IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

[Kashi]

We are stupid and the deal probably includes some hidden things.

Where is Subramanian Swamy when you need him...

[Viv S]

$8.3 billion for 36 planes?

That's daylight robbery if true. Even if this includes weapon systems and offsets.

Are we really that stupid or does this deal include "hidden components" not in the public domain?

Oh you glass-half-empty people, why can you never see the bright side? At least its not costing $10 billion. At $230M/unit its almost $50M lower than it could have been.

[Austin]

The final figures will be known once MOD signs the deal , also offsets and weapons package etc , We will have to wait till Mr Hollande comes to India

Its good though we are done with this , IAF should be happy as well , Even if it means a truncated MMRCA to baseline number to meet operational needs , MOD would be happy that the saved money would be used in Tejas and other indigenous program

[Viv S]

The final figures will be known once MOD signs the deal , also offsets and weapons package etc , We will have to wait till Mr Hollande comes to India

Sounds like you're implying that all these figures in circulation are inflated thus should not be taken as a basis for argument. Alright, we'll know the facts in January.

In the meantime, we may as well create a baseline to judge the financial aspect of the deal. So.. what in your opinion would be a good price, acceptable price and bad price? (Unless the price is irrelevant.)

Its good though we are done with this , IAF should be happy as well , Even if it means a truncated MMRCA to baseline number to meet operational needs , MOD would be happy that the saved money would be used in Tejas and other indigenous program

Err.. signing a bad deal instead of a worse deal isn't exactly 'saving money'. Of course in this case, buying 36 Rafale may well be the worse option (vis a vis the original MMRCA deal), screwing up logistics by introducing a mere two squadrons of a fighter type requiring an independent support chain.

[Austin]

In the meantime, we may as well create a baseline to judge the financial aspect of the deal. So.. what in your opinion would be a good price, acceptable price and bad price? (Unless the price is irrelevant.)

I dont know how to define a good price , it would also depend things like Offsets , Weapons Package , Training Package etc , Total Cost of ownership etc

If they negotiated for 2 years post its selection then both sides would have bargained hard to get a good deal satisfactory for both parties.

Err.. signing a bad deal instead of a worse deal isn't exactly 'saving money'. Of course in this case, buying 36 Rafale may well be the worse option (vis a vis the original MMRCA deal), screwing up logistics by introducing a mere two squadrons of a fighter type requiring an independent support chain.

If it was a bad deal Parrikar would have just cancelled it outright , he took a desicison for mimimum operation numbers needed till 2020 versus squadron strength and used the remaining one to fund Tejas and other program , indeed this is what he said many times.

[Viv S]

I dont know how to define a good price , it would also depend things like Offsets , Weapons Package , Training Package etc , Total Cost of ownership etc

If they negotiated for 2 years post its selection then both sides would have bargained hard to get a good deal satisfactory for both parties.

50% offsets. Standard (non-Arab) training package. Assume a generous figure for the weapons package. (Take a look at DSCA releases if you require a benchmark.) And then tell me what range of values sounds reasonable for purchase.

Also, the fact that they scrapped the deal in favour of a new one, after 2 years of negotiation hardly speaks well of the terms on offer.

If it was a bad deal Parrikar would have just cancelled it outright , he took a desicison for mimimum operation numbers needed till 2020 versus squadron strength and used the remaining one to fund Tejas and other program , indeed this is what he said many times.

No he didn't. The decision 'breakthrough' compromise came from the PMO, and caught Parrikar & the MoD flat-footed (though they've dutifully followed through on the directive from the top). Besides, 'because __ signed it so it must be right' implies that that the individual is infallible, a presumption that's best avoided when the facts can be examined independently.

As to the other point, with the delivery schedule stretching to 2023, we'll have a negligible number of Rafales operational in 2020. It provides no short-term fillip to squadron strength and one could arguably set up a second Tejas assembly line in that time-frame.

[arthuro]

There is the initial investment on facilities, spare parts, trainings, weapons...To amortize this initial investment on such a small number of airframe will of course rise the unit costs sharply. And I am not even counting the 50% offsets which has to have an impact on cost.

But once this initial investement is done, the case for aditional airframes will become much more attractive for a future GoV. Price could be cut by more than 50% in case of follow-up buy.

It is such a common place to say that...If this was an issue, Indian GoV would have cancel the whole deal a very long time ago.

Adding another type of jet fighters is always an investment. If the IAF is so willing to go for that expensive investment (and want even more airframes) instead of more SU30 and LCA one must undrestand why.

Is the IAF incompetent ? Willing to spend all that money on poor assets ? Are Indian MoD and prime minister so blind & ignorant to allow a purchase of 36 airframes in a Gov to Gov deal without challenging the rationale behind this purchase ? So only a few forumers would know what's appropriate and what is not ?

Although it is always interesting to challenge decision makers one should consider other point of view as well.

My view is that IAF is aware of LCA and SU-30 limitations despite their respective qualities and is looking for qualities associated with western fighter jets & technology. Higher level of integration, sensor fusion, ergonomics, survivability to name a few.

[Austin]

50% offsets. Standard (non-Arab) training package. Assume a generous figure for the weapons package. (Take a look at DSCA releases if you require a benchmark.) And then tell me what range of values sounds reasonable for purchase.

Also, the fact that they scrapped the deal in favour of a new one, after 2 years of negotiation hardly speaks well of the terms on offer.

You just assume these are part of package , MOD would tell us the officall package.

If they scrapped the MMRCA and still went for Rafale it tells lot about the aircraft , when they could have gone for no 2 or 3 in the MMRCA race.

No he didn't. The decision 'breakthrough' compromise came from the PMO, and caught Parrikar & the MoD flat-footed (though they've dutifully followed through on the directive from the top). Besides, 'because __ signed it so it must be right' implies that that the individual is infallible, a presumption that's best avoided when the facts can be examined independently.

I can say the same just because you say it is wrong does not mean it is wrong or bad deal

I would take Parrikar word any day over yours , He is MOD and knows things only he or PMO would be privy too.

My own opinion is its a good deal truncated as it might be , Parrikar said 90000 crore , its better to spent major on indigenous system

[Kashi]

There is the initial investment on facilities, spare parts, trainings, weapons...To amortize this initial investment on such a small number of airframe will of course rise the unit costs sharply. And I am not even counting the 50% offsets which has to have an impact on cost.

.....

My view is that IAF is aware of LCA and SU-30 limitations despite their respective qualities and is looking for qualities associated with western fighter jets & technology. Higher level of integration, sensor fusion, ergonomics, survivability to name a few.

None of which explains or even remotely justifies the obscenely high prices that are being bandied about. Of course, it may all be nonsense and the real figures may be vastly different, but given the fact that we are a discussion forum, the members will critique a development if it does not make sense from a financial point of view.

It's difficult to see what are these mythical "qualities" that will come with this deal that we completely lacked before and which are worth paying through the nose for.

If there are questions being raised on these fora, there will be bigger ones raised in socio-political spheres if these figures are confirmed.

People may point to us paying through the nose for Vikramaditya, but it was well explained that there were NO alternatives of any kind. This is certainly not the case for Rafale, which as much as the French try to hype up, IS NOT A fifth-generation fighter. But they certainly seem to be charging us as if it were.

It was speculated that the Mirage upgrade deal was a means to sweeten the Rafale purchase, but it seems that we are being forced to swallow a bitter pill at both ends.

It's baffling because despite stretching logic and imagination, $230-250 million for a 4++ generation fighter makes little sense.

[Viv S]

You just assume these are part of package , MOD would tell us the officall package.

If they scrapped the MMRCA and still went for Rafale it tells lot about the aircraft , when they could have gone for no 2 or 3 in the MMRCA race.

Of course I'm assuming these are all a part of the package. Are you saying that $8.3 billion is just the flyaway cost?

I can say the same just because you say it is wrong does not mean it is wrong or bad deal

I would take Parrikar word any day over yours , He is MOD and knows things only he or PMO would be privy too.

Translation: even if it walks and quacks like a mistake, it can't be a mistake because the govt doesn't make mistakes. There is secret angle that the aam junta isn't privy to.

The trouble is you'd like to openly say that all these figures are false and that the govt isn't foolish enough to pay $230 mil for a 4.5 gen fighter jet (yes, all inclusive).

But you can't commit yourself to such a position because it'll be hard to roll back just in case these figures turn out be accurate in January. Therefore, you've defined a 'good price' as whatever we end up paying for it (even if its staggeringly high).

My own opinion is its a good deal truncated as it might be , Parrikar said 90000 crore , its better to spent major on indigenous system

Only in India can sparing some change from an overpriced import to spend on a cost-effective domestic product, be considered an 'achievement'.

[Viv S]

There is the initial investment on facilities, spare parts, trainings, weapons...To amortize this initial investment on such a small number of airframe will of course rise the unit costs sharply. And I am not even counting the 50% offsets which has to have an impact on cost.

But once this initial investement is done, the case for aditional airframes will become much more attractive for a future GoV. Price could be cut by more than 50% in case of follow-up buy.

Would you like me to spell out the cost of other deals in the world for a similar number of airframes and similar offset value?

Cheap follow-on buy when? In 2023? When the Chinese will have shifted to the exclusive production of 5th gen fighters. And the Rafale production will be in the process of winding up.

My view is that IAF is aware of LCA and SU-30 limitations despite their respective qualities and is looking for qualities associated with western fighter jets & technology. Higher level of integration, sensor fusion, ergonomics, survivability to name a few.

Ironically, nobody in the 'West' seems overly eager to buy the Rafale. Especially not their air forces. Perhaps they are 'blind & ignorant', no?

[Austin]

The cost for Rafale is the life cycle cost and not just the fly away cost , that was what MMRCA deal brought on the table and that cost would be higher than just fly away cost ,A link provided earlier mentioned 3x-4x times

More ever its just a strawman argument to says Junta is not privy etc because all deal are done by Government only, what is junta privy too about past defence deals

Its great that finally the MOD and Dassault has come to a conclusion on this deal , Time to Look Ahead for Rafale in IAF colours

[Viv S]

The cost for Rafale is the life cycle cost and not just the fly away cost , that was what MMRCA deal brought on the table and that cost would be higher than just fly away cost ,A link provided earlier mentioned 3x-4x times

Which is precisely why it can't be the lifecycle cost. Its too low.

Even a modest CPFH of $20K/hr puts the operating cost at $140M each over its life-cycle of 7000 hrs. Which would make the acquisition cost an absurdly low $90M/unit.

Besides which life-cycle costs are computed to determine which entry is L1, not to calculate the value of the purchase contract. The latter reflects only the value of goods and services delivered by the OEM.

More ever its just a strawman argument to says Junta is not privy etc because all deal are done by Government only, what is junta privy too about past defence deals

Either the deal is above board or its not i.e. what you see is what you get. And if its not, then its just as easy to argue that the padded cost is to cover up the existence of kickbacks, as it is to say that the surplus is paying for secret transfers of nuclear tech and like. (Neither of which is likely to be true.)

Its great that finally the MOD and Dassault has come to a conclusion on this deal , Time to Look Ahead for Rafale in IAF colours

Long way ahead, if the deliveries are carry on to 2023.

[Austin]

Even a modest CPFH of $20K/hr puts the operating cost at $140M each over its life-cycle of 7000 hrs. Which would make the acquisition cost an absurdly low $90M/unit.

Besides which life-cycle costs are computed to determine which entry is L1, not to calculate the value of the purchase contract. The latter reflects only the value of goods and services delivered by the OEM.

It could be $90 million per unit , I wont comment on the cost unless I see the final figure from MOD , what on plate what not is just speculation not official figures.

Either the deal is above board or its not i.e. what you see is what you get. And if its not, then its just as easy to argue that the padded cost is to cover up the existence of kickbacks, as it is to say that the surplus is paying for secret transfers of nuclear tech and like. (Neither of which is likely to be true.)

I dont see the money is part of backchannel deal , If both governement wants to do Nuclear Deal stuff they can just do it back to back without clutching Rafale Straw.

Long way ahead, if the deliveries are carry on to 2023.

If MOD has agreed to those figures i.e 8 aircraft then that is what they need as well , IAF would customise the Rafale , also training and other stuff , IIRC the M2K too came on similar timelines

[Aditya_V]

$8.3 billion for 36 planes?

That's daylight robbery if true. Even if this includes weapon systems and offsets.

Are we really that stupid or does this deal include "hidden components" not in the public domain?

in 2011 - M 2000 upg costed USD 50 Millin an Aircraft, can imagine what is the cost of TOT with Manufacture.

[member_20453]

What an absurd waste of money and more importantly time. For the same cost we could have had around 80 Super MKI and most of them delivered by 2023. There is no way 36 Rafale can outperform a fleet of 80 Super MKI.

[srai]

$8.3 billion for 36 planes?

That's daylight robbery if true. Even if this includes weapon systems and offsets.

Are we really that stupid or does this deal include "hidden components" not in the public domain?

in 2011 - M 2000 upg costed USD 50 Millin an Aircraft, can imagine what is the cost of TOT with Manufacture.

Dassault said that Mirage-2000-5 upgrade costs around 80% of a new aircraft. So for 36 Rafale at mid-life upgrade (MLU) at 80% of $8.3 cost would be around $6.6 billion. Ofcourse ... with some sort of LCC support

[Austin]

What an absurd waste of money and more importantly time. For the same cost we could have had around 80 Super MKI and most of them delivered by 2023. There is no way 36 Rafale can outperform a fleet of 80 Super MKI.

Thats hardly an argument , Lets dump the 2K , 29 Jags and go for all MKI fleet that would turn to be cheaper with large number . why have any medium fighter at all.

If IAF wanted a Super MKI they wouldnt have even entertained the MMRCA in 2004 by then we had a sizable fleet of MKI

[srai]

...

... , Lets dump the 2K , 29 Jags and go for all MKI fleet that would turn to be cheaper with large number . why have any medium fighter at all.

...

Yep, that is what I have been saying. The situation is not ideal but at least the process of downsizing fleet types would be one of the better paths forward. Just focus on acquiring Su-30MKI and LCA till 2030--20 squadrons each. Upgrade them to "super" levels. Maybe start getting some FGFA if a JV can be resurrected. Retire everything else (MiG-29, Jaguar and Mirage-2000) by 2030. Then induct AMCA post-2030 replacing the oldest MKIs, which could be put into second-line reserves if enough air-frame life is still left.

[member_26535]

When Modi spoke during his visit to France, he mentioned that he requested Hollande to deliver 36 Rafales in 2 years ?? No ??

[Austin]

Rafale is being bought to replace depleting squadron strength of 21 and 27 and even Jags that were inducted in early 80's about the same time as 27 , it certainly cant be a 1:1 replacement but 3 squadron would give it enough teeth to replace 5-6 squadron of above type thats suppose to be retired by 2022-23.

Tejas production numbers are doubtful to catch up unless one sees it happen and too many MKI would make IAF top heavy.

[srin]

What an absurd waste of money and more importantly time. For the same cost we could have had around 80 Super MKI and most of them delivered by 2023. There is no way 36 Rafale can outperform a fleet of 80 Super MKI.

Thats hardly an argument , Lets dump the 2K , 29 Jags and go for all MKI fleet that would turn to be cheaper with large number . why have any medium fighter at all.

If IAF wanted a Super MKI they wouldnt have even entertained the MMRCA in 2004 by then we had a sizable fleet of MKI

I presume you are being sarcastic, but I'm going to +1 your post. It just makes much too sense to just get Sukhois. Even with higher operating cost of a Sukhoi, the difference in price is really huge.

[srai]

When Modi spoke during his visit to France, he mentioned that he requested Hollande to deliver 36 Rafales in 2 years ?? No ??

That was only if India agreed to deal like the Egyptians ... no offsets ... and first export customer. Egyptians, for being good customers, are getting 6 Rafales meant for French AF as a reward within one year or so.

Besides, not all 36 in two years It would be start of first lot deliveries within 2 years (but 3-years is the norm). The French production line currently produces around 11 aircraft/year with an additional capacity for a few more. That capacity needs to cater to French AF, 24 Egyptian AF, 24 Qatar AF, 36 Indian AF and maybe the 60? UAE AF soon. So there is no way they can produce 36 that quickly even if they do increase production capacity by a bit more. There is 36-month lead time involved to order supplies and manufacture parts/components before final assembly.

[Philip]

China is getting 24 SU-35s for just $2B. At that rate,we would get 96 SU-35s for the price of the 36 Rafales! Frankly speaking,this is simply scandalous.Can't someone show Mr.Modi the facts and figures? I am sure that when he goes to Russia the Russians will ask him why he is buying Rafales at such exorbitant prices. Even at $150M a pop,an F-35 would be better.

[member_26535]

Thanx Srai. I went back to the statements made then. I could not find the 2 Year ref anywhere


“I have asked President (Francois Hollande) to supply 36 ready-to-fly Rafale jets to India,” Modi said at a news conference on the first day of a state visit to France. “Our civil servants will discuss (terms and conditions) in more detail and continue the negotiations,” he said, speaking in Hindi through an interpreter "

http://www.livemint.com/Politics/j2pvz6 ... -as-M.html

"Narendra Modi, India's prime minister, said on Friday that he had ordered 36 "ready-to-fly" jets - meaning they would be built in France - during a visit to Paris "

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/europe/20 ... 58160.html

[Will]

And the saga continues.

[Kakkaji]

It is Manu Pubby, so take it with a pinch of salt, but many tantalizing possibilities. Posting in full:

In boost for 'Make in India', Dassault may manufacture Rafale fighter aircraft in India

NEW DELHI: India's largest-ever military deal is likely to bring in big business for the private sector with the French side looking to set up a production centre for the Rafale fighter aircraft as well as a low-cost executive jet in India, besides sharing vital aircraft technology for the indigenous Tejas project.

Officials familiar with the project have told ETthat major partners for this 'Make in India' project are currently being identified by the French side and are likely to include Anil Ambani's Reliance Defence Systems, Noida-based Samtel and Bharat Electronics. These officials, both Indian and French, spoke on the condition they not be identified.

Spokespersons of the Anil Ambani-led Reliance Group told ET "there is no development". Officials on the French side told ET, on condition of anonymity, that the agreement between Rafale and an Indian partner will be on the lines of the 2012 agreement between the French company and the Mukesh Ambani-led Reliance Industries.

The NDA government had reformatted the UPA government deal and ordered 36 aircraft, instead of 126. The Rafale fighter deal, which will bring in at least $4.5 billion into 'Make in India' projects as per the contract being negotiated, is set to involve a third production line for the aircraft in India, French officials have told ET.

While two lines for the fighter are currently active in France at the same facility, a third line in India would take care of export orders for the fighters and also possible future orders by the Indian Navy and Air Force. The line would also support the production of a low-cost variant of the 'Falcon' executive jet for the Indian and Asian markets.

"It will not be possible to roll out any of the 36 fighters being acquired by India from the production line as it would take time to set up but future orders, including exports, will be fulfilled with the new line," a person involved in the discussions has told ET. "At most, the final painting of the last ten aircraft to be delivered to India could be carried out at the Indian assembly line. This itself is a very high technology process as the fighter has a special anti-radar coat," the person added.

Besides the joint production facilities in India, the French side is also set to transfer some key technologies to DRDO that would benefit the Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) project. A complete list of the technology to be transferred is being finalised but would include several systems to make the LCA more effective.

Technology to be transferred includes the air intake system for the fighter, an undercarriage for the naval variant of of the LCA, cutting edge radar absorbing painting technology as well as an integrated production line software and management system for the fighter aircraft.

While the main Rafale contract is likely to be signed this financial year, as was reported by ET, a separate contract for armament systems will be signed at a later date with French company MBDA. A partnership for transfer of technology and production could be inked with the Defence Research and Development Laboratory (DRDL) that specialises in advanced armaments.

Engineer-General Stephane Reb, Director of the International Directorate of the DGA (General Directorate for Armament) of the French Ministry of Defence is in New Delhi this week to finalise the inter-governmental agreement draft that is likely to be signed before January 26 when French President Francois Hollande will visit India as the Chief Guest at the Republic Day Parade.

[Philip]

The "R" co. wants to have its finger in every defence pie! It was the fav. of the Cong/UPA regime.

[arthuro]

Rafale Deal to Be Signed on Eve of Hollande’s India Visit; 36 French Fighters Will Arrive Over 7 Years

(Source: Indian Express; published November 26, 2015)

By Sushant Singh

NEW DELHI --- India and France are set to sign the deal for 36 Rafale fighter aircraft on the eve of French President François Hollande’s visit to India for the Republic Day celebrations. The draft contract, which envisages supply of the first fighter within 36 months of signing the deal, has been finalised.

(French President Francois Hollande will be the chief guest at the Republic Day parade of January 26, 2016, The Hindu reported Nov. 25.—Ed.)

The supply of full complement of 36 fighters to the Indian Air Force (IAF) will be completed within seven years of signing the deal. The induction of the 36 fighters will add to the IAF squadron strength which is now down to 34. At least 44 fighter squadrons are needed to be comfortable against China and Pakistan.

The proposal for buying 36 Rafale fighters from France in a government-to-government deal was announced during Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s visit to Paris in April.

It followed a long-drawn tender for acquisition of 126 medium multi-role combat aircraft (MMRCA) for the IAF in which the Rafale had been selected as the L-1 or lowest bidder after a decade of evaluation, testing and negotiations. Mired in controversies over pricing and transfer of technology, the process was scrapped by Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar earlier this year.

Industry sources said the price of a Rafale fighter in the current deal has been fixed at the 2007 base rate plus an escalation formula agreed upon by both sides. As per commercial bids received for 126 fighters, plus an increment of 5.5-7.5 per cent per year applied on different sub-systems, items and services as per the escalation formula, the final price for the 36 fighters is expected to be around $8.3 bn.

The draft agreement states that all 36 fighters will be supplied by Dassault Aviation in a fly-away condition. To avoid any complications, the two sides agreed for the same SOP (standard of preparation or technical specifications) for the Rafale fighters as agreed upon in the tender for 126 aircraft.

Sources said Dassault was keen to include improvements in the SOP, with limited change in pricing, but the Indian side did not want to introduce new elements in the negotiations.

Defence ministry sources told The Indian Express that the clause for 50 per cent offsets, as mandated in the 126 aircraft proposal, shall be applicable to the current deal.

According to industry sources, the offsets commitment will now be fulfilled through a private vendor. This is a major difference from the earlier deal, where public-sector Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) was to make 108 fighters in India.

Anil Ambani-owned Reliance Defence Limited (RDL) is said to be the leading contender for discharging the offsets for the 36 fighter deal.

Defence ministry sources say that Dassault and RDL have to fulfil the offset commitment.

Confirming it is constructing a greenfield aerospace facility in Nagpur which will start production in FY 2016-17, RDL said it has not entered into an agreement with Dassault Aviation so far.

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/articl ... nuary.html

[member_20453]

What an absurd waste of money and more importantly time. For the same cost we could have had around 80 Super MKI and most of them delivered by 2023. There is no way 36 Rafale can outperform a fleet of 80 Super MKI.

Thats hardly an argument , Lets dump the 2K , 29 Jags and go for all MKI fleet that would turn to be cheaper with large number . why have any medium fighter at all.

If IAF wanted a Super MKI they wouldnt have even entertained the MMRCA in 2004 by then we had a sizable fleet of MKI

Well all this jack about medium fighter is cock and bull finally, Rafale doesn't bring any additional advantage that the MKI with AESA doesn't. The MKI flies out to longer ranges, deploys more weapons and can get the job done just as much as the Rafale and in most cases far better. Please tell me what advantage that 36 Rafale brings when availability will be around 50% i.e at any time only around 20 will be ready for war. Also, we have to wait till 2023 to get this bird, why? Why not order even PAKFAs, buying off the shelf PAKFA would still make better sense than the Rafale.

[member_20453]

Rafale is being bought to replace depleting squadron strength of 21 and 27 and even Jags that were inducted in early 80's about the same time as 27 , it certainly cant be a 1:1 replacement but 3 squadron would give it enough teeth to replace 5-6 squadron of above type thats suppose to be retired by 2022-23.

Tejas production numbers are doubtful to catch up unless one sees it happen and too many MKI would make IAF top heavy.

Yeah, so 36 fighter of which probably only 20 will be available at any one will replace a fleet of over 300 aircraft? This is more like 1-10 replacement.

[member_20453]

Tejas production numbers are doubtful to catch up unless one sees it happen and too many MKI would make IAF top heavy.

Tejas numbers will catch up, the 120 aircraft order is cleared, so HAL has to deliver them all by 2023. As for IAF being TOP heavy, upgrading the Mirages, Jags ensures it has credible medium fighters till AMCA arrives. No rush here.

[Austin]

Tejas production numbers are doubtful to catch up unless one sees it happen and too many MKI would make IAF top heavy.

Tejas numbers will catch up, the 120 aircraft order is cleared, so HAL has to deliver them all by 2023. As for IAF being TOP heavy, upgrading the Mirages, Jags ensures it has credible medium fighters till AMCA arrives. No rush here.

When it comes to HAL seeing is believing , Lets see whats the kind of production number they can churn out each year , They fell short even for lic production built they have been doing since years

[deejay]

...

When it comes to HAL seeing is believing , Lets see whats the kind of production number they can churn out each year , They fell short even for lic production built they have been doing since years

A good indicator on HAL's capability on production and numbers will be with the Dhruv production chronology and numbers. If some one could track that we could get a better idea.

[arthuro]

A French source also points that a rafale assembly line in India could be part of the offset deal. If this is actually part of the deal, then additional orders would be likely for India.

>Scrap MMRCA to get rid of HAL (and avoid complaints from competitors due to non compliance with RFP) and come with another deal that will eventually lead to a rafale "make in India" but with a private partner. This could be a smart move from IAF and politics if it is the case. The 36 initial rafales plus the assembly line ready would certainly make a case for more.

Perhaps the IAF will finally get the rafale in appropriate number. Their dream might become true.

http://www.boursier.com/actions/actuali ... 6.html?rss

[saumitra_j]

In my understanding, the GOI has done two things: Committed to only 36 aircraft for now, citing budget issues (which are real) but through offsets, created an opportunity for Dassault for selling additional aircraft to the IAF through the local assembly by an meet their export commitments through additional capacity that gets created. For India, it means a new assembly line (albeit for Dassault to start with) apart from HAL - will definitely help in the long run as the complete Ecosystem gets set up (think of all the sub contractors, engineers, technitians et al who will get an opportunity through this) - IMHO for the price, it is the best we can get BOTH from an operations perspective for IAF as well as from the perspective of creating capacity and capabilities in the Indian aerospace industry!

[Karan M]

Completely agree. Getting via offsets capability, a 2nd line for assembly and also TOT for LCA (if true) will be a huge game changer and a true achievement.

[Gyan]

From the news source it seems that price of Rafale has been massively increased on the pretext of price escalation at the rate of 7.5% per annum which means that present price would be double of price negotiated in 2007. Or simply put price has increased from USD 110-130 to USD 230 million per Gold plated white elephant. Pray tell me which manufactured good of 2007 model is double the price in 2015? This is lot of kaala in the daal. In fact the price should be less around USD 100 per Rafale.

Second for the price of 36 Rafales we can get 36 Su-30 MKI, 72 LCA, 6 tankers and 6 AWACS ie 108 indigenous aircraft along with Tankers & AWACS. So what is better for Indian security and as also for Make in India?

[kmkraoind]

India hunts for fighter aircraft other than Rafales

I think time has come again to change title of this thread as "IAF Rafale and MMRCA....."

According to sources, it could well be the F-18 Super Hornet that had competed with the Rafale when India was on the lookout for 126 MMRCAs. Recently, Boeing has offered to set up a manufacturing facility in India and manufacture F-18s to suit the country's needs.

[Gyan]

What about there being NO plan B? Rafale seems to be 2.5 times cost of F-35. 5 times Su-30MKI. 10 times LCA.