India selects Typhoon & Rafale for MMRCA shortlist - Part 2

manum · Post by **manum** » 14 Nov 2011 10:36

chackojoseph wrote:All agreed. But, we still have 10 billion $. No matter how efficient the abcd's (as mentioned by you), we still cannot afford $ 40 bil +. A life cycle cost of efficient 10 billion worth of a/c is good in same ratio as 40 bil worth. I am not arguing that we should not buy them as I have always argued that even 40 bil is good as long as we get the tech and get integrated into the international system of arms sales. I am looking at pocket. The DPP procedures have a cut off limit for the price. (I am not sure) It can be max 10 - 20 % more than the budgeted figure. But, 400 % is violation, right?

How did we afford scorpene, mirage upgrade and vikramaditya deal until recently? I understand that you are trying to tell that its an automated governmental procedure with an inherent valley at the end...

but arn't they aware of minimum cost of each type while being in consultations/communications with vendors? secondly are you trying to say, they were aware of pricing but there is nothing mentioned in government documents in official account to corroborate the awareness of 40 billion as cost...

please if its possible...can you tell in percentage the increase in costing of scorpene, mirage and vikramaditya from expected?

Juggi G · Post by **Juggi G** » 14 Nov 2011 11:07

Certain Victory for Rafale Turns Uncertain
The DEW Line

rajanb · Post by **rajanb** » 14 Nov 2011 11:27

^^^^ Quoted from above.

All of this can be little consolation to the fighter made in Merignac, France. No one doubts the French have a world-class fighter, but their negotiators have talked their way out of certain victory before. Allowing the UAE sale to slip away may not be devastating to the Rafale, with Brazil, India, Kuwait and Switzerland still in talks with the French. But such a loss would surely be long remembered in the industry as yet another can't-miss deal that only the French could mess up.

Well, it is upto them to mess up. Sometimes vendors get too carried away by their own products. Selling with passion is great, but underestimating the competition is a folly.

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 14 Nov 2011 13:42

manum wrote: How did we afford scorpene, mirage upgrade and vikramaditya deal until recently? I understand that you are trying to tell that its an automated governmental procedure with an inherent valley at the end...

but arn't they aware of minimum cost of each type while being in consultations/communications with vendors? secondly are you trying to say, they were aware of pricing but there is nothing mentioned in government documents in official account to corroborate the awareness of 40 billion as cost...

please if its possible...can you tell in percentage the increase in costing of scorpene, mirage and vikramaditya from expected?

I understand your POV on Vicks, Scorps etc. However, they are just 2 bil $ deals. MMRCA is a 10+ billion $ estimate and if you ass the market known prices, we are looking at $40 bil. Now, this is without the munitions.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 14 Nov 2011 13:57

afair from UAE deal era, they were unhappy with the small radar and engine thrust. france asked for $2b extra to develop next gen radar in small form factor to match the apg79/captor-e and the thrust levels desired.

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 14 Nov 2011 14:25

So what Some are saying is that the 60 Rafales were quoted to UAE was for 5 billion dollars and rest 15 billion dollars is for upgrades? I can see it the only way if 126 a/c's have to be 10 billion worth. :p:

koti · Post by **koti** » 14 Nov 2011 15:16

The IAF/MOD will have its task cut out to find the "winner",whose capabilities will be not better than an SU-30MKI,certainly inferior to a Super-Flanker being developed, and which might cost 1.5 times as much! Both aircraft will use similar munitions like Meteor,etc.,therefore the available info about one-on-one combat,recent combat experience in Afghanistan and Libya, between the two might swing the decison,prices beign almost equal.

Operational and life cycle costs perhaps?
Or maybe a safer and distinct spare supply?

More importantly, I believe though the plane may cost 1.5 times more then the MKI it should be seen as an investment for gaining more diplomatic clout which MKI may not put forward.

Both Rafa and EF have been made with the Russian Su,S300 threat kept in mind. Perhaps, we they have more to offer against the PLAAF that field these systems.
JMT.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 14 Nov 2011 17:33

Kartik,there is a lot of info on the SU-30MKI thread,nevertheless,here are some data from AWST Aug 8th.My viewpoints are always based upon facts and not fiction! It is impossible to quote verbatim for every reasoning,as time is extermely precious,therefore bear with me.I am condensing the langauge of the report and quoting key points only.

Now the Super-Flanker meant for the IAF,which is our equivalent to the SU-35S,which is meant to bridge the gap between the 4th and 5th gen fighters."Effectively an extensive mid-lif upgrade of the SU-27.It will combine the proven airframe of the Flanker,"more powerful NPO Saturn 117S engines with TVC and completely new onboard eqpt.,including some eqpt. being developed for the T-50 (FGFA ).The fighter's radar signature was reduced several times compared with other 4th-gen fighters (you can read Rafale/EF if you want to) through the use of electro-conductive coating of the canopy and radar absorbing material on the fuselage,as well as reducing protruding sensors toreduce radat returns."

Two prototypes have been flying since 2008.Low alt. speed reached was 1400kph,high alt. 2,400kph.The confirmed flight ceiling is 18,000m.Its "Tikhomirov
NIIP phased array Irbis radar can detect targets at a range of 400km,while its optical sensors can detect targes at a range of 80km." Deliveries to the RuAF are salted from 2015.Serial production of the FGFA for India is slated to begin in 2016.

Other reports including that of the F mag some time ago which also featured a pic of the aircraft,details of which were posted too,specifically about the upgraded Super-Sukhoi for the IAF revealed that a range of conformal sensors would be fitted to the airframe to give a 360 deg. coverage,an internal wepaons bay that occupied the space between the engine trunking and the well-known fact that the aircraft will carry Brahmos.Hints that the aircraft will carry a Novator LR AAM of 200+km range or another LR AAM ,even longer-ranged from a Russian stable,both classified,are in other reports about Russian missile developments in other issues/mags.

We've even had posted some time ago Oz studies which showed that even the "Euro-canards would be found inferior " to the upgraded Flankers.I've even posted on the JSF thread reports about the JSF being inferior in WVR to existing Flankers and lesser 4th-gen aircraft like the Gripen and MIG-35.One can compare the data with those of the two contenders.What about the results of the EF-MKI exercises? Asa for costs,if the FGFA is being estimated at just $100m,then the Super-Flanker will definitely cost less than that,even if it is around $75m,should be cheaper or the same as the two Eurobirds.

Therefore,in the LR stand-off strike roles one can see it is superior,as it will carry Brahmos ,which none of the two Eurobirds can match,plus carry BVR missiles that outrange its rivals,a radar with greater range and in close combat with TVC,the proven ability of the MKI airframe which has been tested against the two already in exercises,with more powerful engines and better stealth characteristics,will be even more agile and elusive than its predecessor.Where the MMRCA contest is supposed to deliver the bacon is mainly in TOT apart from its immediate availability with both birds in production,a key requirement given our falling numbers,which is supposed to help us design and devlop our wown future fighters like the AMCA.Possessing the best of both east and west (through the MMRCA and FGFA) would give us an edge over our two mortal enemies in the air.

There is enough info available,one has to ferret it out.Cheers to all.

PS: Any feedback about my post (AWST) the EF not being of enough value to the RAF?

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 14 Nov 2011 18:01

Leaving the jingoness behind, I would not be surprised if Rafale loses MRCA as well. The way EADS is wooing babooze with offers is nowhere near what Raf.Sarkozy does. Instead of focusing on the politicians and inviting them to France, focus on the deal, and come clear as to what it would offer.

They are thinking they can walk away with MMRCA as well, like they pressed for the expensive M2K upgrades deal.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 14 Nov 2011 18:36

As an aside.This from Wiki though.There is a different spec for the AESA radar (Phazatron) in it.Even if it is used as against the Irbis,the capabilities can't differ drastically.

Some quotes:

October 2006.[50] This was the first large-scale bilateral aerial exercise with any foreign air force during which the IAF used its Su-30MKIs extensively. This exercise was also the first in 43 years with the RAF. During the exercise, RAF's Air Chief Marshall, Glenn Torpy, was given permission by the IAF to fly the MKI.[51] RAF's Air-Vice Marshall, Christopher Harper, praised the MKI's dogfight ability, calling it "absolutely masterful and unbeatable".[52]

In July 2007, the Indian Air Force fielded the MKI during the Indra-Dhanush exercise with Royal Air Force's Eurofighter Typhoon. This was the first time that the two jets had taken part in such a exercise.[53][54] The IAF did not allow their pilots to use the radar of the MKIs during the exercise so as to protect the highly classified N011M Bars.[55] Also in the exercise were RAF Tornado F3s and a Hawk. RAF Tornado pilots were candid in their admission of the Su-30MKI's superior manoeuvring in the air, but the IAF pilots were also impressed by the Typhoon's agility.[56] The summary of the

There is also a good analysis by DID about the EF-MKI faceoff at Indra-Dhanush.The comparisons/analysis relates to existing MKis and not the future Super-Sukhois,which will carry Brahmos and the LR AAMs which also have anti-AWACS capability.

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/typ ... ise-03470/

“The operational part of the ‘Exercise Indradhanush-2007’ began with a series of 1 vs 1 air combat sorties… The RAF pilots were candid in their admission of the Su-30 MKI’s observed superior maneuvering in the air, just as they had studied, prepared and anticipated. [emphasis DID’s] The IAF pilots on their part were also visibly impressed by the Typhoon’s agility in the air.

While it does not imply to say that the 1 vs 1 air combat sorties were meant for backslapping each other, it may be understood that in today’s aerial combat scenarios of ‘beyond visual range’ (BVR) capabilities of air platforms, it is highly unlikely that any of the modern-day fighters will ever get into a situation that warrants extreme close air combat, as in the situation simulated in the 1 vs 1 sorties. With a ‘kill’ criterion of front-gun ranges being mostly under 1000 meters and a visual tracking envelope behind the target for only up to a 60-degree cone mostly for most fighter aircraft of the world, the unlikely scenario gets more exemplified.

But the irony also lies in the fact that while there is a number of counter and counter-counter measures to make the modern missiles with claims of inescapable parameters redundant by using ‘chaff’ and other active/passive measures, a ‘gun kill’ is invariably a most certain kill. The pilots invariably begin honing their tracking and combat skills under such close combat situations.”

This is true. Even in the modern missile age, most air-to-air kills have remained within visual range. As such, performance within the parameters of this initial matchup still matters.

At short missile ranges, both aircraft are equipped with canards for fast “slew and point” maneuvers, infrared search & track systems, helmet-mounted sights, and ultra-maneuverable short-range infrared missiles (ASRAAM, AA-11/R-73) with wide boresight seeker cones. This creates more forgiving parameters for a kill than the front gun range requirements; the SU-30MKI’s superior maneuverability would have to contend with UK Typhoon flight profiles enabled by ASRAAM’s longer range and lock-on after launch capability.

In longer-range combat situations, however, issues of detection and reach would also come into play. The Eurofighter is smaller, and is generally agreed to have more “shaping” than the SU-30 to reduce its radar profile (though neither aircraft is in the same class as the F-22A Raptor or even the less-stealthy F-35 Lightning II); and its Meteor ramjet BVRAAM missile is explicitly designed to kill from longer range than the Russian AA-12/R-77. Speed can compensate to some degree by reducing detection time and extending missile range, especially in “HVA busting” missions against tankers, AWACS aircraft, et. al. Unlike the American F-22A, however, the Typhoon’s supercruise capability for sustained speed above Mach 1 apparently relies on the aircraft being “clean” (no external stores), while the SU-30 currently lacks that capability until and unless plans for an uprated engine come to fruition.

PS:The observed lesser stealth,AAM,engine cabpabilities of the current gen MKIis mentioned in this old report will be overcome as one cans ee,with the specs given in the latest AWST MAKS 2011 report posted earlier .

karan_mc · Post by **karan_mc** » 14 Nov 2011 20:53

Eurofighter loses ground against F-35 in Japan contract race

Defence analysts monitoring the three-way dogfight for the multi-billion contract say Tokyo has been impressed with the stealth technology of the Lockheed Martin F-35, which will enable it to carry out clandestine monitoring of Chinese, North Korean and Russian military assets in the region.

This will be petrol to restart the F-35 vs , Euro/Rafale debate in India

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 14 Nov 2011 21:17

the r73 may have pioneered the tvc concept and made it a brand, but the western aam's that came later are mostly all equipped with similar movement and better seekers as western IIR tech and seeker tech is better.

the EF in addition should be able to supercruise using conformal meteors when it arrives and its ceiling and t:w ratios are better than MKI which has grown heavier than the base model of Su27 but retains the same engine + few 100kg of TVC eqpt and canard machinery.....it needs the 117S engine of Su35BM to become as sharp as a knife in a2a but sadly the mass flow is different and air intake / engine bay changes needed so its a no-can-do probably.

overall I see the MKI evolving into a F-15E type deep strike bomber with a strong secondary a2a long loiter sweep capability & self-escort/jamming with the MRCA+Awacs combo (esp if we go typhoon) being the "tip of spear" for a2a day1 ops.

we need new bvr and wvr missiles and bars2 (lighter and smarter than the obese 750kg) for the MKI to get to the next level.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 14 Nov 2011 21:22

Japan should have developed their own 5th gen by tying in with EADS or Dassault. costlier and would take longer but they would be stronger for it.

instead they will like a dutiful munna make wing parts, landing gear, grey paint, electronic parts and canopy for a JSF type project while the real design and brains get done in LM/Boeing with no access.

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 14 Nov 2011 21:50

the japanese are going to get their go-go's squashed by unkil unless they buy F35
all they have to do is pull back the pacific fleet...

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 14 Nov 2011 22:28

I don't think the Japanese have any idea about their own requirements.

They wanted F-22, and unkill said F-35 is good enough for them, and then Ef2K is competing for it, along with Super Hornets.

So, JSF <> EF <> SH sounds like their requirements are royally screwed up!

--

Example for desh! If Unkill has so much CnC in Japanese requirements, then think about India?
Even with BAE supporting with:

BAE Systems, which is leading the Eurofighter consortium's campaign, said its aircraft was a "cost-effective" solution and "the most capable deterrent to regional threats". It is also offering Tokyo licensed production, maintenance and technology transfer. The last issue is important to some officials in Japan, who worry about the US willingness to give full access to the F-35's source codes.

"Japan can have sovereign control of manufacture, support and upgrade of Typhoon aircraft in Japan by Japanese industry," BAE said.

"We are also able to offer software source codes and other data, giving Japan the ability to develop the aircraft itself to meet its own unique needs, now and in the future."

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 15 Nov 2011 00:36

Here's the Oz (Air Power) study I mentioned earlier.Interesting table,showing all Euro aircraft lesser in capability to the SU-35S.

]"In strategic terms the Su-35S is a game changer, as it robustly outclasses all competing Western fighter aircraft other than the F-22A Raptor. Deployed in significant numbers it is capable of changing the balance of power in any region where this occurs. This reality does not appear to be widely understood in most Western air forces, or DoD bureaucracies." - Air Power Australia. 23/8/09.

The study even recommends that Oz buy the Sukhoi,an impossibility politically! Here's a comaprison with the JSF,supposedly superior to the Eurobirds (,questionable ?).

So instead of buying 100 JSF Australia could build about 70 Sukhoi 'Super Flankers'. The existing 30 F-111 could be replaced in a decade or so - if required.

While the Sukhoi does not have the partial stealth characteristics of the JSF it does offers significant other advantages:

Range. The Su-35 has an effective range of about 4,000km compared to about 2,200 for the JSF. This means the JSF would have to be refuelled to fly from Perth to Brisbane and would require significant air-tanker support to operate outside of Australia's maritime boundary.

Safety. The Su-35 has two engines instead of one on the JSF. This improves the safety and reliability of the Su-35 over single-engined designs.

Manoeuvrability. The Sukhoi's ability to 'turn and burn' greatly improves its ability to escape the missile envelope of an enemy fighter. (JSF proponents view this ability as irrelevant seing as JSF are invisible and all-knowing due to 'the system' providing the JSF pilot with perfect knowledge of all enemy fighter locations).

Speed. The Su-35 is a Mach 2.4 aircraft while the JSF is limited to about Mach 1.6. The replacement of the existing AL-31 engines with new AL-41 engines will provide Sukhoi aircraft supercruise ability - the ability to efficiently cruise at supersonic speed for long distances. Only the much more expensive F-22 Raptor is capable of doing this for extended periods now. Non-supercruising fighters such as the JSF or the F/A-18E would be wholly uncompetitive against the much cheaper supercruising Sukhoi.

Cost. The Su-35 compares well with the projected price of the JSF of $A160 Million each. The Su-35 is also an existing aircraft whereas the JSF is still under development so its true price is unknown and is rumoured to be escalating towards $A200 Million each.

Radar. The Sukhoi has a huge 1-meter diameter radar bay which can accommodate the most powerful radar systems fitted to any combat aircraft. This will enable the Sukhoi driver to detect and destroy partially stealthy aircraft such as the JSF.

Weapons. Various Russian manufacturers produce a wide range of sophisticated air-air missiles (AAM) and seekers on 12 hard-points. The JSF can only carry four AAM. These can be combined in various combinations. Sukhoi can carry a large number of AAM and typically would fire salvos of several different types at a target to defeat any particular counter-measure the target could use. Sukhoi can launch at over Mach 1 imparting more momentum and hence range to the missile. More...

Availability. Sukhoi fighter aircraft have previously been delivered in about 4 months to other nations. The JSF will not be operational until 2018.

Multiple Suppliers. The Sukhoi Design Bureau licences several manufacturers to build Sukhoi aircraft. The Flanker is like an "open source" aircraft - many manufacturers from Russia, Europe & Asia are already competing to build parts and weaponry that are Sukhoi-compatible. Ideally one of the existing Sukhoi manufacturers could establish a production facility in Australia. (Note too that Australia would be a major customer if it ordered 70 Su-35. This is a much bigger and more lucrative deal for Sukhoi manufacturers than the orders for any ASEAN nation. Australia would not be an expendable 'second tier' customer.)

Proven Design. Sukhoi fighters are the front-line fighter for many nations including Russia, India, China, Malaysia, Vietnam, Ukraine, Chile, Venezuela & Indonesia.

Networking. Sukhoi aircraft are typically networked to each other and other defence assets such as ground based radar capable of exposing 'stealth' aircraft. Australian Sukhoi should be able to be networked to existing RAAF assets such as Jindalee over-the-horizon radar, Wedgetail AEW&C aircraft and RAN submarines. This would give Australian Sukhoi a clear advantage over any intruding Sukhoi, along with the obvious advantage of the Australian Sukhoi being closer to base and fuel.

So instead of buying 100 JSF Australia could build about 70 Sukhoi 'Super Flankers'. The existing 30 F-111 could be replaced in a decade or so - if required.

While the Sukhoi does not have the partial stealth characteristics of the JSF it does offers significant other advantages:

Range. The Su-35 has an effective range of about 4,000km compared to about 2,200 for the JSF. This means the JSF would have to be refuelled to fly from Perth to Brisbane and would require significant air-tanker support to operate outside of Australia's maritime boundary.

Safety. The Su-35 has two engines instead of one on the JSF. This improves the safety and reliability of the Su-35 over single-engined designs.

Manoeuvrability. The Sukhoi's ability to 'turn and burn' greatly improves its ability to escape the missile envelope of an enemy fighter. (JSF proponents view this ability as irrelevant seing as JSF are invisible and all-knowing due to 'the system' providing the JSF pilot with perfect knowledge of all enemy fighter locations).

Speed. The Su-35 is a Mach 2.4 aircraft while the JSF is limited to about Mach 1.6. The replacement of the existing AL-31 engines with new AL-41 engines will provide Sukhoi aircraft supercruise ability - the ability to efficiently cruise at supersonic speed for long distances. Only the much more expensive F-22 Raptor is capable of doing this for extended periods now. Non-supercruising fighters such as the JSF or the F/A-18E would be wholly uncompetitive against the much cheaper supercruising Sukhoi.

Cost. The Su-35 compares well with the projected price of the JSF of $A160 Million each. The Su-35 is also an existing aircraft whereas the JSF is still under development so its true price is unknown and is rumoured to be escalating towards $A200 Million each.

Radar. The Sukhoi has a huge 1-meter diameter radar bay which can accommodate the most powerful radar systems fitted to any combat aircraft. This will enable the Sukhoi driver to detect and destroy partially stealthy aircraft such as the JSF.

Weapons. Various Russian manufacturers produce a wide range of sophisticated air-air missiles (AAM) and seekers on 12 hard-points. The JSF can only carry four AAM. These can be combined in various combinations. Sukhoi can carry a large number of AAM and typically would fire salvos of several different types at a target to defeat any particular counter-measure the target could use. Sukhoi can launch at over Mach 1 imparting more momentum and hence range to the missile. More...

Availability. Sukhoi fighter aircraft have previously been delivered in about 4 months to other nations. The JSF will not be operational until 2018.

Multiple Suppliers. The Sukhoi Design Bureau licences several manufacturers to build Sukhoi aircraft. The Flanker is like an "open source" aircraft - many manufacturers from Russia, Europe & Asia are already competing to build parts and weaponry that are Sukhoi-compatible. Ideally one of the existing Sukhoi manufacturers could establish a production facility in Australia. (Note too that Australia would be a major customer if it ordered 70 Su-35. This is a much bigger and more lucrative deal for Sukhoi manufacturers than the orders for any ASEAN nation. Australia would not be an expendable 'second tier' customer.)

Proven Design. Sukhoi fighters are the front-line fighter for many nations including Russia, India, China, Malaysia, Vietnam, Ukraine, Chile, Venezuela & Indonesia.

Networking. Sukhoi aircraft are typically networked to each other and other defence assets such as ground based radar capable of exposing 'stealth' aircraft. Australian Sukhoi should be able to be networked to existing RAAF assets such as Jindalee over-the-horizon radar, Wedgetail AEW&C aircraft and RAN submarines. This would give Australian Sukhoi a clear advantage over any intruding Sukhoi, along with the obvious advantage of the Australian Sukhoi being closer to base and fuel.[/quote]

There are notes on Russian AAMs,updated.AWST also had a recent issue with latest developments.Here's an intriguing quote from the Oz page with respect to the Meteor expected to arm both Eurobirds.

http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-NOTAM-200408-1.html

I join big party in dacha near Moscow with missile company engineers and salesman. Grisha complain modern air combat becoming too deadly. BVR missiles no good, with WVR missiles all pilots die. Vympel man tap side of nose and say; ‘No worry Comrade Grisha, we have new idea. Amerikantsi clever, do smart rework on AMRAAM into ballistic missile interceptor – this NCADE. We think same but for air combat interceptor – ours better and cheaper. Take many old R-27 [Ed: AA-10 Alamo] missiles and send back to factory. Take out radio locator and warhead, put in new navigation computer and fit R-74 to front of missile with adaptor. We call this «Medusa» – cut off old tired head, grow new deadly head to kill Amerikanski combat fighter.'

‘Choose radio locator or infra-red self guidance head [Ed: seeker] for R-74. Now, you fire R-74-PD salvo at Super Hornet at 180 Km, send radio link guidance until the R-74 sees target. Then R-74 head missile fire and kill Amerikanski fighter very quick. Vympel engineers look at Novator ‘Sizzler’ missile made to kill ships and think this good idea, so think same thing for air to air combat. Very cheap, very quick time to service. Beat Anglo-French Meteor by many years at small price. We hope to get industry medal for this idea.'

PS:Just a footnote from the BRF/BK meet in the US.BK's analysis.

•India’s Su-30 MKI is second only to the F-22 Raptor. IAF will not be overpowered by PLAAF.
•BVR air-to-air missiles are effectively useless. BK has personally advised GoI in the past to strengthen in other ways, not BVR.
•The notion of F-35 for IAF is only amusing and not going to happen; “Hangar Queen”

This (BVR missiles useless) is a debatable ponit,one would've liked to see his reasons for arriving at it,as the Russian tactic of firing salvoes of BVR missiles (tx to large wepapon carrying capability of the Flankers) with diff. seekers to overwhelm enemy aircraft defences has distinct merit.Ultimately,as the Israelis found out,the gun kill is the definitive kill.

Taygibay · Post by **Taygibay** » 15 Nov 2011 02:06

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/de ... d=blogDest

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 15 Nov 2011 02:28

Taygibay wrote: The MoD/IAF could well have gone Israëli, they're able or local for some stuff.
You do not know partnership hasn't been offered by Dassault. Nor do I.
We'll know when it becomes public. It's been my main point since the beginnig of the discussion.

Israeli wasn't really an option because when given a choice the MoD always prefers to go to the OEM, thanks its low tolerance for risk. Mature domestic alternatives aren't really going to be available at least for another couple of years. Also, while the cost of upgrade lead to it being abandoned, the original Mirage upgrade plan called for an airframe update as well (something only the French would have been qualified to carry out). Regardless, the point about France being the sole option for Rafale upgrades still stands. India doesn't retain the kind of choice and financial leverage that it gains by joining the EF consortium.

Oops misunderstanding then. But the point is they may have as said to Kelesis.

'They may have'??

For that matter they may have offered some Polynesian Islands as well. What information lead you to think that France had offered some sort of partnership? Have you heard some hint in the French, Indian or international press that others may have missed? Or is it on basis of some personal information, the source of which you cannot divulge?

Why would the Americans know about a French AESA radar?
Sorry, really can't answer but we tarin a lot together, you know?

I have no idea what you're talking about, aside from a reference to the US. Are you saying (and I won't attempt to dispute it) that the Americans are helping develop an EW channel for the RBE-2AA or are they just aware of its existence?

Or are you repeating what Arthuro claimed a while back - about Rafales locking onto APG-79 emissions in a joint exercise?

... educated guesswork ... is usually accepted ...
... and sometimes costs lifes.
( Although not on fora, of course. )

Well we're on a public forum aren't we? Here to debate with no lives hanging in the balance.

Philip posted part of a rebutal, read up, ViV.
And it is funny how you calculate France as being in dire straits ...
but forget that Italy and Spain will sink first
2 out of four in EF nations and the others talking of not ordering ....
Don't be unfair buddy, goes both ways, been telling you since the start.

??? My statement about 560 and 180 being only real figures since it was backed by a financial commitment, was thoroughly fair to both sides. On the contrary, I believe its you who needs to recognize that it goes both ways. There are two assertions you've made that are faulty -

1. EF members have made noises about it in public so a downsizing of its future build order is imminent. Incorrect: Punitive clauses written into EF contracts make cancellation an expensive and unviable proposition. What they are looking at, is to offset domestic quotas through export orders. Not the same thing.

2. EF orders are in jeopardy because of the poor economic conditions its manufacturers are facing. Well yes, but unfortunately France is in the same boat. While the smaller EF members in Italy and Spain are in hot water, French banks have possibly highest exposure to a Italian debt and the French govt. has a substantial commitment to Euro bailout packages. Since the UK and Germany are better off (thanks to the Pound Sterling and a stronger economy respectively) its fair to say that overall there's no advantage to be had. Which is why claiming that 286 orders for the Rafale is set in stone while the EF orders are capped at 560, is a questionable stand.

That forum is acessible to you if you want.

Not really. Without a name, I have nothing to go on.

It is one of the best known and most respected in the field.
I don't know if I'm allowed to give the name seeing how the BR mods seem ticklish.
But there are many posters with claim to E-fame better than yours or mine so ...
It can also be labelled as the home of the Typhoon so ...
Its owners are editors of some of the best magazines in mili business so ...

I don't think saying Keypub is going to get you a ban here.

And are British so ...as far as you questionning them or the lack of opposition, hum ...

And if it is Keypub that you're referring to - asserting that 'Advantage Rafale' was uncontested there, is a tall claim. Frankly the prevailing opinion seems very much 'Advantage Eurofighter' on that forum. Perhaps KP too has more fanboys than we realise.

But you may have over-valued my use of the word advantage
which I meant as leading by two points on a fifth set tie-break
and under-valued assesment estimate meaning including points
given now and admitted to be expected to change.
If you remember that the Typhoon is not mature and the Rafale is
it would help immensely.

I agree its more mature but then it'll still going be a while before its scheduled to enter service with the IAF. Given that the aircraft is going to operate well past 2030, I'd much rather they go for the option with better growth potential than the one that's matured first. There's a give and take of course - the EF loses out on low speed high AoA performance compared to carrier capable Rafale and lacks those the two extra wet-points. The Rafale OTOH cannot match the EF's radar performance (at least in brute power output), its BVR optimized high speed high altitude performance as well as its simple internal volume (making upgrades less complex). The latter advantages in my opinion are more important from the IAF's perspective, with a view to counter the PLAAF over the Himalayan ranges. The rest incl. diverse munition outfits, sensor fusion, NG optronics etc are either comparable or can upgraded progressively. Also, all public information seems to suggest that the EF's industrial offer is more promising.

Opposing theoretical, rhetorical opinions on subjective matter
and vague statements facilitate unending fruitless bickering ...
Links, quotes and non-specious rephrasing are the tools of debate.
Just saying.

Most debates have at least some degree of rhetoric even if one consciously attempt to limit its extent.

P.S. Viv_S mate, the French govt has turned down the Mirage 2000D
upgrade and the trusted F1 mentioned by Karan-M are not going to
be there in ten years, one of the things that make me sure that the
orders for the Rafale are doing fine ... all because the last MinDef
AKA MoD 2012 budget for has 11 Rafales and the rest will be there
for replacement something that should be as obvious as the fact that
it is the induction of a new standard.

By the same token one could also say that the UK has retired its Jaguars and Harriers, will soon retire its Tornados, and has downsized its F-35 projections to barely a carrier's worth of jets. So there is obviously no justification for downsizing the EF order.

Unfortunately in the absence of a constant adversary, defining an optimum or even a minimum force structure is hard. Twenty years back this issue wouldn't have been pertinent - the existence of the Soviet military made it easier to determine an ideal force structure. Today on the other hand, the French govt. can afford to reduce the 286 aircraft military to a 250 aircraft military without France's integrity, sovereignty or foreign policy being threatened.

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 15 Nov 2011 04:33

India fighter jet deal countdown
Asia Sentinel

India has initiated the final phase of what will be one of its biggest defense deals ever...The US$11 billion contract to buy 126 multi-role combat aircrafts (MRCAs) forms a crucial cog in the country’s attempts to modernize its military capabilities.

Earlier this month the federal defense ministry began review of competing bids of the remaining two European competitors in the fray --- Eurofighter’s Typhoon and French Dassault’s Rafale, both aircrafts used successfully by NATO as part of its recent air campaign in Libya.

New Delhi has said that it will settle for one MRCA platform, leaving the loser saddled with substantial lobbying expense, high expectations but nothing in hand.

The final choice is expected to be made by the end of next month, though the Indian government could take a bit more time to announce the deal. Given the money already allotted in the annual budget for the contract, the decision should, however, be no later than March 2012, when the financial year ends.

Leaving such a large capital outlay unutilized opens the charge of delay and indecision on New Delhi that it would prefer to avoid.

The bidders have been trimmed to Rafale or Eurofighter Typhoon, while the Russian MiG-35, Swedish Saab Gripen, the American Boeing F/A-18 E/F and the Lockheed Martin F-16 combat jets have been rejected on ``technical and operational’’ grounds.

Even though an unhappy America has been pushing New Delhi to re-consider its aircrafts, it is unlikely that such as process is going to happen.

India has been looking to build a fighter jet fleet that will comprise the MRCAs to replace the crash prone MiG-21 interceptors and fit between the more powerful long range Sukhoi-30 and the lower-end indigenous Tejas LCA lightweight fighters.

In a comment, the Jane’s Defense Weekly said: ``with a potential contract price of $9 billion to $14 billion, this is the single biggest competition in the global defense aviation industry at the moment and offers both bidders a much-needed opportunity in a major market.’’

The MRCA contract forms part of India’s estimated US$50 billion import-driven defense modernization exercise over the next five years that comprises submarines, tanks, missiles, air craft carriers, advanced radars, artillery gun and more.

India is making a conscious effort to move away from dependence on imports from Russia to countries such as Israel and America, apart from deepening ties with traditional partners such as France, Sweden and Britain.

The Russian defense industry is seen as increasingly outdated in the absence of effective state support. Existing Russian defense platforms in India’s possession depleted due to lack of spare parts and post sale maintenance.

Washington has been using every diplomatic and strategic means to pressure India to buy weapons from American firms. India has already signed multi billion dollar defense contracts with America comprising transport and reconnaissance aircrafts and this process is only going to grow in the future.

India’s military upgrade, meanwhile, is driven by perceived security threats from Pakistan and China. Given an incipient domestic defense armament industry, India is importing most of the arms it needs.

According to the Swedish think tank Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, India was the world’s biggest importer of arms between 2006 and 10 accounting for 9 % the global arms trade in the period.

VinodTK · Post by **VinodTK** » 15 Nov 2011 05:37

Aircraft Order from India May Save Hundreds of UK Defense Jobs

An imminent contract order from India for Eurofighter Typhoon jets may save hundreds of jobs at Britain’s BAE Systems.

UK Defense Secretary Philip Hammond has told the House of Commons that he expects confirmation of the order from the Indian government “within the next few weeks.”

"UK ministers have been assiduous over the last few weeks in promoting the case for Typhoon in India and in other countries that are currently considering the purchase of new fast jets,” Hammond said.

"We understand that there's likely to be an announcement in the next few weeks on the decision that has been made by the Indian government."
:
:

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 15 Nov 2011 05:45

Major Fighter Competition Decisions Imminent
Aviation Week

Another contract that could be awarded before year-end is that to build India’s Medium Multirole Combat Aircraft (MMRCA). The Rafale and Typhoon remain in the running. Among the impending selections, the MMRCA deal is for the largest number of aircraft, with a minimum purchase of 126 expected.

However, one government official notes that India’s decision could still slip into 2012 because the two contenders’ pricing is very similar, so the industrial participation package is being scrutinized.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 15 Nov 2011 15:29

The sweating has started! Somehow the EF crowd seem to be the more relaxed of the two sides.Do they have an inkling? Anyway,this race looks as if it is going to the wire and will end in a photo-finish.Will the Ballrooom danseuse waltz away wiht the prize or will the Can-Can cabaret chick seduce the patrons?!

The Japanese seem to be indeed confused over their next manned fighter.What they definitely wanted was the F-22 which was denied to them.The next best seemed to be the JSF,now sadly delayed and grossly expensive,whose capabilitie are also coming into question as time goes by.This prompted the Japnese to start conceptual work on their own "6th-gen fighter",whose technology is as yet nowhere on the scene.In this sense,acquiring the JSF and stealth tech for them which will assist them in developing their own future fighter is preferable to the 4++ gen EF unlike India,which already has a rapidly maturing FGFA JV programme with the T-50.They need to have a qualitative edge over the Chinese who have already flown their own homespun J-20.One presumes that the Japanese will probably have upgraded F-15SEs along with JSFs in the future to meet the large number of PLAAF J-11s (licence built Flankers) and J0-20s in the future.

Taygibay · Post by **Taygibay** » 15 Nov 2011 18:23

Sigh! Sounds like argumenting with the wife, "my possible is much more possible than your possible.". Sigh!

1. EF members have made noises about it in public so a downsizing of its future build order is imminent. Incorrect:

Oh! Really?

The cuts the German defense ministry plans also include a reduction of Eurofighter Typhoons, with the current procurement to be limited to 140 units, 37 fewer than initially planned.

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/de ... d=blogDest

Found in here :

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/Eur ... act-05674/

where one also reads :

Nov 12/11: Eurofighter GmbH touts their Dubai flying display, complete with a graphic showing their impressive flight plan.

They also tout a range of technologies that they hadn’t advertised much before, including thrust-vectoring engine nozzles, an AESA radar, and MBDA’s Marte anti-ship missile. The release appears to blur the line between concepts/plans, and field-ready equipment.

The Rafale is ready, did more than the EF in Lybia and Eurofighter babbles to make it look ready.
And every EF amateur knows that if the Tranche 3B is cancelled as a whole by the 4 nations there
will be no penalty. 14 from Spain undecided and 25 Italy, 37 DE, 48 UK called for slashing so that :

The move will also buy more time for industry partners Alenia Aeronautica, BAE and EADS to secure a planned Tranche 3B production order. Negotiations had been hoped to resume in late 2011, but sources suggest this can also now be deferred by up to two years.

from here :
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... te-362594/

But you're a fanboy, my poor Viv_s.
So that you'd rather spread fallacious arguments to foster your point.

As here :

Or is it on basis of some personal information, the source of which you cannot divulge?

or here :

Or are you repeating what Arthuro claimed a while back - about Rafales locking onto APG-79 emissions in a joint exercise?

Very cute nagging but no, not APG-79 and not co-developed and I'm very sorry
that you are not able to understand the meaning of not discretionary.

But as far as India being tied to the Rafale for upgrades, it goes back to ToT and
industrial offer and investment. If India joins in the F4 and prospective work for
development it will get the same as it would with Eurofighter partnership.
In both cases, India is the winner and if it plays its cards right at present in getting
the most out of the competition, whichever choice it makes, it will be secure as
both ACs were deemed adequate to needs by the IAF and engineers will learn.
And my point of view is that of the Indian MMRCA not French Rafale&UK EF.

Thanks for the answer, so yes KeyPub but no :

Perhaps KP too has more fanboys than we realise.

rather it has less Tyfanboys and more Typhoon amateurs and even simply aero-
military amateurs and that is why some fellow forumers got me interested in
the IAF's future which now runs on the dual Tejas-AMCA and MMRCA-FGFA line.

Now, serious talk ( Oh, yes you can

) :

I agree its more mature but then it'll still going be a while before its scheduled to enter service with the IAF. Given that the aircraft is going to operate well past 2030, I'd much rather they go for the option with better growth potential than the one that's matured first. There's a give and take of course - the EF loses out on low speed high AoA performance compared to carrier capable Rafale and lacks those the two extra wet-points. The Rafale OTOH cannot match the EF's radar performance (at least in brute power output), its BVR optimized high speed high altitude performance as well as its simple internal volume (making upgrades less complex). The latter advantages in my opinion are more important from the IAF's perspective, with a view to counter the PLAAF over the Himalayan ranges. The rest incl. diverse munition outfits, sensor fusion, NG optronics etc are either comparable or can upgraded progressively.

Radar range more than power itself and possibly FoV against modes and EW, yes.
But not

its BVR optimized high speed high altitude performance

since
the Meteor will have the same range on both ACs below that of both radars and DL
can be added. However the opposing PLAAF AC's up to J-10 have similar or lesser
maximum ceilings as the Rafale. Same for climbing rates ( 305R/315EF in m/s ).
But for the last time, YES, IF the intent of the IAF is to used the MMRCA winner in
a mostly AtoA use, go EF. I said so often.
Since however it is down to offers the decision might end up politico-strategico-monetary.
Which is why I'll wait through the "informed sources" interregnum.

Both platforms have met the IAF's requirements; others have not.
Their makers should be proud.
India is in charge now.

Good day all, Tay.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 15 Nov 2011 19:20

if MRCA = multi role combat a/c indicates the IAF wants to use them as swing role not pure a2g play like Jag or pure a2a like Mig29.

with airframes being costly we cannot afford such specialized kit any longer.

Taygibay · Post by **Taygibay** » 15 Nov 2011 20:41

^^^

Agreed Singha!
It is the very certitude that went into the Rafale's design from the start.
One plane able to replace all planes s fighter-bombers go and be able to
do it all at all times. There is the case of the nuclear casings for the
governmental authority's controls that comes close to reconfiguration
but even then between half and hour and an hour and a half as much ...
as an engine change. The rest is bolt on or permanently fixed.
To deny that it has reached its omnirole status ( or will by F3+/2013
to be exact in full fledged fashion ) is as ridiculous as the contention of
some French fanboys that the EF was NOT designed as multirole but
AtoA only when it has more of it not only and the difference in
implementation of capacities stems from other aircraft being available
in inventories. The Typhoon was seen as top in a hi-lo set-up to an
upcoming Harrier III and later Lightning II.
Different reasonings, different results, it makes perfect sense.

rajanb · Post by **rajanb** » 15 Nov 2011 21:20

One thing I have learnt through my tribulations of selling cutting edge electronic stuff. If a product has not been designed for a certain role, then reconfiguring it for another role is trying to shoe horn yourself in a shoe smaller than your foot. (Slightly smaller shoe.) It hurts!

if it wasn't envisaged on the drawing board to begin with, then there are inefficiencies which creep into its original role.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 15 Nov 2011 22:57

It appears that we need an amalgamation of both Rf and Ef features.

captor-e later on, or the slightly ahead rbe2a seems to be the most important enabling technology differences between the two for filling the role gap.

A2G and A2S, is important aspect that IAF would have already analyzed during the tech review process. Both seems to have either shown or promised to support part of the deal, which any will be realized by 2015 time frame.

Let us hope to hear which of these two has a better M8 price. The most irritating and disappointing news for either side would be losing the order by an order of buck or two.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 16 Nov 2011 00:58

Taygibay wrote:Sigh! Sounds like argumenting with the wife, "my possible is much more possible than your possible.". Sigh! Oh! Really?

The cuts the German defense ministry plans also include a reduction of Eurofighter Typhoons, with the current procurement to be limited to 140 units, 37 fewer than initially planned.

Reduction how?

Through exports, not by giving EF Gmbh the finger.

Two Eurofighter Typhoons from Fighter Wing 73 of the German Air Force take off from Rostock-Laage Airbase, Germany. (EUROFIGHTER PHOTO) Faced with penalties for non-acceptance of the 37 remaining aircraft, the German government has decided to put these Eurofighters up for sale, under an agreement issued by the new coalition government. The decision may appease Eurofighter officials, since there will be no reduction in the original 180-aircraft German order.

http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=4384702

They also tout a range of technologies that they hadn’t advertised much before, including thrust-vectoring engine nozzles, an AESA radar, and MBDA’s Marte anti-ship missile. The release appears to blur the line between concepts/plans, and field-ready equipment.

The IAF isn't asking for TVN or the Marte missile. And it wouldn't have shortlisted the EF if there were any doubts about EF's ability to deliver on the AESA promised.

The Rafale is ready, did more than the EF in Lybia and Eurofighter babbles to make it look ready.

The IAF isn't bombing Libya and isn't expecting deliveries tomorrow. We're talking about a variant to be operational in 2015. EF is offering an 1425 T/R AESA by 2015, is Rafale Int. offering a supercruising variant in the same timeline?

And every EF amateur knows that if the Tranche 3B is cancelled as a whole by the 4 nations there
will be no penalty. 14 from Spain undecided and 25 Italy, 37 DE, 48 UK called for slashing so that :
The move will also buy more time for industry partners Alenia Aeronautica, BAE and EADS to secure a planned Tranche 3B production order. Negotiations had been hoped to resume in late 2011, but sources suggest this can also now be deferred by up to two years.

from here :
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... te-362594/

EF amateur? As opposed to? Rafale professionals?

Given the economic impact, its more likely that they will produce the T3B and sell it off at cut prices. The UK may likely offload its entire 48 aircraft T3B commitment to the Saudis. In addiation, for now they are willing to spread out T3A deliveries over a larger period (currently UK produces roughly twice as many EFs annually than France does Rafales). And just like France, that will allow the UK and Germany to defer a decision about future orders to the future(near 2015), when they hope prospects will be rosier.

But you're a fanboy, my poor Viv_s.
So that you'd rather spread fallacious arguments to foster your point.

And an ordinary mortal to boot. We can only strive to be as unbiased, objective, tall, good looking, and all-round perfect as you.

As here :
Or is it on basis of some personal information, the source of which you cannot divulge?
or here :
Or are you repeating what Arthuro claimed a while back - about Rafales locking onto APG-79 emissions in a joint exercise?
Very cute nagging but no, not APG-79 and not co-developed and I'm very sorry
that you are not able to understand the meaning of not discretionary.

Well you can simplified things by saying 'yes/no, but I can't talk about it', but you went after some obscure reference to the Americans instead.

But as far as India being tied to the Rafale for upgrades, it goes back to ToT and
industrial offer and investment. If India joins in the F4 and prospective work for
development it will get the same as it would with Eurofighter partnership.

Has it been offered an invitation to join the F4 development program or export rights for Asia? The EF has offered India co-development, inclusion in EF's supply chain, and workshare in all future orders. All of which is in addition to what the MRCA's RFP stipulates.

In both cases, India is the winner and if it plays its cards right at present in getting
the most out of the competition, whichever choice it makes, it will be secure as
both ACs were deemed adequate to needs by the IAF and engineers will learn.
And my point of view is that of the Indian MMRCA not French Rafale&UK EF.

I'm not saying the British EFs are superior to French Rafales either- its just more suitable for the IAF's operational requirements and comes with an industrial offer more attractive to HAL and the Indian private industry.

Thanks for the answer, so yes KeyPub but no :
Perhaps KP too has more fanboys than we realise.
rather it has less Tyfanboys and more Typhoon amateurs and even simply aero-
military amateurs and that is why some fellow forumers got me interested in
the IAF's future which now runs on the dual Tejas-AMCA and MMRCA-FGFA line.

There's a distinction between fanboys and amateurs?

I'd have thought that amateurs could be fans, and fans were obviously amateurs. But then what do I know.

Now, serious talk ( Oh, yes you can ) :

Alrighty then.

Radar range more than power itself and possibly FoV against modes and EW, yes.
But not
its BVR optimized high speed high altitude performance
since
the Meteor will have the same range on both ACs below that of both radars and DL
can be added. However the opposing PLAAF AC's up to J-10 have similar or lesser
maximum ceilings as the Rafale. Same for climbing rates ( 305R/315EF in m/s ).

The range of the Meteor is not as limiting a factor as one might think. Given the massive breadth of the India's border and lines of control with Pakistan and China vis-a-vis the relatively shallow depth of expected operations, head-on engagements aren't necessarily going to be the rule here. Especially in sectors, with limited AEW&C cover. The aircraft will need to climb and accelerate fast to get maximum energy into its missiles at launch, while at same time attempting to stay out of the enemy's FoV. Having a powerful radar with a wide FoV of its own will be invaluable as well.

But for the last time, YES, IF the intent of the IAF is to used the MMRCA winner in
a mostly AtoA use, go EF. I said so often.

Its not intended to fly interceptions exclusively, but yes Chinese Flankers and J-10s are the biggest challenge the IAF faces.

Since however it is down to offers the decision might end up politico-strategico-monetary.
Which is why I'll wait through the "informed sources" interregnum.

As will we all.

Taygibay · Post by **Taygibay** » 16 Nov 2011 01:47

Published: 19 Nov 2009 12:45

The date from your link, mate!

at 10/21/2011 11:51 AM CDT

and

Nov 14, 2011 15:55 EST

The dates from mine.

Right on radar number of MMICs, wrong on supercruise.

tall, good looking, and all-round perfect as you.

The middle has been said, the other two are lies

Obscure reference was an indication if you look into it.

its just more suitable for the IAF's operational requirements and comes with an industrial offer more attractive to HAL and the Indian private industry.

Links to the first one, please? I have asked for those numerous times.
We'll know the second for sure when bids are revealed.

Fanboy is the pejorative version of die-hard fan by opposition to reasonable?

Main acquisition on the Rafale up to Meteor range is passive through SPECTRA, Viv.
Let the Chineses emit then ...

Enough said, later all, Tay.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 16 Nov 2011 05:08

Singha wrote:if MRCA = multi role combat a/c indicates the IAF wants to use them as swing role not pure a2g play like Jag or pure a2a like Mig29.

with airframes being costly we cannot afford such specialized kit any longer.

Well, if it is MULTIROLE that they want (hence the M in the MRCA I suppose), the Rafale certainly offers a more up to date platform than the EF, which "might" integrate a lot of things in the future. Rafale = taiyar aam, EF it seems = kaccha aam.

asprinzl · Post by **asprinzl** » 16 Nov 2011 08:02

Guys, as to my previous post regarding the split in order....nothing is etched in stones. However, my contacts are no ordinary folks. They have been continually reliable to me for more than a decade now especially in business. From what I hear, this jet orders are not just focused on military jets alone. Apparently, MMS and company are trying acquire a package deal especially now that Europe is in dire need of cash infusion to ward off a major melt down. This package supposedly involves many facets of military/defence technology and know how..including missile tech, naval tech, submarine tech, material science tech, kaveri, satelite/surveillance, space etc. Apparently Sarko, Merkel and Cameron have been all ears to MMS's requests. MMS is said to be deadly serious about matching Chinese power.

Anyways, like I said....nothing is etched in stones and we shall wait for the words straight from the horse's mouth.

It is worth pondering....if they are willing to open wide the doors to their entire store especially in sharing the know-how.....

Not my intention to derail the general flow of discourse in this thread among some fine folks but when I heard about it I thought I might as well relate it here.
Avram

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 16 Nov 2011 08:20

^ Split order is not out of the blue, asprinzl. It is been going rounds for a very long time. So what you said can become true. Thanks for that info. Due to various pulls and pushes of Geo-politics, this gov seems interested in rewarding Rafale to the minimum of ~60 if competition tilted in favour of other contenders. Previously it was F-18 and Rafale before the down select, now it is about Typhoon and Rafale, in this split order business. Considering the tender formalities, order number can be raised from ~120 to ~180 or ~200, to reward the other contender. Lately, Tiffy consortium seems to have influenced the mandarins in delhi. Visibly one can see MoU singed with consortium countries. So your source won't be not very much far from the truth.

arunsrinivasan · Post by **arunsrinivasan** » 16 Nov 2011 09:26

asprinzl wrote:This package supposedly involves many facets of military/defence technology and know how..including missile tech, naval tech, submarine tech, material science tech, kaveri, satelite/surveillance, space etc. Apparently Sarko, Merkel and Cameron have been all ears to MMS's requests. MMS is said to be deadly serious about matching Chinese power.

Avram, I hope this is right.

My concern with splitting the order comes from a logistical perspective - IAF has too many aircraft types already - what will be the impact on infrastructure, spares etc of a split order? Maybe if we had instead of upgrading M-2000, we had gone for Rafale, then maybe this order splitting makes sense. My 2 cents.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 16 Nov 2011 09:59

Like in LCA, if IAF wants more thrust and power, the EJ200s already have them. Though both Rf and Ef are equally good in the turn rates etc, Ef has a upper hand.

Rf has promised us on ToT on radar and they are keen to put Kaveri++ on Rf. That is something can't be ignored. I hope they are not lying, and it is on paper. M2K deal is already on [sadly it should have gone for Rf numbers rather].

Ef talks about partnership, but it is too abstract level of definitions. It is like saying, consider me as your brother., as marketing tactics.

Both platforms has impressed IAF. The only difference being A2G and tested aesa radar availability for Ef. The cost seems to be on the neck to neck.

May be if IAF had clearly given a ranking between these two, it would have been easier, since the cost is similar.

rajanb · Post by **rajanb** » 16 Nov 2011 10:19

SaiK wrote:Like in LCA, if IAF wants more thrust and power, the EJ200s already have them. Though both Rf and Ef are equally good in the turn rates etc, Ef has a upper hand.

Rf has promised us on ToT on radar and they are keen to put Kaveri++ on Rf. That is something can't be ignored. I hope they are not lying, and it is on paper. M2K deal is already on [sadly it should have gone for Rf numbers rather].

Ef talks about partnership, but it is too abstract level of definitions. It is like saying, consider me as your brother., as marketing tactics.

Both platforms has impressed IAF. The only difference being A2G and tested aesa radar availability for Ef. The cost seems to be on the neck to neck.

May be if IAF had clearly given a ranking between these two, it would have been easier, since the cost is similar.

There would be a ranking and it maybe unofficial. Like if one a/c scored 633 out of the approx 643 list and the other scored 624.

However, (this is normally known as T1 and T2), both make the "accepted list". So it will be purely on L1 and L2. I do not have any information to suggest (and this would be the practical way to do it) is to have ToT1 and ToT2. Then it would have a bearing on the price.

So if the multiplier of the T and ToT is better, then the a/c with L2 may actually be chosen because we are getting more bang for the buck.

let us not forget that sales and marketing guys are apt to couch terminology in words that if interpreted wrongly will be promising the moon. And you cannot do anything about it post contract.

sohels · Post by **sohels** » 16 Nov 2011 11:26

asprinzl wrote:MMS is said to be deadly serious about matching Chinese power.

This contradicts his pacifist proclivity. If true, it would be very interesting to know as to what exactly prompted this change of heart.

Hitesh · Post by **Hitesh** » 16 Nov 2011 13:28

sohels wrote:
asprinzl wrote:MMS is said to be deadly serious about matching Chinese power.
This contradicts his pacifist proclivity. If true, it would be very interesting to know as to what exactly prompted this change of heart.

I think he is attempting to project a show of strength so he can be given a free hand to deal with Pakistan as he wish, namely, giving Kashmir on a platter to Pakistan!

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 16 Nov 2011 13:49

The 50% offset investment will also be a crucial factor.There have been some reports that the two nations are enjoying the inability of the Indian industry to "absorb" aviation high-tech and are fiddling their expenses claiming them to be "offests".This is where we must drive the hardest of hard bargains.We should demand engine tech,missile tech,radar tech,avionics,composites,etc.,hard core offsets.

abhischekcc · Post by **abhischekcc** » 16 Nov 2011 17:45

MMS is an American nationalist. His 'pacifism' is relevant only when he wants India to not resist American aggression in its neighhbourhood. IOW, his pacifism is directed towards pakistan because this helps USA. And his desire to arm India (against China) is also in line with American policy to make the two Asian giants butt heads.

Both his 'pacifism' and his 'aggression' are dictated by American policy goals, not Indian.

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 16 Nov 2011 17:46

Rafale warplane deal stalled, UAE says proposal 'unworkable'

* Dassault proposal described as uncompetitive

* Shared frustration over "arrogance of Dassault"

DUBAI, Nov 16 (Reuters) - A long-awaited French deal for Dassault to sell at least 60 Rafale warplanes to the United Arab Emirates appeared to hit a roadblock on Wednesday after the Arab country's crown prince said proposed terms were "uncompetitive and unworkable."

The deal, which had been negotiated for the better part of a year, was thrown into doubt earlier this week when it became clear that the UAE had asked for details on a rival aircraft, the Typhoon built by the Eurofighter consortium.

"Thanks to President (Nicolas) Sarkozy, France could not have done more diplomatically or politically to secure the Rafale deal," Abu Dhabi Crown Prince Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed, deputy of the country's armed forces, said in a statement, adding that Sarkozy's "personal intervention in this process has sustained Dassault at the forefront of our considerations."

"Regrettably Dassault seem unaware that all the diplomatic and political will in the world cannot overcome uncompetitive and unworkable commercial terms," he said.

A source close to the deal blamed the current impasse on the "arrogance" of Dassault, despite French military officials saying they were confident about securing a deal and hopes of finalising the sale at the Dubai Air Show.

"There is a shared frustration in both the UAE and French leaderships at the apparent arrogance of Dassault," the source said.

"Rather than using the strength of the bilateral relationship to close the deal out they are attempting to use it to hold out on pricing and a deal structure that hasn't changed in more than a year and that has been significantly bettered by all competitors."

French air chief General Jean-Paul Palomeros had told Reuters on Monday that the Emirates air force was "very keen with Rafale".