VayuSena Rafale: News and Discussions - 17 Oct 2016

[Viv S]

Clearly, the OEM is allowed Invest in a JV with an Indian enterprise for manufacture and/or maintenance of eligible products or services. Is is also allowed to invest in 'kind' in terms of TOT to Indian enterprises.

That Dassault-ADAG JV fits the bill as conceived by the Defence Offset guideline and in my view is a "strategic" enough "partnership" between an OEM and its Indian partner with joint manufacturing for offset purposes to begin with. It also has ambitions to scale up to make the Rafale fully from this facility in future if it get orders beyond the initial 36 crafts. It also aims at creating a local eco-system around this facility.

Further, from the same Defence Offset guideline.

OEM is allowed to choose its own offset partners. Till now the whole thing seems to be within the parameters defined by the policy. On that count at least there should be no cause for concern.

The Defence Offset guidelines are just guidelines. They are not part of any legislation and do NOT limit the govt from applying more stringent norms. Hence the 50% offset requirement, as opposed to the 30% stated under the guidelines.

It was well within the govt's power to have mandated that Dassault partner with a local entity that had at least modicum of experience and financial stability (as opposed to an entity starting from scratch).

As things stand, and as said in my previous post, the SP model was critical to getting the Indian pvt sector running as a viable alternative, and now lies in tatters.

The Indian defence industry cannot accommodate a plethora of private sector players in addition to the DPSUs. The scale isn't there. Even the US with its colossal market worth hundreds of billions of dollars has only three competing players in the aerospace sector, and just one or two in most other segments.

Whatever business the RDAL JV manages to garner, now or in the future, comes at the cost of the existing players like TASL which have gotten screwed over despite investing precious time & resources, over the years, in capacity building. There is already an industrial eco-system in place (Bangalore-Hyderabad belt), a second one isn't required and if set up will only end up cannibalize the existing one which isn't exactly strained for capacity.

1. DRDO's share of the offset is 30+% may go up to 50%. Seems like the TOT portion of the offset will fully be absorbed by DRDO.
2. Dassault's share of the offset pie from DRAL JV is between Rs 1,260 and Rs 1,428 crore and given that this is a 49:51 Dassault:ADAG JV , the number for ADAG would be similar, no where near massive!
3. ADAG and Dassault are individually investing about Rs. 750 cr or so each for the current phase.

The ToT component equals 60% of the ₹30,000 crore offset requirement (30% of the deal value). Most of which will go to DRDO.

Dassault is investing ₹840 crore of the Indian taxpayers' money in the DAAL facility at MIHAN. That's capex. That does not translate to revenues of just ₹1250-1400 crore (disregard India Today's 'could be' speculation).

[pankajs]

If you read from the start of this discussion, the problem some folks on the forum and all opposition and their media allies have is that per them ADAG was "selected" by Modi and that is an indicator of corruption. In fact that is what the whole debate was about whereas you focus is more on the eco-system. GOI could have pushed for the other contenders that you mentioned but the same charge of "selection" would fly then too.

BTW, the other parties that you mentioned are part of the supply chain that will converge at the DRAL JV. I saw a tweet a while back that mentioned Bharat Forge, Mahindra and one Tata firm on the vendor list. It did not occur to me at that time else I would have kept the link.

Chetak saar and others have linked to the vendor list previously. Ref: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=7266&start=1240#p2296396

Now when I think over it, it seems more and more that the DRAL JV is being positioned as some kind of system integrator and will parcel most of the work out to the vendors.

Figures are still hazy and there are multiple versions floating. To that extent every number is speculation.

[Katare]

Viv,
There is no ToT involved so your numbers can’t be right.

[ramana]

Here is graphic on Rafale offsets

https://twitter.com/Gujju_Er/status/104 ... 29099?s=19

[Viv S]

If you read from the start of this discussion, the problem some folks on the forum and all opposition and their media allies have is that per them ADAG was "selected" by Modi and that is an indicator of corruption. In fact that is what the whole debate was about whereas you focus is more on the eco-system. GOI could have pushed for the other contenders that you mentioned but the same charge of "selection" would fly then too.

I can only speak for myself, and while the charge of cronyism is plausible its definitely unsubstantiated by the (auditable) facts on paper.

What bothers me is that my hopes of seeing a private sector player emerge as a formal strategic partner to HAL have pretty crumbled. For me, Dassault tying up with RAL instead TASL would be like Saab getting a Gripen contract from Brazil and then tying up with Odebrecht instead of Embraer, in that even if they manage to retain 20% of the forex component (which is still a big 'if'), it wastes all the capability & potential that's been painstakingly developed over decades.

I don't think the govt could have been questioned had they chosen to impose qualifiers (similar to those laid out by the Atre panel) within the offset conditions, not just to retain forex and generate employment but also to help the private sector achieve economies of scale.

All the substantial points aside, from a political perspective, I can't understand how the govt didn't see this coming. A discretionary decision to award a contract worth ₹66,000 crore to a single vendor who then picks a two week old Ambani company as its primary offset partner. The optics of the deal are just terrible. In effect, the govt simply handed the opposition a stick on a platter, to beat it with.

BTW, the other parties that you mentioned are part of the supply chain that will converge at the DRAL JV. I saw a tweet a while back that mentioned Bharat Forge, Mahindra and one Tata firm on the vendor list. It did not occur to me at that time else I would have kept the link.

Chetak saar and others have linked to the vendor list previously. Ref: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=7266&start=1240#p2296396

Now when I think over it, it seems more and more that the DRAL JV is being positioned as some kind of system integrator and will parcel most of the work out to the vendors.

Figures are still hazy and there are multiple versions floating. To that extent every number is speculation.

Yes I've seen the list before but what it unfortunately doesn't explain the is the scope of those sub-contracts. I'm making cabinets for ground equipment, you're making composite front fuselages; technically we're both part of the supply chain but there's a vast gulf in our respective value addition.

What makes me skeptical about the offset dispersal to industry, aside from the general paucity of details from Dassault/RDAL/subcontractor, is the scale of the allocation for DAAL's facility at MIHAN. Given that Dassault has invested ₹840 crore as capex upfront, assuming say a 15% margin, the project will need to generate revenues of ₹5,600 crores just to break-even (and that's without factoring in accounting creativity).

[Viv S]

Viv,
There is no ToT involved so your numbers can’t be right.

I was using "ToT" to refer to the non-manufacturing part of the offsets - technical consultancy, engine R&D and similar assistance - which accounts for 30% of the contract value, with the balance 20% going towards production.

The R&D/ToT part is likely dominated by Thales & Safran, and the manufacturing portion dominated by Dassault (since we don't need particularly need R&D support on airframe side).

Under the offset agreement, French side has made a 30% offset commitment for military aerospace research and development programmes and the rest 20% for making components of Rafales here. The offsets will be carried out by French companies Safran, Thales, MBDA and Dassault, all part of the Rafale project. - Press Trust of India

[rohitv]

ADAG doesnt have a large chunk of Rafale offset. Confirmed offset associated with ADAG is only 100 million Euro coming from Dassault. Additionally, Thales also have JV with ADAG, but their investment is not known. That's the whole Offset story for the ADAG.

Nope. €100 million (Rs 840 crore) is what they're investing upfront in the 300 acre DAAP facility. The actual revenue generated will inevitably be far higher.

Of course it will be!! The total offset obligations of 30000 Cr when executed by Dassault and other french companies in different projects with Indian partners will generate revenue many times more over the life of the projects.

People are accusing that Reliance got 30000 Cr worth Offset Contracts - this is wrong, Dassault have only invested 100 Mill Euro (Rs. 850 Cr) in Reliance JV which they can claim against their offset obligation of Rs. 30000 Cr.

[rohitv]

ADAG doesnt have a large chunk of Rafale offset. Confirmed offset associated with ADAG is only 100 million Euro coming from Dassault. Additionally, Thales also have JV with ADAG, but their investment is not known. That's the whole Offset story for the ADAG.

Nope. €100 million (Rs 840 crore) is what they're investing upfront in the 300 acre DAAP facility. The actual revenue generated will inevitably be far higher.

And investment is what is counted against offset obligations, not potential revenues. Had that been the case, Dassault could have said that their investment of Rs. 850 Cr in Reliance will generate 30,000 Cr revenue in 30 years and thus their offset obligations are discharged

[Viv S]

And investment is what is counted against offset obligations, not potential revenues. Had that been the case, Dassault could have said that their investment of Rs. 850 Cr in Reliance will generate 30,000 Cr revenue in 30 years and thus their offset obligations are discharged

That is exactly the case, and its not 30 years, its 4 years. The offset revenues have to been shown as generated between Sept 2019 and Sep 2023.

[rohitv]

And investment is what is counted against offset obligations, not potential revenues. Had that been the case, Dassault could have said that their investment of Rs. 850 Cr in Reliance will generate 30,000 Cr revenue in 30 years and thus their offset obligations are discharged

That is exactly the case, and its not 30 years, its 4 years. The offset revenues have to been shown as generated between Sept 2019 and Sep 2023.

Offset obligations can be claimed against upfront investment as well as purchases by Dassault (which can be treated as revenue for the JV) , in the period by which all offset obligations are to be met. So when you say that “The actual revenue generated will inevitably be far higher.” – it is really immaterial, because Dassault can claim offset obligations only against the revenue generated till September 2023.
That and the fact that Dassault has also formed JV with other Indian companies, are sufficient to prove that Reliance is not getting the major chunk of offset pie.
From your other posts, I could see that your objection is more about why TASL was not chosen by Dassault and not about why Reliance got the major chunk of offset pie. This is a separate discussion altogether.

[pankajs]

What bothers me is that my hopes of seeing a private sector player emerge as a formal strategic partner to HAL have pretty crumbled. For me, Dassault tying up with RAL instead TASL would be like Saab getting a Gripen contract from Brazil and then tying up with Odebrecht instead of Embraer, in that even if they manage to retain 20% of the forex component (which is still a big 'if'), it wastes all the capability & potential that's been painstakingly developed over decades.

1)) IIRC, the private defense co. are already strategic partners to HAL. There was a schematic posted by Gagan saar annd other before him on Tejas thread where major sub assemblies where parceled out to firms. Here is the first post with the details that I could locate.

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=7630&start=2120#p2292946

The capabilities built up by these vendors/strategic partners will not be wasted. Their association with the Rafale project will expose them to new processes/procedures and help them enhance their already substantial capabilities.

The question is what extra benefit will the ADAG driven JV bring to the table for India, ADAG, Dassault when compared to TASL driven one?
a. India - None
b. ADAG - Put them in drivers seat for any follow-on order to the current lot where the local content and business would be substantial. This project helps propel them to the front of the line.
c. Dassault - It got it choice of partners and most probably a better deal than it would get with TASL for example. May be more control of the JV or a larger share of the JV and the business pie.
d. TASL - ADAG's gain is TASL's loss. TASL is a placeholder for any other competent promoter in India.

2)) While ADAG will get a lot out of the DRAL JV, it does not seem to be a bad deal as far as India is concerned. Dassault's partnership would lift the capabilities/skills of any Indian partner ADAG or TASL and not the other way. Dassault would not have gained any by the way of technology or process by partnering with TASL instead of ADAG.

India would stand to gain either ways by using this deal to bootstrap another parallel "system integrator" in the Aerospace domain plus Rafale tech/process/quality upgrade for all vendors associated with the project.

Reflecting on my last post,

BTW, the other parties that you mentioned are part of the supply chain that will converge at the DRAL JV. I saw a tweet a while back that mentioned Bharat Forge, Mahindra and one Tata firm on the vendor list.
<....>
Now when I think over it, it seems more and more that the DRAL JV is being positioned as some kind of system integrator and will parcel most of the work out to the vendors.

My thinking has evolved further.

Earlier I has written that we will get "a new aerospace ecosystem around Nagpur". Now I think we are creating a "parallel" system integrator centered at DRAL JV/Nagpur.

End result, we will have 2 aerospace system integrator feeding off the same/similar set of vendors. The Rafale tech/process/quality upgrade will be pushed down the line to the vendors and the whole supply chain will get an upgrade that will benefit the LCA Tejas production and beyond.

Now, if the above is true and I haven't compared the vendor list for both projects, then the below should not be a concern. Assumption being that work will be allocated per their core competencies and not randomly.

I don't think the govt could have been questioned had they chosen to impose qualifiers (similar to those laid out by the Atre panel) within the offset conditions, not just to retain forex and generate employment but also to help the private sector achieve economies of scale.

What makes me skeptical about the offset dispersal to industry, aside from the general paucity of details from Dassault/RDAL/subcontractor, is the scale of the allocation for DAAL's facility at MIHAN. Given that Dassault has invested ₹840 crore as capex upfront, assuming say a 15% margin, the project will need to generate revenues of ₹5,600 crores just to break-even (and that's without factoring in accounting creativity).

IIRC, One news item that I had read a while back seemed to suggest a 10 years breakeven for the project.

One reason it seemed to me that Dassault was confident of additional Rafale orders.

[Katare]

Viv,
You are muddying the water without really saying anything different or substantial. Not making sense to me so I am out. Peace!

[Philip]

The offsets are tangential to the main objective of acquiring cutting edge fighter tech.True, building Falcon biz- jets, etc. is good for employment, the 36 bird deal brings nothing to the TOT table ( which was found exorbitant costwise) and therefore should and must cost far less than the UPA deal.Of course the smaller order will to some extent push up the unit price. With the shelving of the FGFA JV and the labours of the LCA, it's going to be a v.v.long time before we catch up with the majors, in fact the gap may be widening if you keep track of the 6th-gen concepts being contemplated by the US, EU, etc. The Europeans having missed the 5th-gen bus and are left with obtaining only the problematic SE F-35- which had its first totalling a few days ago, require a new twin-engined stealth bird and two concepts ( Tempest from the UK) and
SCAF from France and Germany are under consideration.The US has its own NGAD clocked to arrive post 2030.

We are still struggling with our 4th-gen MIG-21 replacement, that too with considerable firang components like the engine, radar, etc. Even if our AMCA arrives post 2030, 15 years from now,with yet again a firang engine, it will be a whole generation behind the global majors.It's one reason why I postulate building the LCA - Mk-2 as the LCA-S instead, making it as stealthy as poss, as in any case it requires much redesign to accommodate the more powerful engine of which an EJ or Ru TVC one would be better than the legacy 414. This would accelerate our pace on the stealth highway and allow us to look again at the AMCA concept and like the Europeans leapfrog the 5th-gen learning curve.As mentioned officially before, should we want a 5th-gen FGFA in the interim decade to come, we'll buy ( like the Raffys) outright the SU-57 when it arrives in RuAF service.

[jpremnath]

In short, what Philip saar is saying is to push the first flight of LCA mk2 beyond 2030 , junk all studies and developments we made on AMCA to date to chase an unpractical 6th gen design (when we are still doing baby steps on 5th gen) sabotaging and cancelling the whole program en route...so that we buy the Su-57 and save the lord and master of Philip saar, the Russkies..

No european nation will make a 6th gen fighter...the Brits are just fooling around. None of the European countries can spare the budget for an expensive fighter program when their 4th gen programs are such a drag on expenditure. They wont be able to sell to their public why they need to spend so much money seeing the past follies. The best we will see is a few of them coming together to make another short lived joint venture to make initial studies and later disband it altogether when realising how impractical and expensive the whole thing is..

[Philip]

Who's saying push the Mk-2 to post 2020! It should be developed to fly within 5 years and enter service just before 2030.We've already made so much headway with LCA development and some advanced tech like composites, etc., what is required is better stealth profiling, a new TVC engine- available with the EJ and a few Ru engines too.Conformal radars, better EW, avionics ,one or two weapons bay for AAMs and smaller PGMs depending upon the fuselage design should suffice.At least what is possible in the first variant with interim improvements.This will save a decade of development.The current roadmap is leading us to arriving at a 4th-gen LCA by 2030 when the world will be unveiling their 6th-gen fighters.
In any case even the AMCA first flight has been pegged at 15 years from now, beyond 2030!

The Europeans are deadly serious with their future plans, they will like they've done with the Typhoon come together and build their bird.Otherwise they will lose the fighter market to those nations who are building them.

The SU-57 buy outright was conveyed to Ru by none other than the NSA himself, that we declined the JV but would buy it later after it had entered Ru service.In the coming decade we would want a 5th-gen bird to counter the Chin stealth birds which are in an advanced stage of development.2019 will see the first batch of SU-57s entering RuAF service.We will be able to ascertain their performance after 2 to 3 years.

If my idea is pursued and the green light given in 2019, we could have the first prototypes flying before 2025 .We could to shorten the timeframe, use already developed eqpt. like IRST sensors used on our Ru birds, Israeli EW,radars , etc.As far as weaponry is concerned, Astra is doing v.well and a BVR AAM needs to be found, perhaps even Astra-ER.In a 2+2 AAM fit in internal weapons bays and an integral cannon, with TVC, the small LCA-S could be primarily designed for air combat and would perhaps be unbeatable in dogfights. A secondary role could be GA/CS again preferably using stand-off weaponry. Remember how the larger but still small MIG-21 Bisons peppered the F-15s in the first COPE exercises?

This way we could have our desi S- bird inducted faster- and cheaper too.We have about 120 med. upgraded M2Ks, MIG-29s and around 36+ Raffys to come.With 300+ MKIs and a large number of them being upgraded to BMos std.,we will have around 450+ med. and heavy true multi-role fighters.Add another 120+ upgraded Jags for the strike role and the number climbs to over 550! There are thus surely enough aircraft available for strike missions.

What we desperately need are the 42+ sqds also equipped with large numbers of air defence MIG-21 replacements that are both cost- effective ,plus contemporary, to avoid obsolescence at an early stage in their lifespan. The SU-57 is an interim option for the need for a stealth bird to counter the Chins.An LCA-S should be far more affordable, built in large numbers and would have huge export potential there bring no light stealth fighter on the market to replace legacy MIGs and western 4th- gen fighters.Later on , after the LCA-S arrives, the AMCA- a 6th-gen bird should be on the anvil.This in 15+ years to come should enable us to catch up in some good measure with the latest birds from both east and west.

[Philip]

ACM Dhanoa defending the Rafale deal." A bold step to buy 36 " after an impasse with the earlier deal
Delays: 3 years for MKIs, 6 years for Jags(!), and 5 years for LCAs and a 2 yr. delay in M2K upgrades.
"The signing of 36 Rafales,83 Tejas,besides SU-30, will arrest the drop down from the existing 31 sqds."
He also said that neither the IAF or GOI had any choice in Dassault selecting its Indian partner.But this contrasts with ex-pres Hollande's statements.Where lies the truth?
Hollande should come clean, perhaps 'e is too unclean!

[Kashi]

He also said that neither the IAF or GOI had any choice in Dassault selecting its Indian partner.But this contrasts with ex-pres Hollande's statements.Where lies the truth?

The two statements themselves "contrast" each other. Which statement are you referring to?

[Haridas]

https://m.tribuneindia.com/article/how- ... 664621/amp

How the Rafale deal was struck
KP NAYAR | OCT 08, 2018
long-standing ‘understanding’ of India helped it clinch the agreement

[Srutayus]

What bothers me is that my hopes of seeing a private sector player emerge as a formal strategic partner to HAL have pretty crumbled. For me, Dassault tying up with RAL instead TASL

Guys TASL is an offset partner as well, as are HAL, Dynamatic, Samtel etc. etc. Please do read the details of the offsets. These have been posted on this very same thread previously.

[Sumeet]

SC seeks details of decision making process on Rafale from GoI

Needs to be submitted by Oct 29
Dismisses petitioners argument as Grossly Indadequate
Will not go into pricing or why Rafale given sensitive nature of the deal

Tweets from Vishnu Som on this topic:

https://mobile.twitter.com/VishnuNDTV/s ... 3609065472

[SaiK]

What is seeking to understand the legitimacy of decision making process? don't the court or in general public have MOD website, gov purchase policy documents, etc.? and court is not aware or what? #SC - become true shariah.

IMHO, 21st century, all documents must be available on-line.

[Katare]

For a corruption case to stick, it needs a real person who benefitted from it. It also needs the media to lead the charge not the partisan politicians alone. This case lacks both these critical factors. If corruption happened, who benefitted from it? Who took money from chota Bhai or Dassault? Modi, Parikkar are made of the same material as MMS and AKA, these are the Teflon men of Indian politics. Media also needs something solid to stand on which it lacks so far. If there was any hanky-panky stuff in the deal, one or the other babu would have leaked the file details to media by now. With what has been thrown out on GoI so far, except for extreme left, they are not going to convince anyone.

My guess is that SC would dismiss this petition after couple of hearing. IAF Air Marshal was on record with dates on when and for what, AoN was taken for new capabilities/weapons that were added to the new deal of 36 aircrafts. Jetli has given all the dates about decision making process on a TV interview. As per Jetli CCD approval was sought after CNC completed negotiations and FinMin approved it. There are no requirement or process for CCS approval for announcing intention to negotiate to buy anything. CCS is the final authority not the first one. This seems to be the standard process world over for both the govts and the private sector. Bigger the authority, lower it sits in the list of the approvers and highest authority is always the last one.

Modi is an experienced politician and administrator who was hunted for a decade by the entire might of India's federal govt and media, yet he came out on the top in the end. I don't think he would make a mistake so obvious as this.

[Katare]

Subscriber only article......

So Great Anil Ambani's Reliance mediaworks firm invested a grand sum of $1.6M Euro in the film in which Holland's girl had a role as producer. The film's story has india connection, it's about a surfer climbing and down skiing Mount Everest for the first time. Several Indian actors in it too. More of a hobby type small budget documentary movie. This sounds absurd to me.

François Hollande, his partner’s film, and the French fighter jet sale to India

[Katare]

TOUT LÀ-HAUT

[rohan1424]

MediaPart:Signing Reliance Defence was “imperative and mandatory” to bag the Rafale jets contract

French publication ‘Mediapart’ on Wednesday claimed an internal report of Dassault Aviation shows the firm had considered signing Reliance Defence was “imperative and mandatory” to bag the Rafale jets contract.

[rohitv]

MediaPart:Signing Reliance Defence was “imperative and mandatory” to bag the Rafale jets contract

French publication ‘Mediapart’ on Wednesday claimed an internal report of Dassault Aviation shows the firm had considered signing Reliance Defence was “imperative and mandatory” to bag the Rafale jets contract.

Another Hit Job

Code: Select all

In compliance with French regulations, Chief Operating Officer Loïk Segalen informed, May 11, 2017, the Central Works Council of the creation of the DRAL joint-venture in order to fulfil some of the offsets commitment.

https://www.dassault-aviation.com/en/gr ... -aviation/

[Sumeet]

Rohit nice post of DA's clarification. Post it in full so that people can read (those who won't click). It has some important points.

[Sumeet]

Some data points on the same from French journalist. Please read:

https://mobile.twitter.com/jubouissou/s ... 7998493696


julien bouissou
@jubouissou
If you read the article, there is nothing "explosive", nothing new. In may 2017, Dassault Informed French trade unions about the construction of a plant in Nagpur, and explained to them why that plant could not be built in France. (because of the offset).

Quote Tweet
Shashi Tharoor
@ShashiTharoor
Explosive revelation in French media: an internal Dassault document says the Reliance offset deal was a “trade-off”, “imperative and obligatory” to clinch the #Rafale deal. ⁦@INCIndia⁩ (link: https://www.mediapart.fr/journal/intern ... nglet=full) mediapart.fr/journal/intern…
7:50 PM · Oct 10, 2018
998
Retweets
1.2K
Likes


julien bouissou
julien bouissou
@jubouissou
·
4h
Replying to
@jubouissou
The document is with the trade unions of Dassault. Ask for it and they will give it to you.

julien bouissou
julien bouissou
@jubouissou
·
4h
Please note that in France, the top management of a company has to inform the Central Works Councils (trade unions) about their strategy/important decisions.

julien bouissou
julien bouissou
@jubouissou
·
4h
And in that case, the important decision conveyed to the Central Work Council, was the construction of a plant in India that will not create jobs for French

julien bouissou
julien bouissou
@jubouissou
·
4h
It's about French labour laws, not so much about Anil Ambani

Vishnu Som
Vishnu Som
@VishnuNDTV
·
4h
Replying to
@jubouissou
Julien - Microsoft Bing in its translator says "It was imperative and obligatory for Dassault Aviation to accept this consideration in order to obtain the contract export Rafale India." Isn't this a clear indicator or cronyism?

julien bouissou
julien bouissou
@jubouissou
·
4h
True. It was "imperative and obligatory" for Dassault to build a plant in India to fulfill its offset commitments and get the contract. But the article doesn't say Dassault had to partner with Reliance instead of any other indian companies.

julien bouissou
julien bouissou
@jubouissou
·
4h
But i agree with you
@VishnuNDTV
. There are suspicions of crony capitalism. The investigation should go on !

ekikaran
ekikaran
@ekikaran
·
3h
Yes allegations of crony capitalism from French side . Need to investigate Hollande role in selecting reliance for girlfriend film

the red shark
the red shark
@amd_9
·
1h
Hahaha

[Sumeet]

We are honestly degrading image of India internationally. Who stoops this low geez how desperate INC & Co have become.

[SaiK]

^^only the link & message may be read/pasted and not twitter data.

[Srutayus]

https://twitter.com/srutayus/status/105 ... 82944?s=21
Offset companies. Pretty much the who is who of Indian aerospace manufacturing. Find your favorite companies in there.

[ArjunPandit]

rahu gandhi has been crying the entire amount of offset to be as the scam value. No one has bothered to even question him about the amount.

[chetak]

ANI Verified account @ANI Oct 3

There has been delay in delivery schedule in contracts already executed to HAL. There is a 3 yrs delay in delivery of Sukhoi-30, 6 years delay in Jaguar, 5 year delay in LCA, and 2 year delay in delivery of Mirage 2000 upgrade: Air Chief Marshal BS Dhanoa

[Katare]

Dassault management explains to its labor union about why they are building a plant in India and not in France by stating that it is mandatory and obligatory to win the contract and yahoos start to see corruption.

GoI should keep mum, there are enough people on the net and in media to sort these things out.

[Kakarat]

https://twitter.com/livefist/status/1050439621493043200

‘Partnership with Reliance meets about 10% of offset obligations’ — @Dassault_OnAir puts out detailed interview of its CEO clarifying on various aspects of the offsets partnership. https://www.dassault-aviation.com/en/gr ... ation-ceo/

[Aditya_V]

That's 10% of Dassualt 's 6500 crore obligation Thales and others will tie up with other manufacturers.

[chetak]

Rafale offsets

[Sumeet]

Katare ji from your link a very relevant section:

https://www.dassault-aviation.com/en/gr ... ation-ceo/

2) Why did you choose Reliance over HAL as your Indian partner in the JV?

Eric Trappier: Dassault Aviation decided to establish a long-term presence in India through DRAL, a joint enterprise in which governance is provided by an Indian Chief Executive Officer and a French Chief Operating Officer. Dassault Aviation therefore exercises technical and industrial control over the operations, applying its standards and its flexibility. This JV will produce parts for the Falcon 2000 and Rafale. The choice of the Nagpur site, in central India, was dictated by the availability of land with direct access to an airport runway.

Those of you who have Twitter accounts please spread this further. If a big order for Rafale is placed it's DRAL which will produce jets in India, imagine noise then from usual quarters

[Aditya_V]

You people mean to say this is not true?

https://www.theweek.in/news/india/2018/ ... andhi.html

“It is very important for the prime minister of India now to either accept Mr Hollande's statement and say 'yes, Mr Hollande is telling the truth and Mr Narendra Modi gave the Rafale contract and Rs 30,000 crore to Mr Anil Ambani or that Mr Hollande is not telling the truth',” he said.

[chetak]

Abhijit Iyer-Mitra @Iyervval



The ENTIRE price escalation (300%) of the Rafale happened during the UPA.
126 planes cost

in Jan 2012 10.4 billion https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/dassaul ... ces-571309 …

in April 2013 15 billion (50% escalation) https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/governm ... ugh-518850 …

in Jan 2014 28-30 Billion (300% escalation) http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report-dn ... ty-1957107 …





2:51 AM - 7 Feb 2018