Rafale & MMRCA News and Discussions-9 August, 2014

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 02 Jan 2015 10:21

NRao wrote: I still think the Rafale will come. France, the nation, needs the infusion of funds.

Why should it be Indian taxpayer that should pay the French nation. The M2K is already costing us an arm and a leg.

srai · Post by **srai** » 02 Jan 2015 10:43

deejay wrote:^^^ He will / should get to that. First step was to say it. That is done. Now, make everyone say it - either by persuasion or Force. After all we have been in this MMRCA hunt for what - 10 years? This will have to be forced down a lot of throats. Else, this is just a comment in exasperation.

Why medium, when heavy does all that and more at the same price or lesser and it is already available?

With 5th-Gen heavy PAK-FA/FGFA around the corner (~2022+), they will take over the air-dominance role from Su-30MKIs by 2030. By 2030s, medium category 5th-Gen AMCA would be getting ready for induction. So rather than going for a new "medium" type in Rafale of 4.5-Gen lineage now it would be better to utilise more Su-30MKIs in the "medium" category until AMCA can replace them post 2035. One less type to deal with.

If a mix of FGFA and Su-30MKI squadrons are used to augment "medium" category and replace legacy types in the 2030s, it would probably look something like this:

4 x new Su-30MKI squadrons -> instead of Rafales [future -> MKIs replaced by UCAV when ready post 2045]
14 x existing Su-30MKI squadrons (reassigned to "medium" role) -> replace Mirage-2000, MiG-29, Jaguar [future -> MKIs replaced by AMCA/UCAV squadrons when ready post 2035]
12 x new PAK-FA/FGFA squadrons -> take over heavy role from reassigned Su-30MKI squadrons

LCA Mk.1/2 to replace MiG-21/27s in the light category by 2030:

12 x LCA Mk.1/2 squadrons -> replace MiG-21Bison/Bis/M & MiG-27

Total squadrons in the 2030s: 42
Number of types in service by 2035: 3 (FGFA, Su-30MKI, LCA) [post 2035 -> Su-30MKIs and LCAs replaced by AMCA and UCAV (over the course of two decades)]

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 02 Jan 2015 10:48

Absolutely.The M-200upgrade costs as much/more than a brand new MIG-29K! The report quoting the DM has this hard truth."The IAF currently plans to have 272 Su-30MKI fighters by about 2018. HAL’s Nashik production line is building the fighter at Rs 358 crore each, less than half the estimated cost of buying the Rafale."

So for the price of one Rafale the IAF will get 2 FLankers. However,one should add that this will necessitate 2 extra pilots.We could always opt for an SU-35 if need be. This is going to be the biggest hurdle that the Rafale/French will have to overcome. The Flankers are already being built in large number in India without any major problem. The IAF can also upgrade them as is planned into Super-Sukhois with BMos,LR AAMs,etc., to make them even more potent. Who will need another type like the Rafale then,with the money saved plowed into the LCA MK-2 and FGFA programmes?

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 02 Jan 2015 10:55

Pratyush wrote:
NRao wrote: I still think the Rafale will come. France, the nation, needs the infusion of funds.
Why should it be Indian taxpayer that should pay the French nation. The M2K is already costing us an arm and a leg.

There are multiple dimensions. One that is not is the cost aspect - they, as far as I can tell, are not debating about the cost, seem to have come to an agreement on that topic. (My prediction is $15 billion.)

The Ukrainian crisis was ..................

Nukes do preserve peace.

BTW, Russia is being relied upon for "Energy" (Japan for "Infrastructure, China for "Finance").

Mki is a easy option

Easy. Not cheap.

Nor wise.

asprinzl · Post by **asprinzl** » 02 Jan 2015 11:40

Fact of the matter is that India waited too long to get the MMRCA. More than 20 years after the IAF approached the GOI. Apparently MMS government was not really keen on the purchase at all. If the said 200 MMRCA had been in the arsenal in 2008 I doubt Mumbai massacre would have happened. The additional 200 planes would have given the perps pause. Today while the world is inching towards stealth and 5th generation (USA is working on 6th gen), I think India should shelve the Rafale (MMRCA) and concentrate on the MKI while vigorously push on with LCA and MCA locally. The FGFA may or may not pan out but the Rafale is too late to the party and fast approaching the out of date gate.

deejay · Post by **deejay** » 02 Jan 2015 11:53

NRao ji if Rafale is dropped and if MKI is not a wise choice then the option would be?

... surely not EF (equally expensive) or Grippen (then why not LCA) and the F18's are out of production. F35 would be also like Eurofighter (expensive) plus there will be strings attached.

As far as I see, if Rafale is dropped, then MKI is the wisest choice. At least we have one less type to deal with and we already have the TOT and local manufacturing.

abhik · Post by **abhik** » 02 Jan 2015 11:59

NRao wrote:
Why medium, when heavy does all that and more at the same price or lesser and it is already available?
In simple words, were told that the IAF had plans that included three categories and that that plan should not be broken/disturbed/etc.

The pertinent question is the ratio the IAF want its fighter fleet to be distributed in the light-medium-heavy categories? Logically one would have more of the lighter and cheaper fighters and fewer of the heavier and more expensive fighters. Say a ratio of 1:2:3 for heavy:medium:light or 1:2 for heavy:light. But thats hardly the case if one were to go by the current plans. I drew up a chart showing the the IAF fighter numbers over the years(2002 to 2030) with the heavies(MKI, FGFA/PAKFA) in shades of red, medium weights(Canberra, Mig-23, Mig-27, Mig-29, Rafale) in in shades of green and the Light weights(Mig-21, LCA, Jaguar, M2000) in shades of blue. The numbers are from wiki and guesstimates for past and future, so they may not be too precise. But the trend is clear.

Data used for the plot:-
Year 2002 2006 2010 2014 2018 2022 2026 2030
Mig-21 420 360 300 240 140 80 0 0
LCA Tejas 0 0 0 0 20 40 88 120
Jaguar 140 140 140 140 140 140 100 60
Mirage-2000 44 54 54 54 54 54 54 20
Rafale 0 0 0 0 0 40 100 126
Mig-23 135 60 0 0 0 0 0 0
Canberra 80 30 0 0 0 0 0 0
Mig-29 66 66 66 66 66 66 33 0
Mig-27 160 160 160 80 40 0 0 0
FGFA/PAKFA 0 0 0 0 0 0 50 100
Su-30MKI 0 40 120 200 270 270 270 270

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 02 Jan 2015 12:14

Ajai Shukla needs to read on his own a little more than rely simply on off the cuff numbers.

As per latest CAG report on HAL and Su-30 production, as of March 2013, there was production shortfall of 31 fighter a/c. As against 112 fighters which were to be produced by this time period, only 81 fighters were delivered. And even this number had fighters where work share of Russians was increased to expedite delivery to make up for delays.

Unless, substantially more a/c are imported directly from Russia (termed as Phase 1 and Phase 1+ in contracts), that timeline is slipping into 2020-2021 territory.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 02 Jan 2015 12:51

If we want to prevent another type being acquired in the interests of standardisation,ease of maintenance,etc., then there are only 3 types suitable.M-2000s (no longer in production,only second-hand ones available and huge upgrade costs),MIG-29s ( in service with the IN and IAF,v. reasonable cost,35s available too) and MKIs. To save costs, it would be prudent to order at least another 60 MIG-29s of K/35 capability which would cost approx. 60% of an MKI and the rest required MKIs/Super Sukhois.

A pertinent point brought out in the graph by Abhik is that there has been no replacement for the Canberras. One can't understand the IAF's shortsightedness in this glaring deficiency esp. when China has hundreds of bombers. SU-34s are one option.

deejay · Post by **deejay** » 02 Jan 2015 13:02

@abhik: Wonderful effort. Thank You.

Only as an academic discussions and working on the numbers we have in your chart.
While it is obvious that the heavies increase and medium and light decrease an interesting data point is the over all reduction in fleet size. As per the numbers you crunched we had 1045 fighters in 2002 and we are down to 696 fighters by 2030. Now while 1045 fighters would mean ~ 50 Sqns (which is definitely erroneous), 696 fighters would be around ~ 34 Sqns (more like today's numbers).

The heavies make a start in the late 90's and then go on to hold a steady number from some where around 2022. Since they are a new bracket hence will have an increasing trend initially. It is the procurement of light's that is very low. In the medium category AMCA is not reflected since we do not have the numbers (I am not sure here).

I think it is best to assume a set number of Sqns that the IAF would like to acquire (since there is no definitive no. of sqns) to really forecast how those will be filled up through either the LCA or AMCA production by 2030. For me a good number would be 45 Sqns or 900 fighters. Once it is at 900 fighters, a proper analysis of heavy: medium:light may be done.

Again heavy:medium:light of 1:2:3 ratio would mean 150:300:450 for a 900 aircraft complement. Already, in 2030 we have 370 projected heavies, hence this is not where IAF is headed. The light aircraft are at 200 and the medium at 126. So if the IAF continues the trend for 900 aircraft it will probably end up with heavy: medium:light ratio of 3:1:2 (or 450:150:300). The best case from here would be heavy: medium:light of 375:150:375 aircraft in the heavy: medium:light distribution for the 45 Sqn scenario.

Just my thoughts.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 02 Jan 2015 13:14

The question that comes to mind looking at the numbers and types mentioned above. Why is the IAf so determined to retain the museum of aircraft types.

Along with the non standardised logistical tail for the various types. Amongst the types listed, I see that LCA Mk 1 is able to replace today. The Mig 21, (23), 27, & 29. The Mk 2 will be able to deal with the M2K replacement and the Jag, in terms of payloads, & capability.

So why not try & standardise with 2 major types by 2025 (LCA & Su 30 MkI). With Pak FA and AMCA coming in post 2025.

member_28756 · Post by **member_28756** » 02 Jan 2015 13:37

Pratyush wrote:The question that comes to mind looking at the numbers and types mentioned above. Why is the IAf so determined to retain the museum of aircraft types.

Along with the non standardised logistical tail for the various types. Amongst the types listed, I see that LCA Mk 1 is able to replace today. The Mig 21, (23), 27, & 29. The Mk 2 will be able to deal with the M2K replacement and the Jag, in terms of payloads, & capability.

So why not try & standardise with 2 major types by 2025 (LCA & Su 30 MkI). With Pak FA and AMCA coming in post 2025.

I agree the IAF should be told this is the solution and it must ACCEPT IT. No more foreign acquisition except for the FGFA in the future !!

deejay · Post by **deejay** » 02 Jan 2015 14:10

^^^ The existing Jags, Mirage 2Ks and Mig 29s have life left in them and hence will continue till they are retired. Else, by 2030 assuming Rafale comes we have the following six types in 2030:
Su 30 MKI
LCA Mk 1
LCA Mk 2
Rafale
FGFA
AMCA

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 02 Jan 2015 23:13

if Rafale is dropped and if MKI is not a wise choice then the option would be?

Which is why I think the Rafale will fly in IAF colors.

Recall, per some open source reports, the IAF did *not* want a Russian air craft as a MMRCA. I can see the MoD replacing the rafale with the MKI, but cannot see the IAF accepting it without having a say in the matter. There is plenty that the Rafale brings - outside of the cost @ $20 billion. More to say, but will leave it at that.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 03 Jan 2015 00:22

Ooh la la, the French! They developed one of the best, if not the best medium fighter of all times, but can't sell a single piece of it outside their country! If they don't get their act right soon, they might get kicked out of a potential sale of 200 planes!!

It is not looking good for India and the IAF either (in my opinion). The BJP govt has continued with the standard knee-jerk reaction to every problem: order more Su-30s! The result: the top-heavy IAF continues to get even more top-heavy! Come 2025, we are staring at 400-480 Su-30s, and 100-odd LCAs, and some coughing Migs, Mirages and Jaguars. By 2030, we are looking at 400-480 Su-30s, 120-200 FGFAs, 200-odd LCAs and with loads of luck 100 AMCAs! It is seriously not funny!!

member_26622 · Post by **member_26622** » 03 Jan 2015 00:56

Six aircraft types will require an empire to pay the bill and support. Especially when three of them will cost more than 150 plus million dollars easy. We are again disconnected from reality - look at how many of these uber planes are been deployed or planned by France, Germany and UK. Our economy just cannot support this craziness and we cannot bet on our future growth to be able to 'afford' it. Indian economy is nowhere near US or Chinese economy to play this game.

Rafale and Euro jets are fine pieces of machinery but we just cannot afford these in sufficient numbers to make a difference for our needs. The honest reality is that we can buy parts and components from Europe but not full platforms. Indigenization of foreign designs does not deliver cost savings. They will have their piece of fat no matter how smartly we write the contract. Just look at MKI and Scorpene costs after indigenization. Heck, we still import MKI engines as per my readings.

This MMRCA is spoiling and throwing the wrench in our Europe partnership. We are leading them (and us) in to dead ends and disappointments. Ultimately it will be a waste of time for both (except the middlemen who will walk away with their $$$). Even if we sign the deal, we will cut down the 'planned' numbers couple of years down - when we wake up. Waiting for this day dreaming to stop and hopefully it does not blow up in our face.

No point in beating around the bush - we need to build more LCA MK I and II, Double down on AMCA to replace MKI's in 10 year timeframe.

GeorgeWelch · Post by **GeorgeWelch** » 03 Jan 2015 02:48

deejay wrote:the F18's are out of production

Not yet.

In fact . . .

Airbus and Boeing are jointly attempting to unseat Lockheed Martin from South Korea’s KF-X indigenous fighter program, offering technology from Europe that could not be supplied from U.S. sources, industry officials say.

With Korean Airlines as the local partner, the pair are likely to be proposing the Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet as a base design for the KF-X.

. . .

Industry officials previously told Aviation Week that Boeing was proposing the Advanced Super Hornet, an update of the F/A-18E/F with a weapons pod and conformal tanks.

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 03 Jan 2015 05:07

I am just thinking loud. Rafale might not bend as this government is more looking at symbolism's for production showcase. Rafale deal, however problematic will go through. Since the US and EU are in no mood to make the mistake of shifting production from home to overseas again, there is no worthwhile project that this govt, which believes in defence production led make in India growth, can showcase as an achievement. Failure of Rafale deal will be Make in India equivalent of retro-respective tax hurting India.

On the contrary the French are desperate, really desperate to showcase an export sale. However, apart from India deal, none of the other deals are big enough so that they can run a production line in future to sustain and service in decades to come. Spare parts will be prohibitively expensive. Failure of this deal is without a doubt a death knell for the program.

If both sides tom tom that they have clinched a deal, then we have really consider the fine print as the main print.

putnanja · Post by **putnanja** » 03 Jan 2015 05:44

chackojoseph wrote:I am just thinking loud. Rafale might not bend as this government is more looking at symbolism's for production showcase. Rafale deal, however problematic will go through. Since the US and EU are in no mood to make the mistake of shifting production from home to overseas again, there is no worthwhile project that this govt, which believes in defence production led make in India growth, can showcase as an achievement. Failure of Rafale deal will be Make in India equivalent of retro-respective tax hurting India.
...

I don't agree with the bolded part. This has been the issue from UPA time, and the officials have been saying that Dassault has been going against the RFP. Many defence deals have fallen through in other countries too. Rafale lost in Brazil too after it had been shortlisted. Same with UAE. In India, the LUH helicopter tender has been scrapped. To argue that Rafale deal falling through is equivalent to retrospective tax issue is specious at best.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 03 Jan 2015 05:57

Has the F-18 shown at the aero india in 2011 even flown? IIRC, they were suggesting EPE 12.5 ton engines with stealthy droptanks etc... The much needed additional thrust on the superbug would be addressed with the new engines but it will have to go through numerous trials before being available to India. Also, would the extra thrust require change in wing design/layout? And India needs the MRCA/replacement ASAP - no time to wait. Just some thoughts.

Additional flankers seems to be the backup plan that IAF was pretending didn't exist. More MKIs (I would actually have preferred 126 MiG-35s instead in some ways) + LCAs will do for the IAF as gap fillers until FGFA and AMCA.

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 03 Jan 2015 06:14

putnanja wrote:
chackojoseph wrote:I am just thinking loud. Rafale might not bend as this government is more looking at symbolism's for production showcase. Rafale deal, however problematic will go through. Since the US and EU are in no mood to make the mistake of shifting production from home to overseas again, there is no worthwhile project that this govt, which believes in defence production led make in India growth, can showcase as an achievement. Failure of Rafale deal will be Make in India equivalent of retro-respective tax hurting India.
...
I don't agree with the bolded part. This has been the issue from UPA time, and the officials have been saying that Dassault has been going against the RFP. Many defence deals have fallen through in other countries too. Rafale lost in Brazil too after it had been shortlisted. Same with UAE. In India, the LUH helicopter tender has been scrapped. To argue that Rafale deal falling through is equivalent to retrospective tax issue is specious at best.

Well that was my perception. Like I keep saying, I am not getting into politics here. I am merely pointing out this government's policies as they are into power now. Not signing Rafale deal could send a wrong signal which could hurt the defence production led Make in India thrust. This is mother of all deals and is also symbolic. Currently there is no project that can impact investors imagination like the Rafale deal. $ 10 + odd billion deal is not a deal that could be hidden behind curtains if gone wrong. There is going to be high decibels which impacts the perception. Since there is nothing to show on ground to show, perception is the only thing that brings positivist to India. Rafale will be quite substantial to show and India does not has to rely on positivist alone.

Of course, I have pointed out to dark side for French too in original post.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 03 Jan 2015 06:23

Not signing Rafale deal could send a wrong signal which could hurt the defence production led Make in India thrust.

It will hurt the number of squadrons in the IAF, the solution - as suggested - is to increase the numbers with MKIs.

It should help the "Make in India" effort. Not hurt it.

putnanja · Post by **putnanja** » 03 Jan 2015 06:39

chackojoseph wrote: Well that was my perception. Like I keep saying, I am not getting into politics here. I am merely pointing out this government's policies as they are into power now. Not signing Rafale deal could send a wrong signal which could hurt the defence production led Make in India thrust. This is mother of all deals and is also symbolic. Currently there is no project that can impact investors imagination like the Rafale deal. $ 10 + odd billion deal is not a deal that could be hidden behind curtains if gone wrong. There is going to be high decibels which impacts the perception. Since there is nothing to show on ground to show, perception is the only thing that brings positivist to India. Rafale will be quite substantial to show and India does not has to rely on positivist alone.

Of course, I have pointed out to dark side for French too in original post.

Defence deals all over the world are not like any other commercial deals. So there is no comparision. Many bigger defence deals all over the world have fallen over. The USAF tanker bid was cancelled once over corruption and then reopened again. In Brazil, the rafale deal was scrapped. In fact, it is better to not sign the Rafale deal than sign it and then have serious allegations later, which can derail future deals, like the Bofors artillery deals. If Dassault cannot stick to RFP terms, better to scrap the deal and try rebidding, than trying to accomodate it and have it blow up in court later on, with serious implications for future defence deals.

And there are many other foreign companies hoping that the Rafale deal will fall through, for the deal to have any sort of negative reprucussions on Make in India efforts. Foreign companies would rather work with the government to make in India rather than getting cut off for big deals. China insisted on same, and today the companies there (not defence) are establishing factories there and sharing their technology.

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 03 Jan 2015 07:02

US tanker deal is about re-tendering and does not qualify as an example. They do not have to showcase anything to pitch for domestic production. Brazil has chosen an aircraft and that too does not qualify for an example.

MMRCA RFP specifies that the the seller should take charge of delivery too? AFIK, it says it has to transfer technology for production. Can someone tell me affirmatively ( not hypothesis) on this?

last para we are on same page, but idealism is not what i am trying to focus on.

deejay · Post by **deejay** » 03 Jan 2015 09:21

NRao wrote:
if Rafale is dropped and if MKI is not a wise choice then the option would be?
Which is why I think the Rafale will fly in IAF colors.

Recall, per some open source reports, the IAF did *not* want a Russian air craft as a MMRCA. I can see the MoD replacing the rafale with the MKI, but cannot see the IAF accepting it without having a say in the matter. There is plenty that the Rafale brings - outside of the cost @ $20 billion. More to say, but will leave it at that.

This - IAF not wanting the MKI - is from StratPost roundtable with AVM (retd) Mathesaran saying so. As far as the Rafale is concerned the deal is closer to 20Billion dollars and not 10Billion dollars and I think Vodafone backdate taxation is not like Rafale. Here the negotiations are in progress. There is no deal. Dassault is not ready to fulfill the initial requirements of the Tender.

___________________________________________________________

Why pose the 'adverse consequences' to India if it refuses to sign this. Even if it signs the hit is 20Billion dollars out of India in to France which is a major adverse impact anyway. Hard to see if the adverse impact will be even a quarter of this amount if the deal is cancelled. There will be no backlash anywhere. In fact a lot of companies are just waiting for Dassault to fail to get their foot in.

srai · Post by **srai** » 03 Jan 2015 10:14

indranilroy wrote:Ooh la la, the French! They developed one of the best, if not the best medium fighter of all times, but can't sell a single piece of it outside their country! If they don't get their act right soon, they might get kicked out of a potential sale of 200 planes!!

It is not looking good for India and the IAF either (in my opinion). The BJP govt has continued with the standard knee-jerk reaction to every problem: order more Su-30s! The result: the top-heavy IAF continues to get even more top-heavy! Come 2025, we are staring at 400-480 Su-30s, and 100-odd LCAs, and some coughing Migs, Mirages and Jaguars. By 2030, we are looking at 400-480 Su-30s, 120-200 FGFAs, 200-odd LCAs and with loads of luck 100 AMCAs! It is seriously not funny!!

Agree on the IAF being top-heavy.

Just a small nitpick (but debatable), Su-30MKIs won't number that high even if they were to replace the Rafales. From my previous rough calculations, only 4 new Su-30MKI squadrons are required to add to the existing/on-order 14 squadrons. This total of 18 squadrons (272 + 84 = 356 aircrafts) is equal to the current and planned number of squadrons (3 x MiG-29, 3 x Mirage-2000, 6 x Jaguar and 6 x Rafale) in the medium category. [Note: subsequent planned exercise of 60+ Rafale options would be more for replacing the 3 x MiG-29 squadrons in late 2020s.] When the FGFA comes online it will supersede Su-30MKI's current air-dominance role which would free up the MKIs for medium role. This shift to medium role would gradually occur as legacy types (MiG-29/Mirage-2000/Jaguar) are retired and more FGFA squadrons are setup. At least 12 LCA Mk.1/2 squadrons would be needed to replace MiG-21/27s.

Post 2035, AMCA and UCAV would gradually replace the Su-30MKIs in the medium category. The oldest MKIs in service would be over 30 years in 2035.

srai · Post by **srai** » 03 Jan 2015 10:25

deejay wrote:
NRao wrote:...

Which is why I think the Rafale will fly in IAF colors.

Recall, per some open source reports, the IAF did *not* want a Russian air craft as a MMRCA. I can see the MoD replacing the rafale with the MKI, but cannot see the IAF accepting it without having a say in the matter. There is plenty that the Rafale brings - outside of the cost @ $20 billion. More to say, but will leave it at that.
This - IAF not wanting the MKI - is from StratPost roundtable with AVM (retd) Mathesaran saying so. As far as the Rafale is concerned the deal is closer to 20Billion dollars and not 10Billion dollars and I think Vodafone backdate taxation is not like Rafale. Here the negotiations are in progress. There is no deal. Dassault is not ready to fulfill the initial requirements of the Tender.

Why pose the 'adverse consequences' to India if it refuses to sign this. Even if it signs the hit is 20Billion dollars out of India in to France which is a major adverse impact anyway. Hard to see if the adverse impact will be even a quarter of this amount if the deal is cancelled. There will be no backlash anywhere. In fact a lot of companies are just waiting for Dassault to fail to get their foot in.

There are plenty of other deals in the works that would "pacify" the French.

6 x A-330 MRTT (plus options)
Maitri QRSAM JV
4 x LDP (plus future options)
6 x P-75I SSK
xx x Airbus civilian order for Air India/Indian Airlines
Bunch of smaller deals in the likes of Mistral MANPAD, etc.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 03 Jan 2015 10:33

While cancelling the mammoth Rafale deal would be a good idea they need to do some smart purchase to keep numbers of low and medium fighter high.

Some rough numbers that I would look at with cancelling MMRCA

180 LCA Mk2 ( 20 more LCA Mk1 )
40 Su-30MKI( Super MKI )
60 Mig-29K/M2/35

I reckon even with adding strong fleet of 300 fighter in Medium/light/heavy category the cost of purchase wont be crossing $10 -12 billion figure which is getting a fleet twice the number of Rafale maintaining commonality & standardisation within IAF existing fleet and getting more bang for buck

ritesh · Post by **ritesh** » 03 Jan 2015 11:08

Austin wrote:While cancelling the mammoth Rafale deal would be a good idea they need to do some smart purchase to keep numbers of low and medium fighter high.

Some rough numbers that I would look at with cancelling MMRCA

180 LCA Mk2 ( 20 more LCA Mk1 )
40 Su-30MKI( Super MKI )
60 Mig-29K/M2/35

I reckon even with adding strong fleet of 300 fighter in Medium/light/heavy category the cost of purchase wont be crossing $10 -12 billion figure which is getting a fleet twice the number of Rafale maintaining commonality & standardisation within IAF existing fleet and getting more bang for buck

+1
Quite doable

Deans · Post by **Deans** » 03 Jan 2015 11:14

The deal should be cancelled on the grounds that France can be an unreliable supplier, as we have seen in the case of the Mistral - which was cancelled though Russia (which the French economy depends on more, compared to India) was not at war. Doing this should earn us some brownie points with Russia. If we scrap it purely on commercial considerations, it will be considered by some as reneging on the deal, which can hurt future negotiations.
It will also be an opportunity for GoI and IAF to reassess their acquisition plans and move to an era where we have fewer aircraft types and a higher Indian content.

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 03 Jan 2015 11:44

France is not an unreliable supplier. They never stopped supplies during sanctions or war. Hence I would like India to buy atleast 60 which helps both quantity and quality.

Arunkumar · Post by **Arunkumar** » 03 Jan 2015 12:18

Austin wrote:While cancelling the mammoth Rafale deal would be a good idea they need to do some smart purchase to keep numbers of low and medium fighter high.

180 LCA Mk2 ( 20 more LCA Mk1 )
40 Su-30MKI( Super MKI )
60 Mig-29K/M2/35

It seems from GOI's recent announcement, they too have made up their mind along similar lines. I doubt if Mig-29 would make a come back. It would be between LCA and Su-30 as mainstays of IAF fleet. Probably oba-mamu's visit later this month might see increasing the F414 numbers from the current 99.

member_28756 · Post by **member_28756** » 03 Jan 2015 12:47

arvin wrote:
Austin wrote:While cancelling the mammoth Rafale deal would be a good idea they need to do some smart purchase to keep numbers of low and medium fighter high.

180 LCA Mk2 ( 20 more LCA Mk1 )
40 Su-30MKI( Super MKI )
60 Mig-29K/M2/35

It seems from GOI's recent announcement, they too have made up their mind along similar lines. I doubt if Mig-29 would make a come back. It would be between LCA and Su-30 as mainstays of IAF fleet. Probably oba-mamu's visit later this month might see increasing the F414 numbers from the current 99.

No more Foreign acquisition unless its FGFA (MKI is OK as long as its domestically produce) just order LCA to make up numbers.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 03 Jan 2015 14:33

The MiG-29/35 will be entirely imported but provides no significant capability improvement over the Tejas Mk2, despite costing twice as much. And it'll delay fleet rationalization in the IAF by forcing it to operate the type at least a decade beyond 2030 (if not more) when the MiG-29UPGs will have retired.

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 03 Jan 2015 14:40

chackojoseph wrote:France is not an unreliable supplier. They never stopped supplies during sanctions or war. Hence I would like India to buy atleast 60 which helps both quantity and quality.

France is an immoral and conscienceless supplier. During the falklands war they supplied the same system to both sides but hiked up the prices. Their only loyalty is to the money. All else is just window dressing.

and they call britain a"nation of shopkeepers"

eklavya · Post by **eklavya** » 03 Jan 2015 16:30

This is what one of Britain's more successful shopkeepers had to say about France recently. He later had to apologise (what with PC standards these days, etc.):

'France is sclerotic, hopeless and downbeat’ says John Lewis boss

France is “finished” and Britons should get their investments out of the country quickly, according to the managing director of John Lewis.

After a visit to Paris this week, company executive Andy Street said France was "sclerotic, hopeless and downbeat" and he had “never been to a country more ill at ease ... nothing works and worse, nobody cares about it".

"You get on the Eurostar from something I can only describe as the squalor pit of Europe, Gare du Nord, and you get off at a modern, forward-looking station [St Pancras]."

The comments, reported in The Times, were made to an audience of entrepreneurs in London after Mr Street was delayed coming back from the French capital on the Eurostar.

Having collected an award on behalf of John Lewis in Paris, Mr Street joked that the gong was "made of plastic and is frankly revolting".

Having said that, the Christmas lights this year on the Champs Élysées and Avenue Montaigne were simply divine!

Gyan · Post by **Gyan** » 03 Jan 2015 18:20

Austin wrote:While cancelling the mammoth Rafale deal would be a good idea they need to do some smart purchase to keep numbers of low and medium fighter high.

Some rough numbers that I would look at with cancelling MMRCA

180 LCA Mk2 ( 20 more LCA Mk1 )
40 Su-30MKI( Super MKI )
60 Mig-29K/M2/35

I reckon even with adding strong fleet of 300 fighter in Medium/light/heavy category the cost of purchase wont be crossing $10 -12 billion figure which is getting a fleet twice the number of Rafale maintaining commonality & standardisation within IAF existing fleet and getting more bang for buck

With Su-30MKI even the need of MRTT would be reduced. Further if we do deep indigenisation of Su-30MKI then there is no need to have alternate supplier i.e France as we will be our own insurnce against any embargos.

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 03 Jan 2015 18:25

Parrikar to hasten defence acquisition

Speaking to mediapersons, Parrikar signalled that the Sukhoi-30Mki fighter jets — costing Rs 358 crore each, or almost half the expected cost of the French Rafale — were enough for the Indian Air Force. “It (the Su-30MKI) is an adequate aircraft for meeting the Air Force’s needs,” said Parrikar, adding that negotiations with the French had some complications.

There is thought in the power pillars that Rafale half the fighter a SU30 MKI is. So why is cost higher than MKI?

The above is not my comments. I am only pointing out what is being said about the deal.

Cybaru · Post by **Cybaru** » 03 Jan 2015 18:45

Are 4 LCA's better or one rafale betterr? Are 2 MKI's better or one rafale better?

Cosmo_R · Post by **Cosmo_R** » 03 Jan 2015 21:36

Cybaru wrote:Are 4 LCA's better or one rafale betterr? Are 2 MKI's better or one rafale better?

Is the Rafale twice as good as the MKI?