Bharat Rakshak Forum Announcement

Hello Everyone,

A warm welcome back to the Bharat Rakshak Forum.

Important Notice: Due to a corruption in the BR forum database we regret to announce that data records relating to some of our registered users have been lost. We estimate approx. 500 user details are deleted.

To ease the process of recreating the user IDs we request members that have previously posted on the BR forums to recognise and identify their posts, once the posts are identified please contact the BRF moderator team by emailing BRF Mod Team with your post details.

The mod team will be able to update your username, email etc. so that the user history can be maintained.

Unfortunately for members that have never posted or have had all their posts deleted i.e. users that have 0 posts, we will be unable to recreate your account hence we request that you re-register again.

We apologise for any inconvenience caused and thank you for your understanding.

Regards,
Seetal

VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4914
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby Rakesh » 27 Dec 2017 04:08

A Dose of Realism - The Rafale purchase controversy
https://www.telegraphindia.com/opinion/ ... ism-196447

By Air Marshal Brijesh D. Jayal (Retd) - 27 Dec 2017

There is something about the procurement of military equipment from western commercial sources that generates public interest far greater than its financial or strategic content. The entire spectacle of open tendering, nail-biting selection, followed by endless negotiations - all played out in the public domain - does little justice to the very serious business of dealing with a weapon system for the battlefield which, in reality, should remain strictly confidential, if not totally secret. In rare cases of contracts approaching fruition, chances are that at some politically opportune time, they would also become the subject of political controversy with scarcely any concern about the adverse impact this will have on national security, the operational capability of the armed forces or, indeed, on their morale. The latest to join this league is the truncated MMRCA purchase of 36 Rafale aircraft from Dassault Aviation against the Indian air force's requirement of 126 aircraft, a process that was initiated in 2007 as a commercial bid, but remained deadlocked till a new government took charge, scrapped it, and took a decision to go by the government-to-government route. Political opponents have now fired a salvo, alleging that the final contracted unit cost per aircraft was far greater than the one that had been negotiated by the previous government and that due procedures laid down had been violated. This, in turn, has generated a freewheeling public debate - much of it based on limited technical knowledge and perception rather than on hard facts.

As someone who has spent nearly a decade in Air HQ in the planning and procurement branch in various capacities, including its head as deputy chief of air staff, was part of the ministry of defence team that negotiated the Anglo-French Jaguar contract in the late 1970s (which, at the time, had more than its share of speculative media debate and corruption criticisms), observed at close range how the United Kingdom and the French military aerospace industries function and been a part of numerous MoD negotiating teams thereafter, one feels morally bound to inject some realism in this self-defeating debate. This is because whatever may be the political or moral compulsions driving it, at its very least it undermines the confidence that the IAF rank and file will have in its own military leadership and adversely affect morale. That is why the IAF chief has been constrained to take the unusual step of publicly stressing that it was a government-to-government contract, and that it was a better deal with lower cost implications than the earlier MMRCA contract negotiations.

Even in commercial contracts that relate to modern combat aircraft and associated weapons and systems, national governments and strategic security interests of both seller and buyer countries are invariably involved. National governments of aerospace suppliers hence keep a benign check on their own industries - to promote their international sales footprint - as also on their industrial practices to prevent diplomatic embarrassment. All suppliers also require that their costs are treated as 'commercially confident' information for the buyer only. In the event of such contracts being backed through a government-to-government understanding,these commitments take on a more formal role. Unlike many stand-alone products, it is too simplistic a notion to calculate costs per aircraft, because without ground and test equipment, weapons, spares support, repair facilities and a host of other essentials, the aircraft has no utility as an operational weapon system . Any cost comparisons to be meaningful must hence be based on the total system cost on a like-to-like basis. If a realistic analysis were to be attempted comparing the earlier MMRCA proposal and the truncated renegotiated one, this would need a detailed cost-benefit analysis by a body of specialists, who, in the end, would still be left guessing about many subjective issues that have significant value in the operational domain but are not readily quantifiable in financial terms.

In this context, two examples merit mention, although there would be many more. According to Nitin A. Gokhale's book, Securing India the Modi Way: Pathankot, Surgical Strikes and More, Dassault Aviation is now contractually committed to provide performance-based logistic support for five years to two squadrons against the earlier proposal to support only one squadron. Further, it is committed to ensuring that a minimum of 75 per cent of the IAF fleet will always be available for operations. These contractual commitments are a major advantage and, to one's knowledge, have never been undertaken by any earlier supplier to the IAF, including the Hindustan Aeronautics Limited. For those looking for juicy headlines, these may be mundane issues, but for a combat force these have tremendous operational and support value and cannot be quantified in monetary terms. To reduce this debate to higher unit costs being paid without weighing in the operational returns not only exposes our hollow understanding of operational imperatives but is also an unfortunate political red herring that needs a swift burial.

This brings us to the issue of due procedures not being followed. The Bofors scandal has resulted in a defence procurement eco- system within the South Block where procrastination has became the norm. Few in the decision-making chain would venture to take decisions for fear of falling prey to allegations of wrongdoing. The bureaucratic shield for this is hence the defence procurement procedure, first issued in 2002 and now in its ninth edition. Rather than using this as a procedural guide, it is being treated as a policy cast in stone. In the complex world of defence trade, lack of flexibility on the part of those negotiating purchases is a sure recipe for stalling any acquisition proposal as there are innumerable variables. This explains why our armed forces are hopelessly behind in executing modernization plans. Two fundamental errors were made by MoD while issuing the initial tender. First, the bidder was expected to take ownership for the 108 aircraft to be produced by HAL, a demand that is patently impractical. Second, competitive commercial bids were evaluated on the basis of production man-hours as indicated by bidders in their respective production environments without applying any multiplication factor in case of HAL manufacture (a factor that was even applied to earlier licence programmes like the Jaguar). In the event this was determined by HAL as 2.7 times and would have upset calculations that had led to the initial choice of the lowest bidder.

Instead of recognizing these lapses and making amends in a transparent way through policy intervention, the MoD let procedure prevail over operational imperative. To quote from Gokhale's book, "Parrikar told Modi it would be legally untenable to go through with the MMRCA contract since the process had been completely vitiated thanks to Antony's indecisiveness and a crucial oversight in the original terms of the contract." The one exception to the Bofors syndrome thus far has been that at least it did not hamper government-to-government procurement contracts. This would explain how, since 1987, the armed forces have managed to retain some semblance of preparedness. It would now appear that even this last avenue for modernization is being targeted by an attack on this government-to-government Rafale programme. We have a constitutional authority, the comptroller and auditor general of India, to look into the integrity of defence purchases. Having been at the receiving end of its audit of the Jaguar procurement decades ago, this writer can vouch for its thoroughness and professionalism. People's representatives would be fully justified in asking for a CAG audit if there are genuine doubts. But by raising this on the electoral battlefield, we have ended up compromising the cause of the real one. Indian democracy should be made of sterner stuff.

ArjunPandit
BRFite
Posts: 1005
Joined: 29 Mar 2017 06:37

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby ArjunPandit » 27 Dec 2017 05:13

Rakesh wrote:Classic example of penny wise, pound foolish

Qatar Emiri Air Force (QEAF) Fighters
https://www.globalsecurity.org/military ... ghters.htm

Qatar tried to sell its fleet of twelve MIRAGE 2000-5 fighters, which were withdrawn into storage after a very short service period (leaving the Air Force without first line combat planes) reportedly because it was felt to be inappropriate to have French technical assistance personnel and advisors on the same base that houses the CENTCOM forward HQs. A tentative deal with India collapsed in mid-2009 as the price offered by India ($375 million) proved to be less than half the Qatar’s request.

So for a $750 million sale, the Babus went in at 50%. The Babu(s) who came up with the magic number no longer works at the ministry either. Probably retired by now. They pride themselves on being cheap. It may work well in other ministries, but national security is not a game.


i wont be surprised if that babu appears in indian media 10 years down the line, how he saved tejas

Khalsa
BRFite
Posts: 1156
Joined: 12 Nov 2000 12:31
Location: NZL

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby Khalsa » 27 Dec 2017 06:13

aaaah ha ha ha ha ha ha ^^^^^
oh god thats actually funny.

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20673
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby Prem » 27 Dec 2017 09:22

Rakesh wrote:Classic example of penny wise, pound foolish

Qatar Emiri Air Force (QEAF) Fighters
https://www.globalsecurity.org/military ... ghters.htm
So for a $750 million sale, the Babus went in at 50%. The Babu(s) who came up with the magic number no longer works at the ministry either. Probably retired by now. They pride themselves on being cheap. It may work well in other ministries, but national security is not a game.
ArjunPandit wrote:i wont be surprised if that babu appears in indian media 10 years down the line, how he saved tejas

AFAIK,The Babboon hand appeared after younger brother of a senior Bengali Congi leader barged into one negotiating meeting in Dubai and demanded cut or no deal to be signed but was rebuked and refused by "Seller" that these planes will never be sold to India, hence the Tamasha of 50% off. Had this not happen , we would have used them in Kargil to save many Indian lives and kill Paki in wholesale .

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 18861
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby Philip » 27 Dec 2017 13:21

ArjunPandit wrote:i wont be surprised if that babu appears in indian media 10 years down the line, how he saved tejas

It's so tragi-comic that one feels like weeping :((

In such terrifying situs thanks to babudom,the only way for the "Gordian knot",sorry..."Lutyens' knot" to be cut is for the GOI/CCD,to take most urgent immediate decisions on G-to-G basis,to avert the crisis. It did that recently to alleviate the crisis ,shortages of ammo,etc.,which would've been devastating had we been at war. Imagine if that had been done in the case of sub batteries.The submariners killed in the fire aboard a Kilo would still be alive. It should boldly go ahead and take decisions without fear of political bickering in the overall interests of the nation.

dinesh_kimar
BRFite
Posts: 217
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby dinesh_kimar » 27 Dec 2017 18:57

^ Saar, while i agree with all your points and am one of your many admirers, isn't it my duty to remind you that you yourself have said that the submarine tragedy happened cause of a torpedo explosion during loading in the dockyard ?

abhik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2119
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby abhik » 27 Dec 2017 19:43

$60M+ for a decade old fighter in 2009 does not exactly sound like a good deal. That's the same price that a basic airframe was selling for in the mid 90's. Plus if we had to spend $$$ more to upgrade, that just sounds ridiculous.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4914
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby Rakesh » 14 Jan 2018 00:01

No Rat In The Rafale Deal
https://swarajyamag.com/magazine/no-rat ... afale-deal

By Major General Mrinal Suman - The author commanded his regiment in the Kargil-Siachen sector and was the Task Force Commander at Pokharan for sinking shafts for the nuclear tests. He is a prolific writer and is considered to be the foremost expert on myriad aspects of India’s defence industry, procurement regime and offsets.

Most unfortunately, adverse coverage in the media, wittingly or unwittingly, deters decision making and delays procurements. No functionary wants his honesty and diligence questioned. Even the boldest and the most conscientious officers fear subsequent enquiries. The media must certainly highlight acts of corruption and misdemeanours, but it is not necessary to smell a rat in every defence deal.

Cybaru
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2124
Joined: 12 Jun 2000 11:31
Contact:

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby Cybaru » 14 Jan 2018 05:57

abhik wrote:$60M+ for a decade old fighter in 2009 does not exactly sound like a good deal. That's the same price that a basic airframe was selling for in the mid 90's. Plus if we had to spend $$$ more to upgrade, that just sounds ridiculous.


I do think it came with all the supplies/missiles qatar had invested in. which may not be the case this time around if we do ever purchase. The French if smart will offer the withdrawn 30-40 m2k for 10/15 million a pop along with 48-64 rafales at reasonable rates. This will end the SEF and ensure they get most of the orders and it gets us through whatever we are going through.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4070
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby srai » 14 Jan 2018 07:41

abhik wrote:$60M+ for a decade old fighter in 2009 does not exactly sound like a good deal. That's the same price that a basic airframe was selling for in the mid 90's. Plus if we had to spend $$$ more to upgrade, that just sounds ridiculous.

These had a lot of life in them from what I remember. They were Mirage-2000-5 standard (which is what IAF is upgrading to now) and I think the deal included the whole infrastructure and weapons.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 18861
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby Philip » 14 Jan 2018 11:28

I have one thought reg. the massive cost of M2K upgrades.Some years earlier when Sea Harrier upgrades were needed, the IN turned to Israel for the LUSH upgrade as the Brit. offer was considered too expensive.Israel has a vast experience in upgrading aircraft both from east and west, particularly French eqpt.They replicated the Mirage-3 as the Kfir.Their F-16 copy, the Lavi was shunted off to the Chinese for their clone of it! I am sure that an Israeli upgrade of our M2Ks would've cost us a lot less than the French upgrade, now stuck,especially as there is so much input in the LCA programme, AESA EL-2052 radar , missiles, etc.

Zynda
BRFite
Posts: 1431
Joined: 07 Jan 2006 00:37
Location: J4

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby Zynda » 04 Feb 2018 18:11

Found this document on Keypubs; An article about Rafale including current F3R & upcoming F4 standard.

fox3_19.pdf

Posting excerpts about F4...
The Standard F4 will include a whole new generation of sensors and weapons helping boost the fighter’s already fearsome air-to-air and air-to-surface capabilities. The Rafale’s communication suite will be improved thanks to the adoption of Thales Contact software radios, of a robust Satcom system, and of a secure fighter datalink to supplement the L16.

Additional radar functionalities will be introduced for the detection of threats in challenging environments, notably a Ground Moving Target Indicator (GMTI) mode. The Spectra electronic warfare/self-protection suite will also be updated, with enhanced emitter geolocation capabilities and a faster and more accurate jamming response.

With the advent of the Standard F4, French aircrews will be equipped with a Helmet-Mounted Display System (HMDS) allowing off-boresight target designation to be performed while improving aircrew situational awareness in the air-to-air and air-to-surface roles. The Rafale cockpit will also be progressively modernised, with new, larger lateral multifunction displays to be introduced.

Thales is heavily investing on the promising Gallium Nitride (GaN) technology that will shape the future of the Rafale’s sensors from 2025. Compared to current AESA modules, GaN transmitters/receivers will prove even more powerful, but with reduced electric and cooling requirements, allowing the RBE2 radar’s already impressive performance to be significantly increased and additional functionalities to be performed via the radar antenna.

New multifunction GaN arrays are likely to find their way onto the Rafale, thus multiplying the number of sensor apertures to enlarge the radar’s field of view. GaN antennas will also be adopted for the Spectra jammers. Various new weapons are due to be introduced for the Rafale over the coming years, either as part of spiral upgrades or as part of the future Standard F4, including upgraded Scalp stealth cruise missiles of the Scalp / Storm Shadow family and improved and heavier Hammer (Highly Agile, Modular Munition Extended Range) precision weapons. The Mica family of air-to-air missiles will be upgraded too, to guarantee operational relevance against a whole range of emerging threats. With all these improvements on the horizon, the battle-hardened Rafale will remain a lethal combat tool for the foreseeable future.

Thanks to constant investment, to the unconditional support of the French Defence Procurement Agency and to the recent successes on the export market, the Rafale is set to stay in production for years to come, with an additional batch of Rafales likely to be procured by the French MoD around 2020.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 18861
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby Philip » 04 Feb 2018 18:52

Dinesh .Two Kilo tragedies.SR blowing up during weapons loading while in harbour and the other, SK ,I think due to a a battery fire at sea.

dinesh_kimar
BRFite
Posts: 217
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby dinesh_kimar » 04 Feb 2018 22:59

Ah I see Saar. You were indeed right.

VKumar
BRFite
Posts: 390
Joined: 15 Sep 1999 11:31
Location: Mumbai,India

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby VKumar » 07 Feb 2018 05:44

Twitter is ablaze with the price controversy on Rafale, and the secrecy clause evoked by the government.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 18861
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby Philip » 07 Feb 2018 07:45

What secrecy clause?

prat.patel
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 33
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby prat.patel » 08 Feb 2018 00:51

^^^
Looks like some politicization is going on for petty gains and under-mining national security.
Some politicians are claiming corruption in Rafale acquisition and are demanding a detailed cost breakdown in parliament. Govt has responded by stating in-ability to table the detailed break down cost due to some terms and conditions in the contact which prevents them from doing so. Approximate per unit cost has already been provided as claimed by Govt.

Not sure where this is headed. It all seems like unnecessary noise to me.

Experts may chime in and clear things up, if possible.
Last edited by prat.patel on 08 Feb 2018 01:23, edited 1 time in total.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4914
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby Rakesh » 08 Feb 2018 00:59

^^^ Each and every one of the Congress' claims can be countered with a blow torch. The Congress is talking utter tripe. Not a single accusation is true. As Tom Cruise says in the movie -- A Few Good Men, "It is not what you believe, but it is what you can prove."

However, in politics...perception plays a big role. And that is what the Congress is doing. Creating a false perception, because there is no reality to anything they have said.

brvarsh
BRFite
Posts: 171
Joined: 03 Mar 2011 20:29

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby brvarsh » 08 Feb 2018 01:21

In parts Congress government is to be blamed why HAL and OFB have performed under par. There is a strategic angle to all price points too. We would not buy a Chinese JF17 even if China is willing to sell it for half the price of Tejas- would we?

prat.patel
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 33
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby prat.patel » 08 Feb 2018 01:40

Totally agree with you guys!

Just hope that the Govt. finds a effective way to shut this noise down. Its a unnecessary distraction to the much required efforts being put in to defense area by this Govt.

I am of a firm opinion that - strategically we are doing the much required right thing by backing indigenous platforms. But at the same time while these indigenous platforms get ramped up, we need to fill in the short term GAPs with tactical acquisitions. 36 Rafales was a tactical buy.

There is no need for any political party/person to drag this acquisition into controversy irrespective of what we had to pay.
Just saddened by the total disregard in this case for national interest just to score some political brownie points. :cry:

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 18861
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby Philip » 08 Feb 2018 04:14

GOI should engage with the Parliamentary standing committee on defence and explain the Rafale deal and the classified portions, costs, etc.That should take the wind out of the sails of the Oppn. The debate can then go to more important matters like Paki perfidy and dealing with the situ in the Maldives.Again Oppn. given a classified sit-rep and a consensus of course of action obtained if at all.

Srutayus
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 50
Joined: 29 Aug 2016 05:53

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby Srutayus » 08 Feb 2018 04:14

Here is an article I wrote a few months ago when the Congress was trying to pitch the Eurofighter: https://www.myind.net/Home/viewArticle/the-rafale-vs-eurofighter-debate-is-a-non-starter-vested-interests-should-stop-trying-to-derail-the-rafale-deal

Note the relationship to the AugustaWestland scandal and Sonia Gandhi's office. Only the Congress can make a mega scam even while sitting in the opposition.

Sumeet
BRFite
Posts: 1204
Joined: 22 May 2002 11:31

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby Sumeet » 08 Feb 2018 09:54

A great debate on Rafale hosted by Vishnu Som of NDTV. Pretty much all arguments of Congress slapped back.

https://www.ndtv.com/video/news/the-buc ... ncy-478291

jaysimha
BRFite
Posts: 375
Joined: 20 Dec 2017 14:30

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby jaysimha » 08 Feb 2018 10:51

Information Relating to Inter-Governmental Agreement on Rafale

Unfounded allegations are being made regarding the 2016 Inter-Governmental Agreement (IGA) to procure 36 Rafale aircraft in fly-away condition from France. This would normally not have merited a response but for the serious damage being caused by the misleading statements, sought to be repeatedly perpetrated on a serious matter of national security.

It ought to be remembered that it was under the ten-year tenure of the previous Government at the Centre that the earlier initiative of 2002 to meet requirement of the Indian Air Force (IAF) for much needed augmentation of its fighter strength ran aground. In 2012, the then Defence Minister exercised an unprecedented personal veto on the laid down institutional process then underway for procurement of 126 Medium Multi-Role Combat Aircraft (MMRCA). All this happened when there was an alarming decline in IAF’s fighter strength.

In another effort to twist facts, the Government is asked why it did not conduct negotiations with a particular company representing a competing fighter aircraft. It seems to have been conveniently forgotten that the then Government itself had rejected that company’s unsolicited offer made days after closure of the bid process, declared Rafale (DA) as the L1 bidder and had commenced negotiations with it in February 2012.

The demand that the Government disclose the details and value of the contract for the Rafale aircraft contracted in 2016 is unrealistic. [In keeping with confidentiality requirements, the UPA Government had also expressed its inability to disclose the price of various defence procurements, including in its responses to Parliament Questions]. The approximate acquisition cost of the Rafale aircraft has already been provided to the Parliament. Provision of exact item-wise cost and other information will reveal, inter alia, details regarding the various customizations and weapons systems specially designed to augment the effectiveness and lethality of the assets, impact our military preparedness and compromise our national security. Such details would also come under the ambit of the security agreement signed in 2008. Thus, in not revealing the item-wise details of the contract, the Government is merely following in letter and spirit the confidentiality provisions of a bilateral India-France Agreement of 2008 signed by the previous Government.

As doubts are sought to be created about the 2016 contract for 36 aircraft, it is once again strongly reiterated that the deal secured by the Government is better in terms of capability, price, equipment, delivery, maintenance, training, etc., than that notionally negotiated by the then Government in a process it could not conclude in ten years. Moreover, the present Government completed these negotiations in just about one year.

It is also stressed once again that the procurement of 36 Rafale aircraft through an Inter-Governmental Agreement (IGA) with France to meet the urgent need of the IAF is strictly in accordance with the Defence Procurement Procedure in all aspects including mandating, conducting and monitoring of negotiations and seeking all necessary approvals, including that of the Cabinet Committee on Security, before entering into the IGA. The aircraft had already been evaluated successfully by IAF during 2009-10.

It may also be noted that contrary to the impression sought, to be created by the Opposition, in the earlier proposal to procure Rafale, which ended in a stalemate, there was no provision for transfer of technology but only to manufacture under licence. The Government was unable to agree on the terms for even that in its negotiations with the vendor, resulting in the long-drawn exercise under the earlier Government ultimately turning futile. Further, no Indian Offset Partner for the 2016 deal for 36 Rafale Aircraft has been so far selected by the vendor (DA) because as per the applicable guidelines, DA is free to select the Indian Offset Partners and provide their details at the time of seeking offset credits, or one year prior to discharge of offset obligation.

NAo/Rajib


(Release ID :176321)

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 18861
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby Philip » 08 Feb 2018 12:18

So no TOT ever sought for the MMRCA only screwdriver tech.Screw-tech featured all our deals previously with the MKI achieving the best % of indigenisation.FGFA offer is for TOT. Will the much touted SEFs come with S-tech or genuine TOT? Some original deal and at what cost too..,

deejay
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3766
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby deejay » 08 Feb 2018 13:13

Srutayus wrote:Here is an article I wrote a few months ago when the Congress was trying to pitch the Eurofighter: https://www.myind.net/Home/viewArticle/the-rafale-vs-eurofighter-debate-is-a-non-starter-vested-interests-should-stop-trying-to-derail-the-rafale-deal

Note the relationship to the AugustaWestland scandal and Sonia Gandhi's office. Only the Congress can make a mega scam even while sitting in the opposition.


Nice article Sir. Thank you for sharing.

prat.patel
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 33
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby prat.patel » 08 Feb 2018 22:27

Srutayus wrote:Here is an article I wrote a few months ago when the Congress was trying to pitch the Eurofighter: https://www.myind.net/Home/viewArticle/the-rafale-vs-eurofighter-debate-is-a-non-starter-vested-interests-should-stop-trying-to-derail-the-rafale-deal

Note the relationship to the AugustaWestland scandal and Sonia Gandhi's office. Only the Congress can make a mega scam even while sitting in the opposition.


Thank you Sir!!!
Excellent piece.
Thanks for sharing!

Mihir
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 851
Joined: 14 Nov 2004 21:26

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby Mihir » 09 Feb 2018 21:34

I wrote a piece on the contrived nature of the Rafale scam for Newslaundry: https://www.newslaundry.com/2018/02/09/ ... y-dassault

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4914
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby Rakesh » 09 Feb 2018 23:29

Mihir, good job on the above. Very nice.

Srutayus
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 50
Joined: 29 Aug 2016 05:53

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby Srutayus » 10 Feb 2018 00:34

Thank you.
It is good that we at BRF are tying to put these things out there.
The Co***ess is stooping to new lows with their disregard to national interests. They have continually surprised by further surpassing their own low standards of morality with their actions, such as during the surgical strikes, the Doklam standoff and the Rafale purchase. One reflection upon seeing the image during the stand-off of the "Family" smiling with the Chinese ambassador, who was bad mouthing India in the crassest terms, is how they are able to get away with it.
But they are very good at messaging with a collaborative media ecosystem and a generally ignorant public.

We who know better must try and do the needful.
Last edited by Srutayus on 10 Feb 2018 02:01, edited 1 time in total.

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3803
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby Kartik » 10 Feb 2018 00:52

Very good article Mihir!

Please pass it along to other publications as well. Firstpost, Swarajya and others if possible. More people need to read it. The whole farce of a forced "scam" where none exists is too much for bear, especially coming from the Congress party, which ran the entire MRCA exercise into the ground. They're trying to raise a stink where none really exists, just in order to try and taint the Modi govt. in time for the next elections.

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3803
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby Kartik » 10 Feb 2018 00:57

Just one data point- the man hours for the HAL assembled Rafales were apparently 2.4 times higher than those for Dassault assembled Rafales. That estimation remained a point of contention till the very end of the MRCA contest.

Also one must remember that way before the demise of the MRCA deal, Dassault had already indicated that they wanted Reliance to build the 108 Rafales in India. And that happened during the UPA's time itself, as far as I can recall.

Also, Meteors were not part of the original MRCA offer from Dassault and was only taken up for the 36 unit order. That is one costly missile, but reputed to be the most lethal in the world. Also, this deal includes the cost of IAF specific modifications to the Rafales. Essentially, the price that was reportedly agreed upon was very close to what the French Air Force paid for its Rafales, which in itself is a big deal. Generally, export prices are substantially greater than those for home Air Forces. Where Dassault would try to make up a profit would be on the support deals and the spares/training, etc.

Mihir
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 851
Joined: 14 Nov 2004 21:26

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby Mihir » 10 Feb 2018 02:46

Kartik, Rakesh, thanks! :)

It was pointed out on Twitter that the Dassault-RDL JV was signed in 2012, before Modi even took office. Also, good point about the Meteors!

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4914
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby Rakesh » 10 Feb 2018 20:48

Controversy, not a scam: Can’t let Rafale heat freeze military modernisation
https://theprint.in/2018/02/10/controve ... rnisation/

The pressing reason for the government to come out with a strategy to deal with the controversy is that India simply needs many more Rafale jets. The 36 fighters purchased are nowhere enough to meet the concerns of an air force that is fast retiring its Soviet-era fleets. This number needs to be doubled or even tripled at the earliest.

The turnaround time that India has when it comes to pushing through a defence deal – the fastest we have done any in recent times is three years – does not give the air force the luxury of going through a whole new selection process.

The air force’s plans to procure single-engine jets has already hit a roadblock. The best-case scenario is that to make up the numbers, the air force can repeat orders for the Rafale jets, preferably placed within the next two-three years so that a continuous supply of the fighters flows in even as India retires its MiGs.

Cosmo_R
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3405
Joined: 24 Apr 2010 01:24

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby Cosmo_R » 10 Feb 2018 22:13

By 2025, the IAF will retire ~250 fighters. Assuming HAL goes full bore with 2 lines and 32 LCA MK-1As per year from 2019-2025, that's 225 a/c. Add the 18 follow-on options for Rafale and you get 243. All of this to keep the fighter squadrons at 32. That's not accounting for attrition.

I'm not sure HAL can deliver 32 LCA-MK-1A a/c consistently over 7 years. It becomes a required run rate issue: if they don't do 32 in 2019, it piles up.

We know we can't afford 126 Rafales at current prices. And we sure as heck are not going to afford them as inflation kicks in beyond the current 54 (36+18 follow-on)

It would have been nice to have the 225 as mix of Mk-1As and Mk2s but that is not going to happen.

Hence the SEF.

Cosmo_R
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3405
Joined: 24 Apr 2010 01:24

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby Cosmo_R » 10 Feb 2018 22:20

Kartik wrote:Just one data point- the man hours for the HAL assembled Rafales were apparently 2.4 times higher than those for Dassault assembled Rafales. That estimation remained a point of contention till the very end of the MRCA contest. ....

Also one must remember that way before the demise of the MRCA deal, Dassault had already indicated that they wanted Reliance to build the 108 Rafales in India. And that happened during the UPA's time itself, as far as I can recall..


I think it might have been 27% higher though I might be confusing this with the SU30MKI figures. Also, HAL wanted Dassault to be responsible for all a/c assembled by HAL which was a non-starter. Dassault came out and said no way it would work with HAL.

Finally, it's kind of obvious that CKD/assembly means the a/c have be assembled by the OEM, disassembled, packed into 'kits' like IKEA and reassembled locally. That cost will not be overcome by cheaper local labor.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4914
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby Rakesh » 10 Feb 2018 22:32

42 squadrons are required. 30 to 32 exist now (depending on source). They are;

Su-30MKI @ 15 Squadrons
Jaguars @ 6 Squadrons
MiG-29s @ 3 Squadrons
Mirage 2000s @ 2.5 Squadrons
MiG-27UPGs @ 2 Squadrons
MiG-21 Bison @ 4 Squadrons

So there is a 10 squadron shortage. Now by 2025, the strength will be at....

Su-30MKI @ 17 Squadrons
Jaguars @ 6 Squadrons
MiG-29s @ 3 Squadrons
Mirage 2000s @ 2.5 Squadrons
Rafale @ 2 Squadrons
Tejas Mk1 @ 2 Squadrons
Tejas Mk1A @ 4 Squadrons

The above comes to 36.5 Squadrons. If the Rafale order is doubled to 4 squadrons (from the present 2 squadrons), you will add 38 squadrons. And as for affording additional Rafales, the option exists in the contract for a follow on 36. The initial cost has already been placed in terms of air bases, tools, spares, weaponry. A repeat order is just for aircraft. It will not be the same cost as the first batch.

And as for Tejas production, 40 Mk1s and 83 Mk1As are scheduled for manufacture. The goal in 2019 is to achieve a 16/yr production rate and not 32. HAL is on the way to achieving that. At 16/yr, they will achieve that number in 5+ years. So by 2025, all 83 will be delivered. Looking at the first flights of the series production Tejas aircraft, it can be seen that the production time is indeed coming down. See below...

Line 1 ... SP-1 ... LA-5001 ... 01-Oct-14
Line 1 ... SP-2 ... LA-5002 ... 22-Mar-16 (1.5 Years from SP1)
Line 1 ... SP-3 ... LA-5003 ... 28-Sep-16 (Six Months from SP2)
Line 1 ... SP-4 ... LA-5004 ... 03-Mar-17 (Six Months from SP3)
Line 2 ... SP-5 ... LA-5005 ... 02-Feb-18 (first aircraft off the second line)
Line 1 ... SP-6 ... LA-5006 ... 30-Jun-17 (Three Months from SP4)
Line 1 ... SP-7 ... LA-5007 ... 12-Dec-17 (Six Months from SP6)

Looking at the above, the amount of time it takes for SP aircraft is only going down. And now with the second line also open, the number of SP aircraft deliveries to the IAF will only go up.

If the GOI cannot afford 126 Rafales, it will never afford 108 SEF. So if the GOI is not willing to make the investment - because of a cost issue - the SEF will be no different. The same "inflation" applies to the SEF as well. The investment for the Rafale has already been made at Halwara and Ambala AFS. Beyond the four squadrons of Rafales - at these two air bases - to make an investment for Rafales at another air base might be cost prohibitive for the IAF.

To make up that shortfall of 4 to 5 squadrons, from 38 in 2025 to 42 by 2032....additional Tejas aircraft are *FAR* more cost effective than SEF. Hence the need for no SEF :) Because cost and inflation are big factors. To quote srai, no need for 100+ *NEW* silver bullets.

Cosmo_R
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3405
Joined: 24 Apr 2010 01:24

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby Cosmo_R » 10 Feb 2018 23:32

Here's Angad Singh's (Vayusena) projection:

X.1 2012 2017 2022 2027 2032
SEPECAT Jaguar 6 6 6 6 0
Mikoyan MiG-29 3 3 3 3 0
Dassault Mirage 2000 3 3 3 3 0
Sukhoi Su-30 9 13 14 14 14
Mikoyan MiG-27 5 0 0 0 0
Mikoyan MiG-21 11 6 4 0 0
Indian designed jets 0 1 3 6 6
Dassault Rafale 0 0 2 2 2

You may be able to access the blog it may not be behind the paywall. In which case you can see the above numbers in Excel

https://blogs.wsj.com/briefly/2016/09/2 ... -shortage/

Your numbers show 17 squadrons (340 a/c) of SU30. I thought the number was around 280. Have they been ordered?

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4914
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby Rakesh » 11 Feb 2018 00:27

Cosmo, the exact number is 272 for the Rambha. That number got increased to 314 as announced by ACM Dhanoa on 08 Oct 2017. So 40 aircraft more. And remember, my sqn strength numbers are all based on 18 aircraft per squadron. That number varies, but is generally the rule of thumb.

A single engine American fighter is coming. But it will not be F-16 or the Swedish Gripen. SEF as we know it now will die. A new RFI will be issued and it will be tailor made for the F-35. It will not be 100 aircraft. But more like 2 (or may be 3) squadrons. Just to break down the door and clear the path for other fighters. The same will happen for the Navy contest as well. It will be F-35B/C. Deliveries will happen only in the middle of the next decade.

Negotiations will take that long. But that is a good thing, as both sides have opportunities to test the waters of strategic defence partner. I have zero faith in Pak-Fa. This new relationship - between the US and India - will blossom and it must. But it is just like a new marriage. It will take years before they begin to truly understand each other. There will be give-and-take on both sides.

I am a strong proponent of you cannot fight, what you cannot see, which the F-35 does beautifully well. Nobody can do stealth like the Americans. Just as is in carrier ops, they have near divine like capabilities in that sphere.

Station the two F-35A squadrons at a single airbase, which the Amreekis can inspect all they want and whenever they want. Everyone is happy. Everyone wins.

But make up the present dip in numbers via a follow on order of 44 Rafales. That number may seem small, but the capability leap is HUGE. To just order 36 Rafales is truly a waste of money.

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2342
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

Postby kit » 11 Feb 2018 03:47

Rakesh wrote:I am a strong proponent of you cannot fight, what you cannot see, which the F-35 does beautifully well. Nobody can do stealth like the Americans. Just as is in carrier ops, they have near divine like capabilities in that sphere.

Station the two F-35A squadrons at a single airbase, which the Amreekis can inspect all they want and whenever they want. Everyone is happy. Everyone wins..


Has the F 35 ever been in consideration for the IAF ? ..all the news i see is the contrary . LM is interested only in getting some quick buck for an obsolete line quite unlike Boeing which is going to great lengths to pick up partners and work with the indian industry even before a possible success for the 18 !!


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: alexis, ArjunPandit, Kakarat, ssaravanan and 42 guests