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.
Amoghvarsha
BRFite
Posts: 245
Joined: 18 Aug 2016 12:56

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby Amoghvarsha » 14 Sep 2016 02:41

indranilroy wrote:Ras/Kakkaji,

I am not a guru. If you think about it in a non-partisan way, I am stating the most obvious.

What I would do with $ 8B? There are many aspects of the IAF which have been red flagged for decades: infrstructure, radars, refuelers, AWACs. Forget, infrastructural needs and the outdated and often malfunctioning radars of our air defenses, we don't need the fingers of the second hand to count the number of AWACs + refuelers that are available at any time. I would first look into them. But, let's say the govt. is very savvy and is looking into getting funds for each of these neglected articles from somewhere else. Let's say that these $8B have to be for some reason spent on acquiring new new fighter aircraft and aircraft weaponry only, then what are India's options.

IAF has categorically said that it requires the capabilities of a medium weight fighter. I agree. I actually bow to their knowledge. Now what does that mean: a fighter which has approximately 70-80% of the endurance and weapon carrying capability of a heavy fighter. Accordingly, it should cost 70-80% to acquire and maintain. So how do we go about doing this in the current scenario. Let's look at the worst ways first:
1. Chose a medium weight fighter whose acquisition and maintenance cost is higher than that of your heavy weight fighter :roll:
2. Chose a new kind so that you have to have to pay extra for the separate infrastructure (when your infrastructure for current types is crumbling), separate training, separate weapons types, i.e. make sure that economies of scale can't kick in. :-?
3. How about make it a little worse: chose 2 new kinds, one that potential kills your indigenous design :D

Ironically, we are doing all of the above. It is not funny, it is actually sad.

What were possible Plan Bs (if we wanted to have them):
1. "I want my planes, and I want them now": By all Mirage-2000s on offer and upgrade them to one common upgraded standard to bridge you through to the advent of AMCAs. You will have the planes all the planes within 3 years.
2. Get the capabilities using existing fighter types. 36 Su-30s cost 3.6B, 36 LCAs cost about 1.6 B, 36 Mig-35s cost about 2.5B: do the math. There are so many combinations. No new training, no new manufacturing infrastructure, no "ToT", no new weaponry. And you know what's best, in times of war, numbers and availability are strongly correlated. With 8B $s, you could save enough to pour into the acceleration of design of Mk1A, Mk2, and AMCAs and speed-up the generation of build Tier 1/2 private manufactures to manufacture the Mk1A, and use them subsequently for Mk2/AMCA.
3. And if had to get a new kind, GET ONE. 26 makes no sense, and IAF whimpered when Modiji abruptly announced the 36 plane deal. Those whimpers were quickly doused iron handedly and replaced with praise. Nobody with any understanding of aircrafts can justify getting two new kinds of aircrafts while grappling with funds. Personally, I did not want the F-16s or the Gripens in IAF. But if Lockheed is ready to move F-16 production to India at a favourable price, get it. My end goal is to get independent of imports. Bring TASL up as a competitor to HAL in manufacturing technology.

We are looking at paying is 20-30B to acquire 120 odd 4th generation medium fighters in 2016. It's a shame.


You want us to buy the F 16s?The fighter is at its life cycle end.Lets face it,Rafales of the IAF will be the best aircraft in Asia till Cheenis get the J 20 and hopefully by that time we will have the FGFA/PAK FA.

You believe that the F 16 can give us the kind of edge Rafales give us?Will there be any further enhancement in the F 16s?And do we really want a single engine fighter that also Bakis fly?Lets not forget the sanction happy face of unkils.

Rafales are expensive yes but they are the best in their class and every country will fly 4.5 gen aircrafts for atleast another 2 decades.


PS:Did you change my username?Please check the feedback thread.

Manish_Sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4225
Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby Manish_Sharma » 14 Sep 2016 02:42

Does any other fighter match such payload with empty weight ratio of Rafale?

Empty Weight :
10.3 Ton, B model
9.85 Ton, C model
10.6 Ton, M model

Payload = 9.5 Tons


http://defense-update.com/20140127_rafale_omnirole_configuration.html

Super heavy Sukhoi 30mki can lift 8 tons.

Superhornet can lift 45% of the weight iirc.

I had a post in old Rafale vs ef2k thread comparing and Rafale was amazing.

Though previous link I had posted of unofficial page Tejas MRCA facebook, claims that we are getting Rafale with 10 ton payload.

while mig 29, jaguar bodies became weaker, there was a post before crash telling how HAL was amazed that m2k body were as sound as new after so many years. Maybe that also weighs on the mind of IAF.

First 40 sukhoi 30k were returned as the IAF had through sheer use had drained their airframes. Maybe ruggedness of Rafale also weighs on IAF's mind.

Best use of ToT for Rafale would have been to get the french handing over tech to make single piece alloy tail and other such parts of Tejas which are imported.

Amoghvarsha
BRFite
Posts: 245
Joined: 18 Aug 2016 12:56

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby Amoghvarsha » 14 Sep 2016 02:49

Manish_Sharma wrote:
indranilroy wrote:The French were with us at the beginning of LCA, they left.

It seems a french trait, they joined eurofighter then left midway and created rafale, they joined WASS Blackshark torpedo then left midway and created F-21, they started developing submarines with spain then left midway and created Scorpenes. It seems they enter a project and then after finding out all the techs and philosophy plus weakness and strength they leave and create competitor project.

They were with us on the Scorpenes, but they have never helped us on our indigenous submarine efforts.

Even after buying expensive Scorpenes when Bharat approached them for torpedos F-21 they rudely told us that they'll only sell it for scorpenes or other french-subs, but not for Aridaman and P-75I (in case from germany etc.) So we're buying German Seahake. Yes they are mighty snooty.


We are buying Seahakes?Thats news to me.Dont Bakis use the same.

Manish_Sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4225
Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby Manish_Sharma » 14 Sep 2016 02:59

We are buying Seahake IV with 104 kilometer range the latest ones.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7770
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby Indranil » 14 Sep 2016 03:03

Manish_Sharma wrote:Does any other fighter match such payload with empty weight ratio of Rafale?

Empty Weight :
10.3 Ton, B model
9.85 Ton, C model
10.6 Ton, M model

Payload = 9.5 Tons


http://defense-update.com/20140127_rafale_omnirole_configuration.html

Super heavy Sukhoi 30mki can lift 8 tons.

Superhornet can lift 45% of the weight iirc.


It is physics! You can even put 15 tons. It won't be a fighter.

Manish_Sharma wrote:Best use of ToT for Rafale would have been to get the french handing over tech to make single piece alloy tail and other such parts of Tejas which are imported.

And why would they do so. They are not willing to give us one extra thing than what we are currently getting. And it has taken us years to get here, and if you realize, we have climbed a long way down from what we had asked for in the RFP of MMRCA.

Amoghvarsha
BRFite
Posts: 245
Joined: 18 Aug 2016 12:56

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby Amoghvarsha » 14 Sep 2016 03:15

Manish_Sharma wrote:We are buying Seahake IV with 104 kilometer range the latest ones.


I am some what allergic to buying any system that Bakis have

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7770
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby Indranil » 14 Sep 2016 03:19

Ratul wrote:You want us to buy the F 16s?The fighter is at its life cycle end.Lets face it,Rafales of the IAF will be the best aircraft in Asia till Cheenis get the J 20 and hopefully by that time we will have the FGFA/PAK FA.

IF WE HAD TO GET A NEW TYPE, ONLY THEN. Nobody in the neighborhood has anything near the newest generation of F-16 either. I would love to build an AF almost entirely of EF/Rafales/FGFAs. Unfortunately, I don't have the mullah.

Ratul wrote:You believe that the F 16 can give us the kind of edge Rafales give us?Will there be any further enhancement in the F 16s?And do we really want a single engine fighter that also Bakis fly?Lets not forget the sanction happy face of unkils.

Aerodynamically F16s inferior to the Rafales. Avionics/weapons-wise the latest generations are comparable and ahead of anything that OAF/PLAAF have. and those F-16s/J-10s etc. are the top of the lines for the PAF/PLAAF. We have better. So, yes we will have a technological edge. May be we can mitigate our current numerical disadvantage. If Unkil becomes sanctions happy, many things that this govt, and the previous two have done will come to a grinding halt, including our LCA program.

Ratul wrote:Rafales are expensive yes but they are the best in their class and every country will fly 4.5 gen aircrafts for atleast another 2 decades.

F-22s are best planes money can currently buy. Can USAF afford them: no. Can USAF do without it: yes. PAKFA/Su-35 is the best plane Russia can develop. can they afford to have their entire fleets changed to either of the two: no. Can do they do without them: yes. you can pick any airforce in the the world, and I can show you that they can't have a fleet of the best aircraft that they can get their hands on.

Ratul wrote:PS:Did you change my username?Please check the feedback thread.

I did not. But if it was, it must have been accordance to forum rules. you can always ask for an alternate handle.

Ramu
BRFite
Posts: 136
Joined: 18 Feb 2011 17:05

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby Ramu » 14 Sep 2016 05:14

Strategy doesn't always depend on technology. Sometimes its completely irrelevant. Stone pelters and every flavour of paki terrorists for example. They achieved more in Kashmir than us with every flavour of fighter jets in our stable.

Anglo Saxon foreign policy has been purely arms sales in one way or another for the past few hundred years and its going to stay same in near future as well.

When you buy f16, 17, 18, 22, 35, rafale, you are merely subscribing to their foreign policy and not securing yours. The technology that comes with it is a liability in long term and none of them will tick all the boxes for us. Scorpene being prime example

But there are bad times where the only acceptable reason to buy something should be a stopgap measure till you rectify your handicap situation.

So who do you buy it from? List down the guys who are most responsible for your handicap situation and don't buy from them. Like the guys who sanctioned lca, the guys who are probing embraer deal, etc. Then get something from the guy who was least harmful to your development.

When you just look at the technology and fall for it, you will end up like a kid inside a sweet shop aka IAF.

Ashok Sarraff
BRFite
Posts: 619
Joined: 06 Oct 2007 00:44

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby Ashok Sarraff » 14 Sep 2016 05:26

Yes, huge sums of money are involved. But it is possible that GoI is thinking of two major benefits out of potential purchase of Rafale, Gripen, and F16/18. First, it will help fill the numbers more quickly in comparison to depending upon a single vendor (who will have limited lines to manufacture the planes). Second, the manufacturers' presence in the country (through manufacturing technology, JVs, and ToT's) will create a much wider, vibrant, and competitive aviation ecosystem in the country. This will help the Indian aviation industry (PSUs, Pvt. sector, SME's, technologists) to more deeply plug in with the global industry, something we cannot achieve solely by relying on LCA.
Last edited by Ashok Sarraff on 14 Sep 2016 05:55, edited 1 time in total.

Manish_Sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4225
Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby Manish_Sharma » 14 Sep 2016 05:52

We need to train them like pavlovian dogs, these western nations.

When we buy Rafale, it should be hailed as everlasting friendship of france and remembering President Jacques Chirac support during shakti tests while others were sanctioning Bharat. This would go down in the memories of usa uk that how we reward the nations that support us.

While few reports name unnamed officials stating that rejection of teens are due to past sanctions.

Avarachan
BRFite
Posts: 539
Joined: 04 Jul 2006 21:06

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby Avarachan » 14 Sep 2016 06:49

indranilroy wrote:Avarachan sir,

I have never doubted the IAF's claim that we need medium fighters. In this very forum, I have fought people who said LCAs can do the work of medium-weights or that the Su-30s are the panacea to all of India's fighter needs. But is Rafale/EF, the absolutely most expensive fighter aircrafts on the military market our solution to medium weight fighters. I don't think so. I completely agree with you that Gripen is nothing but LCA++, and should not be pursued at any cost. Parrikar has made many mistakes. I hope he does not commit that blunder.

Also, I can't see the strategic angle. Because, we buy the Rafale, would be get technological help for the LCA. History has proved elsewise. The French were with us at the beginning of LCA, they left. They were with us on the Scorpenes, but they have never helped us on our indigenous submarine efforts. They have been providing us helicopters, and helicopter engines for decades, and yet when the time came to help HAL with LUH's transmission or GTRE with Kaveri, they asked for such astronomical amounts for such small incremental work, that everybody backed down. even in the civil sector, you can look at the nuclear sector.

I also do not buy the transfer of technology with the current 36 Rafales. They are to be bought off the shelf with 30% scredrivergiri at home. It does not bring us any technology. RAM coatings etc. are coming from the Russian side, with the work on the Super Su-30s and the FGFA.

There are only two angles:
1. The government is not technically savvy. They listen to those who are. And those who are, can't see beyond the Rafales. It was a sad day for me when the IAF chief says that there is no plan B for the INDIAN air force, if it can't import the Rafales. And I say this without any nationalistic fervour. (I hate the word nationalistic and its acceptance in modern day Indian political parlance. India was never a land of nationalists, and it never should be. India was, is and should remain the land of the patriots).
2. This military buy should be viewed in the larger theatre of geo-politics, in which case everything I said is moot.


Indranilroy-ji, there's no need to call me "sir." You know much more than I do. :)
As a sidenote, I agree with you on the distinction between nationalism and patriotism.

1) The MMRCA contest was driven by geo-politics. (I've written about this previously, in case anyone is curious.) By the way, the Scorpene purchase was decided on geo-political grounds, as well. The technical specifications did play a role, but they were in the background rather than the foreground. That doesn't necessarily produce a contradiction: if a state is strong enough to help India strategically, they're probably also capable of producing good weapons. That is true in the case of France (at the present time, at least).

2) Of course, you're wise to be wary of French promises. I don't deny any of what you said. Let's see. I've heard that the GoI has become more skilled in framing contracts. Also, because India is now more experienced, India knows what it needs and can tell whether the guidance offered is helpful or not (by running simulations, etc.).

3) I can't believe that India is going to buy the Gripen E (or any second MMRCA). That would be insane.

4) One thing I respect about the Chinese is that once they have a good design, they pump it out. As far as I can tell, the Yuan-class submarine is a modified copy of the 636 Kilo (albeit with AIP). And just look at how fast the Chinese are producing it! It's impressive. In my opinion, any less than 300-400 Tejas's (of different variants) is a crime.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7770
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby Indranil » 14 Sep 2016 12:05

Avarachan wrote:Indranilroy-ji, there's no need to call me "sir." You know much more than I do. :)

No "ji" for me then. I nurse no such illusions about my "knowledge".

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20163
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby Philip » 14 Sep 2016 12:34

I am reminded about the tale,(true) of how the Israelis stole the Mirage-3 designs.The Swiss were supposed to destroy the drawings,but the Israelis got the joker responsible to sell them to them.They then produced the Kfir,a great copy.

In restrospect,when there ius so much talk of ancient F-16s,F-18s on offer, why could we not have asked the French for the entire M2K prod line? This design could've been further upgraded to the current M2K upgrade status,which would've been a far better bang-for-the buck deal than just 36 Raffys without the tech. It is only becos the M2K line was closed that the ISAF began the MMRCA chase,otherwise they would've been happy with more M2Ks ,LCAs for the light fighter role and MKIs for the heavy role. Even now if the GOI hasn't finalised eveything,we cana sk for the M2K prod line instead of wanting the Gripen,F-16s or F-18s!

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

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby Cosmo_R » 14 Sep 2016 18:58

Philip wrote:...why could we not have asked the French for the entire M2K prod line? This design could've been further upgraded to the current M2K upgrade status,which would've been a far better bang-for-the buck deal than just 36 Raffys without the tech. It is only becos the M2K line was closed that the ISAF began the MMRCA chase,otherwise they would've been happy with more M2Ks ,LCAs for the light fighter role and MKIs for the heavy role. Even now if the GOI hasn't finalised eveything,we cana sk for the M2K prod line instead of wanting the Gripen,F-16s or F-18s!


You're forgetting history. The M2K was to be produced in India during the 1980s. The FSU pressured us to select the MiG29 instead. Also, circa 2000, when the IAF was looking at 126 M2Ks as a follow-on order, the Babooz decided (brilliantly) that the Mirage 2000-5 was a different a/c from the original M2K-H and ordered a public bake-off which came to be known the MMRCA competition tamasha. MoD is weapon of mass destruction.

Bhaskar_T
BRFite
Posts: 268
Joined: 13 Feb 2011 19:09

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby Bhaskar_T » 14 Sep 2016 19:37

TOI reports, IGA is being worked on and then it will be sent to MOD or CCS. So, some final final work going on. Livefist reporting that Meteor is included in the deal.

http://toi.in/lMxOsb79/a19ei

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7770
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby Indranil » 15 Sep 2016 00:00

Just realized that the sum of money discussed is in Euros, not dollars :D

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36393
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby SaiK » 15 Sep 2016 03:58

too late to realize against the decisions.

Manish_Sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4225
Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby Manish_Sharma » 15 Sep 2016 04:27

Ashok Sarraff wrote:Yes, huge sums of money are involved. But it is possible that GoI is thinking of two major benefits out of potential purchase of Rafale, Gripen, and F16/18. First, it will help fill the numbers more quickly in comparison to depending upon a single vendor (who will have limited lines to manufacture the planes). Second, the manufacturers' presence in the country (through manufacturing technology, JVs, and ToT's) will create a much wider, vibrant, and competitive aviation ecosystem in the country. This will help the Indian aviation industry (PSUs, Pvt. sector, SME's, technologists) to more deeply plug in with the global industry, something we cannot achieve solely by relying on LCA.


I remember around '07 before I discovered brf, reading maybe on Thakur's website or idc that due to variety of aircrafts IAF imports 4500 types of mobile oils, 3 more types like f-16, Rafale, Grippen would be a promotion from gemini circus to russian circus.

Getting 3 ToTs from 3 different nations for 3 different platforms. One nation sweden doesn't make anything other than assembling.

nits
BRFite
Posts: 992
Joined: 01 May 2006 22:56
Location: Some where near Equator...

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby nits » 15 Sep 2016 12:14

With Rafale, A Game-Changer Missile That Puts India Ahead Of China: Exclusive

s India and France get set to sign a Euro 7.87 billion contract for 36 French Rafale fighters, details are emerging on a previously undisclosed part of the deal, which will see India acquiring the Meteor, arguably the world's most advanced air-to-air missile.

Sources tracking the final negotiations have confirmed to NDTV that the IAF's Rafales will come equipped with the Meteor designed to knock out enemy aircraft and cruise missiles significantly more than 100 km away. The acquisition of this weapon is likely to be game changer in South Asia. Neither Pakistan nor China, India's traditional military adversaries, possess a weapon of the same class.

The only other air-to-air missile as capable as the Meteor is the AIM-120D, the latest variant of the US Advanced Medium Range Air-to-Air Missile which is also designed to hit targets more than 100 km away.Analysts, however, point out that the Meteor is likely to be significantly more capable because of its ramjet engine.


Hmm what other surprises do we have in this deal - some may come out some may never will :!:

Will
BRFite
Posts: 637
Joined: 28 Apr 2011 11:27

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby Will » 15 Sep 2016 13:10

Cosmo_R wrote:
Philip wrote:...why could we not have asked the French for the entire M2K prod line? This design could've been further upgraded to the current M2K upgrade status,which would've been a far better bang-for-the buck deal than just 36 Raffys without the tech. It is only becos the M2K line was closed that the ISAF began the MMRCA chase,otherwise they would've been happy with more M2Ks ,LCAs for the light fighter role and MKIs for the heavy role. Even now if the GOI hasn't finalised eveything,we cana sk for the M2K prod line instead of wanting the Gripen,F-16s or F-18s!


You're forgetting history. The M2K was to be produced in India during the 1980s. The FSU pressured us to select the MiG29 instead. Also, circa 2000, when the IAF was looking at 126 M2Ks as a follow-on order, the Babooz decided (brilliantly) that the Mirage 2000-5 was a different a/c from the original M2K-H and ordered a public bake-off which came to be known the MMRCA competition tamasha. MoD is weapon of mass destruction.


The French had offered to shift the M2K line to India just as unkil is with the F16 at the moment. My point is that if we have to go in for ancient aircraft like the F-16 we have wasted a decade as we could have had the M2K line a long time back.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20163
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby Philip » 15 Sep 2016 14:13

They can still offer it as part of the 50% offsets if we are still keen on acquiring antiques to make up numbers!

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

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby Cosmo_R » 15 Sep 2016 15:48

@Will ^^^ We make no decision before it's too late. M2K, C-17s. And, MP is probably the only one who 'gets' the fact fact that we need to acquire an ecosystem not just assembly lines and planes.

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 » 15 Sep 2016 16:12

I don't think shifting a line can be done at all after it is shut down. The reason is simple. Just like HAL points out that they have 2500 private suppliers, Dassault too would have had several thousand third party suppliers who were employed with orders as long as the line was open. If the line had been shifted back then all those 1000s of suppliers would have signed agreements to keep supplying their little bits and pieces for a few more years - to be shipped to India. But once the line is closed all those third party suppliers move on with other orders and get rid of the machinery and workers involved with fabrication of Mirage 2000 specific items destined for Dassault. After a few years even the spares suppliers for the frequently replaced parts will also go.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4367
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby JayS » 15 Sep 2016 19:46

^^ And for the same reason that there exist thousand of Tier 1,2,3 suppliers for each program, shifting assembly line means nothing unless you also shift the supplier base to Desh. Or we are forever dependant on US anyway for spares. Well, F-16 is much better option from this POV since its produced in 5 countries already and has far wider suppliers base I would imagine as compared to say F18 (Rafale is even worse). But the fact remains that shifting assembly line doesn't mean much if the parts are still coming from overseas. Can LM send its entire (or even significant enough portion to make us self sufficient) supplier base to India?? I don't think so.
Last edited by JayS on 15 Sep 2016 19:49, edited 1 time in total.

srikven
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 19
Joined: 27 Aug 2016 21:58

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby srikven » 15 Sep 2016 19:47

7.87 Billion Euro Rafale Deal To Be Signed On September 23

http://www.ndtv.com/india-news/india-to ... eststories

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 » 15 Sep 2016 20:05

JayS wrote:^^ And for the same reason that there exist thousand of Tier 1,2,3 suppliers for each program, shifting assembly line means nothing unless you also shift the supplier base to Desh. Or we are forever dependant on US anyway for spares. Well, F-16 is much better option from this POV since its produced in 5 countries already and has far wider suppliers base I would imagine as compared to say F18 (Rafale is even worse). But the fact remains that shifting assembly line doesn't mean much if the parts are still coming from overseas. Can LM send its entire (or even significant enough portion to make us self sufficient) supplier base to India?? I don't think so.

What is easy to miss here is the meaning of the expression "large industrial base". Industrialized nations have got that name because they have a large industrial base. India simply does not have an industrial base to match even Italy, let alone France, Britain or Germany - and that is why HAL has to build aircraft from raw material. The "base" of a pyramid must be broad with thousands of companies making thousands of parts feeding companies above them that add value to those parts and then hand stuff to even higher tier companies that produce the pinnacle of tech - ie. aircraft or engines. Rockets are relatively rudimentary in this regard. Cars too - but when it comes to car engines and gearboxes - we ain't there yet.

Bhaskar_T
BRFite
Posts: 268
Joined: 13 Feb 2011 19:09

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby Bhaskar_T » 15 Sep 2016 20:10

I have handled projects where such cost escalation will and will-not have included the inflation factor in it. Read a recent article on the same subject which mentioned that inflation cost in the IGA has been fixed at 3% per year. Now,
1. Is this cost escalation of 10% per year or within 5 years from signing of contract?
2. Whether this cost escalation includes inflation cost of 3%?
3. Follow-on new Rafale may cost 10% of stand-alone current contractual Rafale cost or current packaged-Rafale cost?

srikven wrote:7.87 Billion Euro Rafale Deal To Be Signed On September 23

An Inter-Governmental Agreement between India and France allows for a follow on order of Rafale fighters with a 10 per cent cost escalation.

http://www.ndtv.com/india-news/india-to ... eststories

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4367
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby JayS » 15 Sep 2016 20:45

^^@Shiv

Very true. And people forget it all the time and think that some ToT from Sweden or assembly line from LM will overnight transform us in to a Aerospace "Suppapower". One they ain't giving us no tech, second we don't have a industrial base to absorbe it even if they did. However hard we try we are going to play catch up game for next few decades still. But this kind of ad hoc approach of trying to beg technology from outside will only further this time.

Consider this - there was this recent tender where HAL invited companies to be make-to-print suppliers for entire modules for HTFE/HTSE engine. Guess how many engines they mentioned in the tender which were expected to be manufactured in next 10yrs or so period?? Some 70 odd. This is when we have an estimated 6000 engines requirement in coming future of similar class particularly for Helicopters. Which company will be ready to invest on setting up manufacturing plant for such low number of engines in foreseeable future?? How we expect our industry base to develop like this without putting forward proper business case for pvt companies to invest their efforts?? We very easily promise numbers for imports. But when it comes to Desi products no commitment is given for ROI. Add to this the red tapism and delays.

I don't have problem with importing to fill the gaps. But we import and sit tight till next gap appears.

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 » 15 Sep 2016 21:09

JayS wrote:Which company will be ready to invest on setting up manufacturing plant for such low number of engines in foreseeable future?? How we expect our industry base to develop like this without putting forward proper business case for pvt companies to invest their efforts?? We very easily promise numbers for imports.

Unfortunately we are the biggest kanjoos penny pinchers because we will spite ourselves to save a buck. I am amazed at the amount of financial discussions we have about products and I can just imagine what the actual companies are doing.

A couple of years ago I was looking for a telescope mount for an air rifle. No local workshop had the machining ability to do it. Checking online I found one Indian source selling what I wanted for Rs 5000. A few clicks later I found a Chinese source for US$ 9. Yes 9 dolah. Not even 10

There are thousands of companies in the world who make things at prices far lower than what we can do in India - but when it comes to strategic industries we must swallow the expense and pay the price to build and keep a domestic skill afloat. After all we have wasted lakhs of crores on subsidies for various things. But we are always haggling. I buy a TV in Manchester and my desi friend Raghavan asks me "How much did you pay?' and when I tell him he says "he he he I could have got it for you for 20 Pounds less in London". Even on BRF we are constantly talking about how we can get something for a little less. This may make sound economic sense and make bean counters happy - but the sad truth is that you name any goddam manufactured product and there will be a Chinese or Taiwanese or Korean company that can ship it to you from their country for less. Getting it for less is praised as a "great deal" but local industry will not develop unless we cough up the extra pain. Prices will come down later

Its not as though Indians can't pay. Indians are paying twice as much for iPhones and high end cars but we seem to revel in the idea that paying so much is a good thing if it comes from abroad but if it is foreign and cheap so much the better. I recall a lament that my late mother made saying that in the old days a man would come home carrying a 50 kg sack of rice on his back and accept 4 annas (25 p) but she had to pat Rs 50 auto fare for transport. Why my own dear mum did not seem to see what that everyone is getting paid more now. That 4 anna labourer's son is now out of poverty

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4367
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby JayS » 15 Sep 2016 22:05

^^ Yes, we need to swallow additional price Indian products will have for some time until the businesses become competitive enough to take Chinese head on. "Be Indian Buy Indian" means there will be some cost associated with it. On the other hand Indian businesses need to focus on quality and customer care. But well this is a very broad issue and our society will take its own sweet time to change. We can't wait until then for defense and other hi-tech equipments which are top-driven and are supposed to be handled by erudite people and not by penny wise mango abdul who cares only about what to eat in next meal, or which shirt to wear tomorrow to office or which new shiny Chinese phone is coming up. If all those erudite people cannot lift themselves above all this and see the things in proper perspective then aaaaach thoo on them..

How quickly Modi decided to go for 36 Rafale and how quickly (relatively speaking) we losened up ~8B Euros. Compare this with the glacial pace for buying a Mig-29 test bed for Kavery flight test. How quickly govt is sanctioning laks of crores of rupees for so many projects - It took them two years just to sign an MoU for CoPT between DRDO and IITs. There was a time when I could have gone on to work for this CoPT 2 yrs ago, but simply because I knew its gonan take hell lot of time to start I chose not to go (papi pet ka sawal tha..). And I was proven write. I simply fail to see any kind of alacrity shown on long term planning on some serious engineering RnD on defense items that we will need soon.

Manish_Sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4225
Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby Manish_Sharma » 15 Sep 2016 22:12

nits wrote:With Rafale, A Game-Changer Missile That Puts India Ahead Of China: Exclusive

confirmed to NDTV that the IAF's Rafales will come equipped with the Meteor designed to knock out enemy aircraft and cruise missiles significantly more than 100 km away. The acquisition of this weapon is likely to be game changer in South Asia.


Hmm what other surprises do we have in this deal - some may come out some may never will :!:


Wasn't it mentioned by a poster some time back that main advantage of meteor is two way communication, but unlike eurofighter Rafale has only one way communication so unable to get the full benefits of meteor?

ashbhee
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 97
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 07:05

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby ashbhee » 15 Sep 2016 23:37

Can we get Meteor for LCA? Since LCA still does not have beyond visual range missile. Or will French insist that they will only sell Meteor to arm Rafale?

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36393
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby SaiK » 15 Sep 2016 23:40

why do we need meteor for LCA?

leave Astra on Ashtray?

[home grown logistics always comes first. #NationFirst]

Rafale package deal just to get off and maintain French relationship at strategic levels.

France and Russia are key players thus far.

[I am looking for what they offered for Kaveri? that is another pain prick from GTRE]
Last edited by SaiK on 15 Sep 2016 23:45, edited 2 times in total.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7770
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby Indranil » 15 Sep 2016 23:44

Who will integrate the elta radar with the missile? And for how much?

It is better to go with Astra and the Israeli missiles on LCA for now. The desi meteor equivalent, called SFDR is now in manufacturing stage. Let's wait for it. If we have to pour money into a ramjet propelled A2A rocket for LCA/Su-30s, let it be the desi one.

ashbhee
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 97
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 07:05

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby ashbhee » 15 Sep 2016 23:55

SaiK wrote:why do we need meteor for LCA?



There was lots of press about meteor being the very best world has, so why not get it?

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53475
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby ramana » 16 Sep 2016 00:15

Best is the enemy of the Good.

Also one cant just attach a new weapon and hope everything works. It needs lot of integration work, weapon release studies, testing etc.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4367
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby JayS » 16 Sep 2016 00:16

Is the deal including Astra integration?? Or we have to pay through our nose for every integration effort??

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7770
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby Indranil » 16 Sep 2016 00:43

JayS wrote:Is the deal including Astra integration?? Or we have to pay through our nose for every integration effort??


What Astra integration bhai? Astra is not going on Rafales.

Integration of Meteor on LCA: radar is Israeli, missile is French. You can imagine the circus and the money.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4367
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby JayS » 16 Sep 2016 01:00

I am not even expecting Meteor for anything other than Rafale. As such its so costly we can't afford it in numbers. And we really need good numbers for LR AAM. SFDR is way to go for rest of the fleet. I did think we might integrate Astra on Rafale. So no desi weapon on Rafale???

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7770
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Postby Indranil » 16 Sep 2016 01:41

Not even paint ;-)


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 30 guests