

The Rafale was very much dead before India announced it as a "winner" in 2012 for the MMRCA competition. That "win" gave "life" to the Rafale and it subsequently got orders from Egypt and Qatar. So for Austin, Arthuro and other Rafale supporters it is a living being capable of physiological phenomenon :P

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18650
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby Karan M » 29 Apr 2016 16:26

Now you are scaring me. I was already worried about Skynet. :mrgreen:

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18650
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby Karan M » 29 Apr 2016 18:34

Austin wrote:If you see even the MKI has a range of Standoff weapons for such role ,


Only some of which work - the weakness is in ARH/ARM.

the only difference is we are paying a premium to get this stuff for Rafale , if you pay even half of the premium for what we are doing for Rafale for the MKI we can get much more things inside that aircraft ,with better uptimes and range of weapons employed would drawf the Rafale ,


Err.. not really, Russia's new replacements are yet to prove their reliability or have even gone through the kind of extended, public, trials we saw for instance with the Meteor.

As with Bars we have the source code and there is no restriction for what we want to integrate.


Which is why Astra Mk1/Mk2, NGARM are the future for the Su-30 MKI in IAF service.

I am sure Rafale can hold its own against any thing out there as many exercise has shown.


Not hold its own. According to French mags, Rafale will win without even flying. If all else fails claim sensor fusion, 4++++++++ generation and super Spectra. :lol:

But if we want to get a one on one duel with latest Rafale F3 with indian specific equipment then a more equal comparision would be to get Super MKI with enhanced power , still I think MKI wont be a slouch even though its a far bigger bird ......... May be it would turn out be the Mig-29 vs M2K type with our Delicate Darling Rafale getting all the cuddle and care from IAF :wink:


Agree, Su-30 if its issues are fixed (which don't seem insurmountable) will remain a beast. Interestingly, even with its current avionics Su-30 may be a match for Rafale F3R in several areas - not bad for a 2000's jet.

arthuro
BRFite
Posts: 627
Joined: 06 Sep 2008 13:35

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby arthuro » 30 Apr 2016 13:49

Another myth debunked : AASM price. With the new plurlannual order from France and Egypt, price will drop significantly and will be close to a GBU-49 gravity bomb from the US.

Ces commandes pluriannuelles permettraient d'augmenter la cadence de production d'une nouvelle version du AASM. Surtout, elles permettraient de faire baisser le coût à l'unité d'un armement, jusqu'ici bien plus cher que les produits de la concurrence. Notamment par rapport aux bombes américaines GBU-49 très utilisées sur les théâtres d'opérations. "Avec ces commandes, nous pouvons être très proches du prix des GBU-49", a-t-on expliqué à La Tribune.


http://www.latribune.fr/entreprises-fin ... 62087.html

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby Viv S » 30 Apr 2016 14:50

arthuro wrote:Another myth debunked : AASM price. With the new plurlannual order from France and Egypt, price will drop significantly and will be close to a GBU-49 gravity bomb from the US.

Additional orders from the French state are still in the speculative stage. Orders from Egypt and Qatar meanwhile will only add 470 units to the 1,728 ordered so far (down from a target of 4,200). Raytheon & LM produce more Paveway kits than that annually. And if a customer wants yet more range there's still a variety of cheaper options available in the JDAM-ER (72 km) and SDB I/II.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7916
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby brar_w » 30 Apr 2016 14:55

JANES IHS did a PGM session/presentation where they had JDAM-ER range listed as >75km. I have seen >72 km/45 miles as well in other cases. Obviously thats for higher altitude releases (They quote 12,000m as the highest RAAF tested altitude, most likely resulting in that >75 km range), but even at lower altitudes we are looking at a high multiple of the standard JDAM. The original Boeing design for the ER (with Alenia Marconi / MBDA's wing kits) had a range of closer to 100km but Australia chose their own wing design based on their requirement.

Australia's design

http://i64.tinypic.com/fmnvip.png

Older Design:

http://i63.tinypic.com/htblnd.jpg

It delivered a nearly 4x increase in range when dropped from 6000 meters (up to 40km).

On Economies of Scale : Overall, the Pentagon’s FY17 budget requests $1.8 billion to buy 45,000 smart bombs and other guided munitions to replenish supplies in the continuing campaign against ISIS.

sivab
BRFite
Posts: 935
Joined: 22 Feb 2006 07:56

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby sivab » 04 May 2016 06:07

http://www.deccanherald.com/content/544 ... -says.html
Rafale fighter deal stuck, says Parrikar

The much-awaited deal to purchase 36 Rafale fighter jets from France has hit the roadblock.

Three crucial components of the multi-billion dollar contract are still to be finalised after Union Law Ministry red-flagged many contentious issues that are yet to be resolved.

“Negotiations on the terms and conditions of the said supply, including total cost, actual delivery timelines and guarantee period have not been concluded,” Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar has informed the Rajya Sabha on Tuesday.

He said India and France agreed to conclude an inter-governmental agreement on the supply of 36 Rafale aircraft.

The defence minister’s statement in Parliament contradicts the India-France joint statement issued after the January summit meeting between Prime Minister Narendra Modi and French President Francois Hollande. In the joint statement, the 2 leaders “welcomed the conclusion of the inter-governmental agreement on the acquisition of 36 Rafale fighter aircraft in flyaway conditions” except for some financial issues, which the leaders hoped would be resolved as soon as possible.

Almost at the same time, the law ministry expressed its concerns on the mega defence deal, which Parrikar admitted tacitly in Parliament.

“The ministry of law and justice has made certain observations and the same will be adequately taken into account while finalising the inter-governmental agreement, which is still under negotiations,” he said, responding to another question.


The liability clauses in the agreement and the supply protocol are learnt to be heavily loaded in favour of the French supplier Dassault Aviation. The government-to-government deal to buy 36 aircraft was announced by Modi, during his visit to France in April 2015.

The earlier process to buy 126 fighters through a global tender was cancelled in August, 2015 as the French company, short-listed in the earlier process, did not obey the terms of the 2007 tender and the commercial bid while negotiating the price.



And now the truth :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :lol: :mrgreen:

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby shiv » 04 May 2016 06:49

sivab wrote:
And now the truth :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :lol: :mrgreen:


Actually I think it is good to hear the truth. We have posted a BR article (written by my late cousin) several times here about a HALmodification made on the Jaguar that BAe adopted for its Jaguars but did not owe HAL anything because the "fine print" in the Jaguar said that. Western companies have batteries of lawyers who write all sorts of conditions into contracts and I think India for the first time has placed a counter battery of people to read every letter of the contract.

I am guessing that these Western arms exporters have ready made thousand page contracts written and ready to protect them and screw the buyer where only a few blanks have to be filled depending on the item to be sold and name of customer.

As a complete digression I have looked at some contracts that doctors sign with fancy corporate hospitals and I note that the contracts are heavily weighted against the doctor. The individual is powerless. Either he signs or someone else will sign and get the job. I am sure Western supplier companies do this with every buyer and countries who buy and induct quickly are surely signing away a lot of freedoms.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16404
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby NRao » 04 May 2016 07:14

eTea and eBisbut?

Or is iTea and iBiscut? Perhaps that would infringe upon Apple's TMs?

I love the internet age.

And a very dharmic DM. Enjoy

Akshay Kapoor
Forum Moderator
Posts: 1625
Joined: 03 May 2011 11:15

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby Akshay Kapoor » 04 May 2016 10:43

I think we have reached the stage in the negotiation where we should start closing our brief cases and making a show of leaving the table. We are the buyer you are the seller. This is my price and terms. Jamta hai to deal Karo Nahi to Jai Ram ji ki. Enough of this nautanki from Rafale.

I really wanted this deal to happen but we have to draw a line somewhere and move on.

Akshay Kapoor
Forum Moderator
Posts: 1625
Joined: 03 May 2011 11:15

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby Akshay Kapoor » 04 May 2016 10:52

There must be other options in the short run. In the meantime no choice but Tejas and AMCA but that can only happen if we fix HAL on a war footing. Transfer control to IAF like it was earlier. Give IAF a budget and complete autonomy on how to use it for domestic MIC , and some foreign munitions and sensors, and complete control over HAL. Full accountability and full authority. That's the only solution.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18650
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby Karan M » 04 May 2016 15:18

Guys DeccanHerald is a congi paper.. the headline and content below are not the same.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20148
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby Philip » 04 May 2016 17:34

The liability clauses in the agreement and the supply protocol are learnt to be heavily loaded in favour of the French supplier Dassault Aviation. The government-to-government deal to buy 36 aircraft was announced by Modi, during his visit to France in April 2015.


Gents,this is typical of almost all deals we have signed where the OEM is absolved of after sales support,etc.,except at higher costs to the buyer. THus reduced liability (remember the outrage by western N-plant suppliers at the N-Liability bill passed by parliament?).Here,it is the Indian negotiating side that allows this to happen,er...the MOD. This is the cute means by which "extras" could be used for kickbacks to desi entities.

Purely on the cost alone per Rafale when compared with other options,PlanB/C whatever as we've discussed ad nauseum on BRF,where 2-3 MIG-29/35s,MKIs,US legacy birds,Gripens,the deal falls flat.MP would be well advised to put his foot firmly down,have his options ready and meet the PM.

Cosmo_R
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3407
Joined: 24 Apr 2010 01:24

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby Cosmo_R » 04 May 2016 17:39

“Negotiations on the terms and conditions of the said supply, including total cost, actual delivery timelines and guarantee period have not been concluded,” Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar has informed the Rajya Sabha on Tuesday."

Other than the critical issues, everything seems on track :)

I'm hoping that NaMo's visit to DC next month comes up with something --anything so we can move on.

Gagan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11195
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby Gagan » 04 May 2016 20:43

NaMo in DC next month,
US is blocking F-16s to Pakistan for the moment

1. Either F-16 is still in the running
2. Or, Massa is deferring the sale to pakistan for the moment pending Modi's visit.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7916
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby brar_w » 04 May 2016 21:00

Not sure they are blocking it, but they are asking them to pay full price for them.

member_20067
BRFite
Posts: 627
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby member_20067 » 04 May 2016 21:16

brar_w wrote:Not sure they are blocking it, but they are asking them to pay full price for them.


Which is as good as blocking it- US knows Pakistan does not have the change to afford 8 F-16s or $700 million

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18650
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby Karan M » 04 May 2016 21:48

Why? If US aid continues to TSP elsewhere it frees up funds to put in F-16.
Seems like a dog and pony show for public/Indian consumption.


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 64 guests