Rafale & MMRCA News and Discussions-9 August, 2014

arthuro · Post by **arthuro** » 12 Feb 2015 18:48

It seems the rafale is vert close to get its first export with Egypt. Ceremonial signing is schedulded this monday in Cairo. Agreement has been signed today (reuters).

A deal wrapped in three months with first delivery in less than four month after signature.

Take note India

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 12 Feb 2015 18:53

Here is the world view on the French - yet to sell a single Rafale to anyone, whilst calling the customer names each time around.

Many such successful sales. Korea, Singapore, Brazil, Switzerland, Netherlands, Algeria, UAE...and apparently India and now Egypt.

If Egypt does buy the Rafale.. they'll make a nice addition to their showpiece military which is yet to get a single active BVR armed fighter. A few Rafales may be good for them.

ps: UAE

UAE stings Dassault’s 'uncompetitive and unworkable' Rafale bid

"Regrettably, Dassault seems unaware that all the diplomatic and political will in the world cannot overcome uncompetitive and unworkable commercial terms," said Mohammed, deputy supreme commander of the UAE Armed Forces.

"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

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articl ... le-365019/

A decade from now.

France in negotiations with Trinidad and Tobago to sell first export Rafale. JSF clocks its 500'th sale. PAK-FA FGFA enters service in Russia and India. Chinese J-20 in squadrons, photos emerge. Dassault confident of Trinidad sale, says nothing important, business jets are doing well.

pps: France seems to have swung political contacts to land deals like the Maitri as well. Looks like with the change in dispensation, the French Govts huffing and puffing on current Govt folks didnt' go unnoticed.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 12 Feb 2015 19:09

Another thing surprised me post the Rafale selection. French go around bragging on not just how great the Rafale is, but how behind India was that it had to select the Rafale and how the soup-e-rear Rafale would be the answer. Complete over the top arrogance. If this was the same attitude brought by the French to the negotiating table (and apparently it was) no wonder this deal went nowhere. There is something really weird about folks who refuse to introspect.
Desparate Indians "needed the Rafale". No other answer possible.

Then there is this..

https://translate.google.com/translate? ... edit-text=

This article for instance openly admits the Mistral case (and bad bad Russian and perfidious Albion lobbying) made India cautious about French "reliability". But hey its bad bad India. India is now giving preference to indigenization over overpriced JVs (eg SRSAM) but hey, bad bad India.

Go figure.

Sid · Post by **Sid** » 12 Feb 2015 19:11

^^ damn you are quick, I was gonna post that. "Arrogant" is the right word for Dassault.

But Dassault not bulking even at the verge of loosing a mammoth deal of 20B is border line crazy. Our order size is second only to French air force.

Given such a bulk order, I would have loaded my customer with untold amount of goodies or have given unprecedented discounts.

arthuro · Post by **arthuro** » 12 Feb 2015 21:01

It Is true that Dassault/France deserve to a certain extent its arrogant reputation, but let's face it : Indian military procurement does not enjoy an exellent reputation as well.

As often the truth is somwhere in between.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 12 Feb 2015 21:49

French being Arrogant and perhaps bit Foolish is Truth

From India's pov we need to Fix the Procurement process ,big deals like MMRCA or Heavy Guns , Submarine Procurement ( P-75I ) should not take more than 5 years at max and small and medium deals like Hawk Trainer types or MCMV ships , Small Arms should not take more than 1 for small deals to 3 years for deals of medium types

If such deals go beyond 5 years or 3 years then it should be cancelled by default.

Our never ending procurement process right now is too broken and we cant blame others unless we dont fix it ourself.

If there is no money in coffers there is no point in going ahead with RFI/RFP/Trails for time pass sake or to keep Generals Happy unless MOF is 100 % certain it can fund it in 3-5 years within which the Trials/Deal is suppose to get signed.

RoyG · Post by **RoyG** » 12 Feb 2015 21:56

arthuro wrote:It Is true that Dassault/France deserve to a certain extent its arrogant reputation, but let's face it : Indian military procurement does not enjoy an exellent reputation as well.

As often the truth is somwhere in between.

Arthuro, no doubt the Rafale is a great aircraft but Dassault really got carried away by getting greedy during the UPA firefighting years. I have a feeling the deal with go through, but Dassault needs to wake up if it wants to survive. None of the sh*t they played is going to fly anymore with India.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 12 Feb 2015 22:00

Wonders never cease Arthuro. Your posts in this thread were all rah, rah Rafale, your AF will buy it, you guys have no choice. Anyone who said otherwise, you responded with moreorless, "ah you guys know nothing, this is what ze french newspaper says, this is what your AF says, this is how bad your Sukhois are, you cant make LCA for xxx years whereas we French we have the glorious Rafale etc etc

But heres the thing, we did have choices.

And your attitude towards Indian choices in its own way, did enough to turn even Rafale supporters like me to skeptics.

Dassault's own behaviour at the negotiating table was no different. Its asking for everything from violating RFP terms (bring Reliance in as primary integrator) to asking for information it has no right to - asking for data on HALs deal with Sukhoi f.e. can anyone define over the top?

Yes, Indian military procurement is no great process.

If it was, Dassault would have been shown the door moment the Reliance stuff and other stuff started. We hung around far too long. Waste of time.

But.

Thing is Indian military procurement can get by without Rafale. It has EF or JSF or FGFA or Super-30 etc etc.

Can Dassault remain a fighter builder without the MMRCA deal? Things to ponder.

We'd all like to have seen the Rafale in IAF colors. Heck, still do. But theres a price at which it makes sense and a price at which it does not. At $20 Bn its just too nuts.

That $20 Bn can make Indian MIC far stronger than an imported Rafale for which Dassault (judging by present reports) will continue to ask for diamonds for every screw and nut.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 12 Feb 2015 22:04

Austin wrote:French being Arrogant and perhaps bit Foolish is Truth

From India's pov we need to Fix the Procurement process ,big deals like MMRCA or Heavy Guns , Submarine Procurement ( P-75I ) should not take more than 5 years at max and small and medium deals like Hawk Trainer types or MCMV ships , Small Arms should not take more than 1 for small deals to 3 years for deals of medium types

If such deals go beyond 5 years or 3 years then it should be cancelled by default.

Our never ending procurement process right now is too broken and we cant blame others unless we dont fix it ourself.

If there is no money in coffers there is no point in going ahead with RFI/RFP/Trails for time pass sake or to keep Generals Happy unless MOF is 100 % certain it can fund it in 3-5 years within which the Trials/Deal is suppose to get signed.

Austin, theres a famous line about a corrupt judge. It says, he would take money from all sides and make the decision on merit.

This is basically UPA decision making.

Tell the military to get ready for imports, have them conduct a dog and pony show & then strike a deal off the books with the winning participant.

Once the participant thinks politicians are in its bag and the customer (read IA, IAF etc) is desparate, it begins to hike the prices, start all sorts of games, delaying the process. Otherwise, its rivals plant stories.

Political greed for imports is a big factor. Defence Minister is more like Defence Purchase Minister in India.

srin · Post by **srin** » 12 Feb 2015 22:05

arthuro wrote:It Is true that Dassault/France deserve to a certain extent its arrogant reputation, but let's face it : Indian military procurement does not enjoy an exellent reputation as well.

As often the truth is somwhere in between.

Look at the data:
We are the biggest importer in the world - which is good and bad. Good, because it means that our procurement is working. Bad, because it may be working too well for our own good.

And let's look at the other customers of Rafale - so that we have control set. Oh - wait - there are none ...

QED

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 12 Feb 2015 22:16

If UPA is the reason for the current dog and pony show then the current GOI has the best chance to fix the broken system knowing its absolute majority it enjoys.

They have no reason not to fix it unless they dont want for the same reason UPA didnt.

Current big deals like P-75I , Artillery and quite an equal numbers of small and medium deal should be signed in the current GOI tenure if they dont have fund then its better not to pursue it in the hope of signing in in the next 10-15 years.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 12 Feb 2015 22:23

Austin, tell me do you think Parrikar or any "man in a hurry" will stick around to fix 60 years of institutionalized rot? Do you think he can take on the powerful troika of wheeler dealer/politicos, rtd personnel, babus etc who are all involved?

UPA was just brazen about stuff which the INC was a past master at but in subtle fashion. Tell me, before the Tatra scam blew up who knew the owners connections with RG? An Army Chief was threatened in his own office, for crying out loud by a retiree. Nothing happened.
What have we heard of the exOFB chief who was held for various scams?

In NDA, while George Fernandes was tarred and feathered over some piffling coffins, the Joshis (IAS Couple) one of whom was in the MOD during Kargil, made hay.

The point is the whole system is subverted. It is in this milieu, T-90s are ordered, Rafale deal price shoots up 2x-3x and so forth.

If Parrikar actually sticks around, as versus browbeating technical staff and pays attention to the real rot, perhaps he may fix things. Right now, I doubt it.
He even talks of legalizing middle men, in otherwords legitimizing what they have been doing. Now they will do far more and in the open.
Things will continue as they are.

member_20292 · Post by **member_20292** » 12 Feb 2015 22:25

arthuro wrote:It Is true that Dassault/France deserve to a certain extent its arrogant reputation, but let's face it : Indian military procurement does not enjoy an exellent reputation as well.

As often the truth is somwhere in between.

The French are arrogant - fact

Indian military procurement is broken - fact

These are two independent facts.

GeorgeWelch · Post by **GeorgeWelch** » 12 Feb 2015 23:54

All this comes down to: does the RFP require Dassault to guarantee the work of HAL?

India says it does, France is emphatic that it does not.

Without being able to see the language of the contract, none of us knows.

If it does not, France is not being arrogant, merely sticking to what they agreed to.

If it depends on your interpretation, then perhaps India is at fault for not being more explicit.

If it is clearly required, then France's feet should be held to the fire.

arthuro · Post by **arthuro** » 13 Feb 2015 00:38

Things can get quite passionate obviously...Love hate story

About supplier reliability, mirage 2000 upgrade seems to go as planned with IAF satisfied :

Thales : We Are Already Culturally Indian, Sharing Knowledge, Technologies and Expertise with the Local Industry for Years

[...] In July 2011, Thales and Dassault Aviation signed a contract for the upgrade of the Indian Air Force’s Mirage 2000 fleet.[...] Thales is on time with the contractual delivery calendar. Considering each step has been undertaken in strict accordance with the terms of the contract, IAF is extremely satisfied. The next major milestone will be the certification by IAF at the end of 2015.
The serial kits production has now begun and the first kit has been approved. Considering these kits will be fitted onto the aircraft at HAL, the support has started for the fifth aircraft. Additionally, the development of the FOC standard, integrating indigenous equipment, has begun. [...]

http://www.forceindia.net/Interview_AntoineCaput.aspx

On a side note: Rafale export to Egypt has been officially announced by French President (24 aircrafts). Ceremonial signature monday in Cairo. Quatar is likely to follow for 36 or 72 aircrafts.

Cybaru · Post by **Cybaru** » 13 Feb 2015 01:26

Does Egypt have the money for this? Wasn't their president caught saying Saudis and Kuwait need to share some money their way?

Sid · Post by **Sid** » 13 Feb 2015 01:29

^^ yup, money is the issue. Since its completely financed, deal might be going faster then expected.

But if I was Dassault, I will wait till Monday.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 13 Feb 2015 02:52

Good to hear about Egypt, etc.

That should allow India to slide out of this quagmire. Gracefully.

On the flip side, the Rafale might not be a bad deal at $11 billion. No F3 to fund. After 15 year India can sell them to a third world nation and move on.

srai · Post by **srai** » 13 Feb 2015 03:04

GeorgeWelch wrote:All this comes down to: does the RFP require Dassault to guarantee the work of HAL?

India says it does, France is emphatic that it does not.

Without being able to see the language of the contract, none of us knows.

If it does not, France is not being arrogant, merely sticking to what they agreed to.

If it depends on your interpretation, then perhaps India is at fault for not being more explicit.

If it is clearly required, then France's feet should be held to the fire.

This is from CAG's recommendation from the Su-30MKIs licence production audit. Here is that report: CHAPTER IX: DEFENCE PUBLIC SECTOR UNDERTAKINGS - 9.1 Licence production of Su-30 MKI aircraft

...
Conclusion

HAL did not receive all the components of transfer of technology from ROE as envisaged impacting the timely supply of deliverables to IAF. Similar issue was observed in respect of Transfer of Technology to Ordnance Factories as brought out in para 8.1.9.2. Consequently, HAL could not achieve the required level of absorption of technology to meet the compressed schedule of deliveries and had to resort to outsourcing to ROE which increased the import component and had an impact on the indigenisation programme.

Recommendation

9.1.4

Suitable clauses may be incorporated in the contracts with foreign vendors to safeguard the interests of defence forces in respect of delay in meeting contractual obligations including transfer of technology.

PERT charts drawn up for each major activity including indigenisation should be adhered to.
...

GeorgeWelch · Post by **GeorgeWelch** » 13 Feb 2015 03:34

srai wrote: This is from CAG's recommendation from the Su-30MKIs licence production audit. Here is that report: CHAPTER IX: DEFENCE PUBLIC SECTOR UNDERTAKINGS - 9.1 Licence production of Su-30 MKI aircraft

I'm not sure what you're trying to say.

srai · Post by **srai** » 13 Feb 2015 03:37

^^^

Read it and you will understand.

GeorgeWelch · Post by **GeorgeWelch** » 13 Feb 2015 04:07

srai wrote:^^^

Read it and you will understand.

Sorry to disappoint you, still not clear what point you're trying to make.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 13 Feb 2015 07:13

No one has access to the original contract but its very likely that it was a part of the RFP as a policy decision to reduce OEM leverage, following a CAG study. Dassault's position is that such liability clauses are absurd and no company would ever accept such terms. And yet -

IN sources told IHS Jane's that OTO Melara has offered its 127/64 LW - Vulcano gun system for 13 indigenously designed and built Shivalik-class frigates and Delhi-class destroyers.

OTO Melara emerged as the solitary vendor after BAE Systems declined to field its 127 mm/62 calibre Mk 45 Naval Gun System.

The November 2013 tender stipulated that three of the 13 naval guns would be imported and the remaining 10 licence-built by state-owned Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited (BHEL) at Haridwar, 200 km north of New Delhi.

The MoD also wanted the vendors to undertake production, quality control and timeline guarantees for the BHEL-produced naval guns but without providing the vendor with executive or supervisory authority over the public sector company.

BAE Systems opposed this arrangement, and in an official statement declared its unwillingness to accept the "disproportionate level of risk" in the tender.

Industry sources said OTO Melara has no such reservations as BHEL has been licence-producing its 76/62 Super Rapid Light gun since the mid-1990s. The contract will require special clearance by the MoD's Defence Acquisition Council, however, as India's defence procurement procedure (DPP) discourages solitary bids.

The DPP provides for exceptions based on operational exigencies, of which the 127 mm gun procurement is one, IN sources said.

http://www.janes.com/article/47555/indi ... -64-lw-gun

BAE wasn't willing to accept the risk (which was their right) while OTO Melara was and thus walked away with the contract. The MoD's terms however were unambiguous and neither company attempted to modify or otherwise renegotiate them, as Dassault appears to be doing with the MMRCA contract.

Of course this isn't 'proof' that the MoD's position on the RFP is factual, but its certainly strong evidence supporting that.

VinodTK · Post by **VinodTK** » 13 Feb 2015 07:26

France, India Disagree Over Key Rafale Contract Issue

After months of seeing Dassault Aviationbeing browbeaten in the Indian press, French arms procurement agency DGA defended its contractor, asserting that a 2012 agreement to provide India withRafale fighter jets never committed the company to guarantee aircraft manufactured in India at state-ownedHindustan Aeronautics Ltd. (HAL). However, a recent senior adviser to HAL’s management tells Aviation Week that guaranteeing HAL’s work is not the issue, but that the French are being “rigid” and refusing to stand behind the integrity of the design.

“Dassault will not be responsible for the whole contract. It is a co-management setup,” says French defense procurement chief Laurent Collet-Billon, who was clear that France will not assume full liability for HAL-built Rafales. “It cannot be a problem, because it was not in the request for proposals [RFP].”

Speaking to reporters during an annual media address Feb. 9, France’s arms procurement chief said the €10.2 billion ($12 billion) agreement—which has been under negotiation for more than three years—calls for the first 18 of 126 Rafale jets to be built in France. After that, HAL would take over production of the remaining 108 aircraft.

Dassault’s responsibility for the latter has been the subject of heated negotiations between New Delhi and Paris in recent months. Pressure on the talks has increased because India, according to defense ministry officials, wants to make a final call on the Rafale project before Prime Minister Narendra Modi visits France in April.

“A lot of progress has been made since 2012,” says Collet-Billon, adding that he wants to believe negotiations will give way to a contract for the 126 fighters plus 63 options. But Collet-Billon says talks with the Indian government have become bogged down over questions of production of the fighters on Indian soil. “India has its own pace,” he said of New Delhi officials. “It’s not useful to put pressure on the client. We have to live with our differences.”

French officials are increasingly optimistic that a Rafale deal will be signed shortly with Egypt, and an order from Qatar is still considered likely. Those deals would end Rafale’s export drought and reduce India’s negotiating leverage.

But even as a French official in India insists that “everything is at its normal pace,” Indian officials are stoking speculation that the acquisition process could be delayed again, and that India could choose to acquire more Sukhoi Su-30MKI fighters as an alternative to the Rafale.

Moreover, a retired senior Indian military officer who was involved in the drafting of the original RFP and has been a senior advisor to HAL, tells Aviation Week that “the French don’t want to be accountable in any way. The original equipment manufacturer [OEM] has to stand guarantee with respect to design and integrity of design. The French are trying to get away from the OEM’s responsibility.” He added that the defense ministry would eventually have to choose between the Rafale and the Fifth-Generation Fighter Aircraft (FGFA), a HAL-developed variant of the Sukhoi T-50.

Defense minister Manohar Parrikar told a local television channel in January that “the Su-30 choice is always there. Upgrade the Su-30 to make it more capable by equipping it with state-of-the-art electronic warfare systems.”

The Indian defense ministry is complaining about Dassault’s alleged unwillingness to guarantee the performance of the HAL-built aircraft. According to Indian officials, the original RFP required bidders to transfer technology for production to HAL as well as provide a warranty for HAL’s work. “The offer of the French firm for technology transfer is compliant to the requirements specified in the RFP,” the minister said, but Dassault’s guarantee terms—which are limited to the first 18 aircraft—are inadequate.

“Irrespective of anything, the RFP terms have to be met. . . . They cannot be diluted,” Parrikar added. However, the minister also ruled out the possibility of re-opening the competition.

Dassault’s response to the RFP was influenced by a planned partnership with Reliance Industries, a $75 billion private-sector energy-based conglomerate that planned to expand into aerospace and defense. Reliance would have performed much of the manufacturing work on the locally built Rafales in new-build facilities. However, the Indian government has insisted that HAL build the aircraft. The original manufacturers of the Su-30MKI and Jaguar were not asked for similar guarantees.

Amber Dubey, head of defense and aerospace at KPMG India, commented that “to drag the selection process for eight long years and then question the very need for the product may not reflect very well on India. A flexible approach, without compromising India’s interests, is needed here.”

GeorgeWelch · Post by **GeorgeWelch** » 13 Feb 2015 07:32

Viv S wrote:Dassault's position is that such liability clauses are absurd and no company would ever accept such terms.

Dassault's position is that such terms are not in the RFP.

Viv S wrote:BAE Systems opposed this arrangement, and in an official statement declared its unwillingness to accept the "disproportionate level of risk" in the tender.

. . .

Of course this isn't 'proof' that the MoD's position on the RFP is factual, but its certainly strong evidence supporting that.

Actually, that's strong evidence that it's not there at all.

BAE is on record as not being willing to sign such agreements, yet they appeared to have no qualms about participating in the MRCA competition.

To me that says that they didn't think it was in the RFP either.

Shreeman · Post by **Shreeman** » 13 Feb 2015 07:37

What jet did BAE bring to MRCA? edit -- I see, the gun. Not the MRCA.

As far as I can see, the rafale is not happening. It will drag on for couple more years while the first 20 LCA are produced, then die a quiet death.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 13 Feb 2015 07:53

GeorgeWelch wrote:Actually, that's strong evidence that it's not there at all.

BAE is on record as not being willing to sign such agreements, yet they appeared to have no qualms about participating in the MRCA competition.

To me that says that they didn't think it was in the RFP either.

BAE's problem was not with the 'reasonableness' of the agreement (or lack thereof) but the risk-reward ratio. Its very much possible that it judged it acceptable for one contract and unacceptable for another. Or that it placed a higher bid for the contract to compensate. Also keep in mind, the EF campaign in India was led by EADS Deutschland and that the prospects for the Tranche 3B had more or less evaporated well before the MMRCA downselect.

GeorgeWelch · Post by **GeorgeWelch** » 13 Feb 2015 08:02

Viv S wrote:BAE's problem was not with the 'reasonableness' of the contract (or lack thereof) but the risk-reward ratio. Its very much possible that it judged it acceptable for one contract and unacceptable for another. Or that it placed a higher bid for the contract to compensate.

Then why didn't they place a higher bid in the other competition to compensate?

Viv S wrote: Also keep in mind, the EF campaign in India was led by EADS Deutschland

Whoever led the campaign doesn't matter so much, BAE still needs to sign off on it.

If they weren't willing to assume the very limited risk for 10 guns, why would they assume the stupendously more massive risk for 100+ planes?

GeorgeWelch · Post by **GeorgeWelch** » 13 Feb 2015 08:03

Shreeman wrote:What jet did BAE bring to MRCA? edit -- I see, the gun. Not the MRCA.

BAE owns a third of EF

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 13 Feb 2015 08:04

Dassault’s response to the RFP was influenced by a planned partnership with Reliance Industries, a $75 billion private-sector energy-based conglomerate that planned to expand into aerospace and defense. Reliance would have performed much of the manufacturing work on the locally built Rafales in new-build facilities. However, the Indian government has insisted that HAL build the aircraft. The original manufacturers of the Su-30MKI and Jaguar were not asked for similar guarantees.

Yeah sure. Deviate from the RFP and choose some arbit mfr with zero experience in aircraft mfr as the local partner. Wonder why.

Amber Dubey, head of defense and aerospace at KPMG India, commented that “to drag the selection process for eight long years and then question the very need for the product may not reflect very well on India. A flexible approach, without compromising India’s interests, is needed here.”

LOL, flexible approach = India compromises. Goodie goodie

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 13 Feb 2015 08:30

So, France/Dassault has assaulted Egypt with a contract for 24 flyaway Rafales plus uno FREMM frigate for a measly $ 6.5 billion wonlee. This includes weapons, support and training. Deliveries to start in 4 months - now that is fast. Read somewhere (keypubs) that the Fremm is about $ 1bln. The rest is all Rafale - 24 for $ 5.5 billion. So, if India were to buy 126 (that too with TOT, offsets and what not), $ 25-30 billion doesn't look out of the ball park.

Let us see...what can IAF do for $ 25 billion?

Some much needed AEW + AWACs + MRTT + 50 MKI + extra sqds of Tejas thrown in, and $$s to spare.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 13 Feb 2015 09:13

Amber Dubey, head of defense and aerospace at KPMG India, commented that “to drag the selection process for eight long years and then question the very need for the product may not reflect very well on India. A flexible approach, without compromising India’s interests, is needed here.”

Egypt my friend.

India *should get* a cut out of that sale.

Think about it - seriously - IF India had not dragged it so far, the Rafale would have died a natural death years ago.

{Egypt AF and Rafale. I would keep away from that bird.}

brvarsh · Post by **brvarsh** » 13 Feb 2015 09:37

I have a few wish - to find if aliens exist, if there is a big foot and loch ness monster and if India would buy 126 multirole fighters.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 13 Feb 2015 10:06

Cain Marko wrote:So, France/Dassault has assaulted Egypt with a contract for 24 flyaway Rafales plus uno FREMM frigate for a measly $ 6.5 billion wonlee. This includes weapons, support and training. Deliveries to start in 4 months - now that is fast. Read somewhere (keypubs) that the Fremm is about $ 1bln. The rest is all Rafale - 24 for $ 5.5 billion. So, if India were to buy 126 (that too with TOT, offsets and what not), $ 25-30 billion doesn't look out of the ball park.

Let us see...what can IAF do for $ 25 billion?

Some much needed AEW + AWACs + MRTT + 50 MKI + extra sqds of Tejas thrown in, and $$s to spare.

LOL Cain. This reminds me of the cheap deal offered by France to Morocco? Where it was something like 1 of zis, 1 of zat, 1 of ze one more and all for piddling $x billion only... and Morocco went and purchased F-16s.

rkhanna · Post by **rkhanna** » 13 Feb 2015 10:27

Amber Dubey, head of defense and aerospace at KPMG India, commented that “to drag the selection process for eight long years and then question the very need for the product may not reflect very well on India. A flexible approach, without compromising India’s interests, is needed here.”

Considering we are a poor country and we are/were awarding the Mother of all Military Tenders on the Earth we will take as long as we damn well please..

Guarantee you that even if say we drop the Rafale and scrap the tender (like the Helo Deal) we will still keep getting these guys back everytime there is a tender.

RoyG · Post by **RoyG** » 13 Feb 2015 10:32

So Egypt will be the first to receive Rafale. Good for them. If it isn't in our interest to buy it at this stage, walk away and put all the money in the LCA, AWACS, etc.

The French are truly blood jokers.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 13 Feb 2015 10:35

>> AEW + AWACs + MRTT + 50 MKI + extra sqds of Tejas thrown in, and $$s to spare.

sounds more delicious imo. and MRTT deal will provide some $$ to airbus.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 13 Feb 2015 11:36

Pharaoh-General "Fat" Al-Sissy has to keep his generals in clover and comfort.Hence a quickie with le Republique Francaise and their agent Dassault for a mini-buffet of "finger food",with which the generals can lick their fingers afterwards,if you get my meaning! Now this is going to be a complication with the Indian deal,or perhaps an indication of "finger-licking" goodness from France? The French are also trying v.hard to prevent Egypt from signing away all mega-buck billion$ deals with Russia which are also on the cards. This is also a sweetener to India to allay fears that the Raffy will be operated only by France and India. Quick work by France!

deejay · Post by **deejay** » 13 Feb 2015 13:55

Amber Dubey, head of defense and aerospace at KPMG India, commented that “to drag the selection process for eight long years and then question the very need for the product may not reflect very well on India. A flexible approach, without compromising India’s interests, is needed here.”

Since Mr. Doobay is sermonizing us on what will reflect well for India and what will not, here is something this attitude needs to know - Mr. Doobay, what does not reflect well here is you. Pls, stand in front of the mirror and check the reflections. For any country what reflects well is its national interests.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 13 Feb 2015 17:23

GeorgeWelch wrote:Then why didn't they place a higher bid in the other competition to compensate?

They may judged it a losing proposition i.e. attempting to match OTO Melara's expected lower bid.

Whoever led the campaign doesn't matter so much, BAE still needs to sign off on it.

If they weren't willing to assume the very limited risk for 10 guns, why would they assume the stupendously more massive risk for 100+ planes?

You have no basis for your terming one a 'limited risk' and the other a 'stupendously more massive risk'? Risk is weighed against revenues and expected profit margin, not by the dollar amount involved.

HAL has been building BAE aircraft under license continuously since 1962. Just like like OTOM had a different perception of the risk (vis a vis BAE) involved in delivering warranties for BHEL manufactured equipment, BAE had no reason to hypenate the two contracts. Unlike the GoI, they have no single company policy on such matters.