Rafale & MMRCA News and Discussions

Kersi D · Post by **Kersi D** » 23 Jan 2013 13:55

Singha wrote:only creatures with a low metabolic rate survive for long in BR.

The meek shall stay in BR for all times to come. Ha ha

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 23 Jan 2013 14:31

ajgar's and other serpents and reptiles have a low metabolic rate too ... onlee thing is they dont make much noise, mostly wait in ambush.

member_20453 · Post by **member_20453** » 23 Jan 2013 16:21

Until I see a clear full-fillment of the long ranted promise of full-tot from France or a worthy price for the Rafale, I am not convinced it remains the ideal bird for us. The price/capability difference to the SH is significant.

Arthuro you are sadly naive too, just because IAF rated the Raffy a better aerial performer and downlisted it to win doesn't make it the superior bird. Unkil did shoot himsef in the foot by bringing in all kind of BS clauses and rumors of diluted TOT. Just because Raffy was downlisted didn't stop the Chief from clearly acknowledging the fact that Unkil's avionics and weapons were superior in every way. Rafale no matter how good an aircraft can only be a great aircraft with better Unkil weapons which are far more economical and I hope IAF goes for a significant order of Ameerki Ground pounders like JSOW, SDB, JDAM-ER, Dual Mode Paveways, more CBU-105SFWs, CLAW to compliment the Raffy.

The SH will offcourse be upgraded simply because the fleet hasn't even hit MLU. MLU is inevitable, all of the upgrades if not most of them will find their way into the birds starting end of decade, it all comes down to price. Most of the proposed upgrades aren't really extensive, stealth pods, CFTs, Large Panel Displays, internal IRST, new MAWS are rather easy and will be ready for fielding by 2015. GE has funded the EPE and 17 engines have already been ordered after successful prototype testing. Knowing that the current only major drawback of the SH is its slow accelaration, the EPE upgrade will certainly be welcomed. Fortunately, the engine's modular upgrade won't even require a massive new engine order and the new cores and turbines can probably retrofitted with a small charge. Also note that the US Navy itself has funded things like CMC for turbine blades on the F414 and many other enhancements, I certainly don't see them abandoning the SH not while it still remains one heck of a reliable / versatile aircraft with a very low cost per flight hr of just over $10K

http://comptroller.defense.gov/rates/fy2011/2011_f.pdf

You seem forget that USN has done quite a few great things with the SH over the many years, from testing with bio fuels to testing of latest weapons SH remains at the forefront of the USNs aerial focus. F-35 has many delays and issues and till it reaches stability in operational life, SH will remain the mainstay. Australia is also considering more SHs and they can certainlty request the International upgrades on their new order. SH has a lot of upgrade potential, a future upgrade could certainly be a swashplate style array, more CRCs in the airframe to put the SH on a diet, next gen jammers etc that can come by 2025-2030 to support Aussie MLU and USN MLU of SH order placed in 2010.

Boeing has kept the F-15 very much relevant for many years and I seriosuly doubt they will back away from keeping the SH a very good aircraft current and kicking for years to come.

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articl ... es-349834/

http://www.aviationweek.com/Blogs.aspx? ... 6e826f&plc

Offcourse I also make a big assumption of relaxed clauses and a bigger chunk of TOT if the same order or around 200 aircraft is signed with unkil, that one is offcourse a major challenge in such a negotiation but I think can be achieved. Such an order could certainly ease some of the intrusive clauses and thus ensure smoother usage of other Amreeki equipment in inventory which btw is growing rapidly.

ravi_shankar · Post by **ravi_shankar** » 23 Jan 2013 16:41

I think the armed forces is very clear with respect to the products from Khan...limit to airlift capability aircrafts, WSR, may be Apache.. but when it comes down to the core of the flighting forces.. I don't think India will ever buy from Khan... the distrust is set very deep down that it would be unable to overcome till khan demonstrates it ...

member_20453 · Post by **member_20453** » 23 Jan 2013 17:34

ravi_shankar wrote:I think the armed forces is very clear with respect to the products from Khan...limit to airlift capability aircrafts, WSR, may be Apache.. but when it comes down to the core of the flighting forces.. I don't think India will ever buy from Khan... the distrust is set very deep down that it would be unable to overcome till khan demonstrates it ...

As more and more open competition tenders are held, the more the ameerki equipment will find its way. I think its high time to address this mistrust.

arthuro · Post by **arthuro** » 23 Jan 2013 19:01

Until I see a clear full-fillment of the long ranted promise of full-tot from France or a worthy price for the Rafale, I am not convinced it remains the ideal bird for us. The price/capability difference to the SH is significant.

Arthuro you are sadly naive too, just because IAF rated the Raffy a better aerial performer and downlisted it to win doesn't make it the superior bird. Unkil did shoot himsef in the foot by bringing in all kind of BS clauses and rumors of diluted TOT. Just because Raffy was downlisted didn't stop the Chief from clearly acknowledging the fact that Unkil's avionics and weapons were superior in every way. Rafale no matter how good an aircraft can only be a great aircraft with better Unkil weapons which are far more economical and I hope IAF goes for a significant order of Ameerki Ground pounders like JSOW, SDB, JDAM-ER, Dual Mode Paveways, more CBU-105SFWs, CLAW to compliment the Raffy.

The SH will offcourse be upgraded simply because the fleet hasn't even hit MLU. MLU is inevitable, all of the upgrades if not most of them will find their way into the birds starting end of decade, it all comes down to price. Most of the proposed upgrades aren't really extensive, stealth pods, CFTs, Large Panel Displays, internal IRST, new MAWS are rather easy and will be ready for fielding by 2015. GE has funded the EPE and 17 engines have already been ordered after successful prototype testing. Knowing that the current only major drawback of the SH is its slow accelaration, the EPE upgrade will certainly be welcomed. Fortunately, the engine's modular upgrade won't even require a massive new engine order and the new cores and turbines can probably retrofitted with a small charge. Also note that the US Navy itself has funded things like CMC for turbine blades on the F414 and many other enhancements, I certainly don't see them abandoning the SH not while it still remains one heck of a reliable / versatile aircraft with a very low cost per flight hr of just over $10K

You are persisting in your internet armachair general delirium. You must have quite an ego and be quite deluded to believe that your arguments are more relevant than IAF selection process conclusion.

1) The SH lost the technical evaluation despite its AESA radar and despite your beloved american weapons package. That alone disqualifies all your non sense. It is the whole package of aircraft performance, avionics, weapons and sustainability that was evaluated. Even in the Brazilian competition the SH is regarded as inferior to the rafale (according to their criteria). See post #4013 in the link below and go back to the official links&quote I provided here about the FAB technical evaluation a while ago on this forum.
http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/sh ... ws/page268

another article and a link for more :

Board wants to hear Saito confirm that FAB prefer Rafale

To the Minister Nelson Jobim, the Brazilian Air Force (FAB) prefer to buy French Rafale fighters to refit the force. The statement was made on Wednesday in the House of Representatives.

Minister Nelson Jobim said in open court in the Foreign Relations Committee that the Air Force commander, Brigadier Juniti Saito, showed a preference for the Rafale, despite its higher cost. "He said that the technical aspects, all three proposals meet, but the Air Force Command believes that the Rafale fighter is what most corresponds to National Defense Strategy, despite the costs," Jobim said, as matter of O Globo.

The statement Jobim contradicts previous information where the French fighter had been considered the worst choice among the three models in contention: the Gripen, the Rafale and F18.

To clarify, the Commission on Science and Technology of the House should invite Brigadier Juniti Saito, commander of the FAB, to explain both the criteria for evaluation of aircraft as the preference of the FAB.

plenty of other links that I already posted here (have a look to refresh your memory) :
http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... start=3120

2) You are foolish to believe that the IAF would have make a 20 billion $ gamble on an hypothetical US navy upgrade to the "international" standard that was proposed to India.
With the F35 coming and increasing budget constraints there is vey very little chance the US navy will ever go for the massive SH international upgrade proposed to india. History tells that this kind of high end upgrade is not a traditional option for the US navy : A-7 corsair, F18 etc...Your arguments are as always your usual wishfulthinking.

3) France and ToT: As far as I know most recent/up to date informations about the contract negotiation the issue is to work out the offsets package which is resulting in a few months delay but ToT does not seems to be a case to delete or postpone the contract signature. "A decision has already been taken" said the indian ambassdor in France. If the deal is signed it means that India is happy enough with the conditions. The rest is your own speculation.

The Rafale contract is in its final stages and we hope to be concluded within three to four months," had yet told Rakesh Sood, the Indian ambassador in France, Indian journalists gathered at the Indian House in London on November 6.
"The formal clauses were intended to ensure technology transfer and compensation, and Dassault Aviation has accepted", had then assured the ambassador.

post #4007 :
http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/sh ... ws/page268

All in all you act as if you think your discussion is going to change the contract...which is a kind of a desperate stance as people who knows better than you and me have already came to a conclusion.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 23 Jan 2013 19:42

You are persisting in your internet armachair general delirium. You must have quite an ego and be quite deluded to believe that your arguments are more relevant than IAF selection process conclusion.

1) The SH lost the technical evaluation despite its AESA radar and despite your beloved american weapons package.

Oh my, my.

The correct statement would/should be that all the other planes lost based on what was presented at THAT POINT IN TIME.

I am not sure if the trials were to be revisited that the Rafale would win again. The Rafale is a good plane, but not unbeatable. The IAF had a process to follow and the IAF followed that process. The planes that lost are not worse than the Rafale, just at that point in time the ones that lost did not measure up to the IAF processes. That is all.

And based on what we seem to be hearing that even the MMRCA is not worth it. Some 200 Rafales for $20 billion, not counting ammo? Not worth it. Just like the others.

And wait till the French are approached for more sensitive ammo. France will screw India - again.

arthuro · Post by **arthuro** » 23 Jan 2013 20:06

The result of a technical evaluation is the reflect of a balanced set of priorities so the results can change depending of the country.

Both in India and Brazil the rafale came on top of the SH as far as technical evaluations are concerned. That does not mean the rafale is superior in every way to the SH but nevertheless when two major airforces with different set of priorities and different methodology come to the same conclusion it gives a clue. Not an absolute truth but not something that you cant ignore.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 23 Jan 2013 21:31

^^^^^

In fact, I would argue, something we can totally ignore.

"Not an absolute truth" is a gross under statement IMHO. Truth is truth, what is absolute truth? Just a mechanism for us to continue - ad nauseam - discussing something we assume/think to support a position we hold? For our own convenience?

arthuro · Post by **arthuro** » 23 Jan 2013 22:05

As external observers you do with what you have. And one of the most relevant source of comparison as far as the "global package" is concerned remains the various technical evaluations. Not perfect and not the only source to compare but still a good basis. Indeed What is the most interesting in my opinion is to assess the "global package" efficiency and not only a specific area of performance.

Each competition is specific so it would be a bit oversimplistic to tell that A is better than B, nevertheless those technical evaluation are still a good source to discuss an aircraft vs another. What I meant by "absolute truth" was simply "definitive conclusion" or "definitive evidence".

The original point of this discusion was to answer to Septimus who keep promoting the SH when it did not make the cut in India.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 23 Jan 2013 23:59

NRao sahab,

I agree with you that France is very far from the full-TOT-all-access-saint that it was totting to be. But the fact is, so would have been any of the other countries (including Russia).

what I don't agree with you is

I am not sure if the trials were to be revisited that the Rafale would win again.

What would change, if the MMRCA would be conducted today?

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 24 Jan 2013 00:18

Reduced ToT in the specifications and more screw drivers, and lower prices.

Now, focus on home grown technologies rather begging this way. They are not going to sell it (tech) even for a price.

srai · Post by **srai** » 24 Jan 2013 06:09

What some people fail to see regarding Rafale TOT is that it is dealing with many thousands of components and their sub-parts. That is a lot of parts to be negotiated over; some easily agreed upon and some not. As an enticement for getting TOT on the most sought-after critical technologies, such as Single Crystal Blades, AESA etc, new DPP doubles or triples points towards the fulfillment of off-set requirements if those are shared. It remains to be seen how much TOT India will come away with when negotiations are all completed for the first lot of 126 aircrafts. There will be another round of negotiations for the follow-on 63 options in 5 years or so. More TOT could be gained in the second round.

No matter who had won the L1 it would have been the same. Enlighten me as to which of the MMRCA contestant would have swiftly provided 50 percent off-sets along with TOT, especially those that are deemed critical?

Victor · Post by **Victor** » 24 Jan 2013 07:17

What people are really forgetting is that Rafale was chosen based on the promise of *full* ToT. The French trumpeted aloud many times that unlike (name your country), to them full ToT meant FULL ToT. If they find some creative ways to wriggle out of that commitment now, the deal is technically off.

Or as saik suggests, tell the French "OK, skroo the ToT & tell us how much you'll charge for simple screwdriver assembly". He's right, we should not beg for tech like this. We have some of the best engineers in the world dammit. Why not throw the warplane market open to all Indian parties and see what happens? If the top engineers from the PSUs run to the private companies,so what? They deserve the best India can give them. What is soooo freaking special about a proven non-performing dump like HAL? There is absolutely nothing it is doing now that can't be done ten times better by a raft of private companies in India.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 24 Jan 2013 07:24

We need HAL, just because of the monopoly setup.. till we mature our GoI/MoD and labs operations similar to established in massa. Our private to establish needs time, and the only hope now is draw off from the HAL mother's udder and feed the puppies till they grow into giants.

GD, LM and Boeing et al were similar puppies and well fed by GOTUS, under strict regimes. Proper process in place, and people with integrity at helm, with merit should meet our requirements. We have enough mis-managed engineers who can deliver from mission critical system to safety critical systems, embedded or distributed.

We have institutions and profs who can lead efforts from labs and schools to support this. The private can start by investing into a setup, a quasi to start with.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 24 Jan 2013 08:03

Just for the record,here's how Uncle Sam treats India on supplying advanced mil-tech,.traight from thr horses' mouth!

http://newindianexpress.com/cities/bang ... 430489.ece

‘India’s radar technology on a par with counterparts’

By Express News Service - BANGALORE

22nd January 2013

“The United States of America has not responded favourably to Defence Research and Development Organisation’s (DRDO) requests for an insight into acclaimed Forester Foliage Penetration Radar,” S Varadarajan, Director, Electronics and Radar Development Establishment (LRDE) said.

Delivering the 33rd Indian Institute of Science (IISc) Alumni Association lecture on ‘Radars for National Security,’ he said the DRDO was trying to develop foliage penetration radars with the help of other countries.

He invited academia and industry to work on the development of these radars.

“Uncle Sam (USA) has not given us favourable responses when we tried. It is the only country with Forester. We are interested to discuss the matter with academia and industry. Institutes like the IISc can work on this. It is a very advancing field in imaging with great prospects,” Varadarajan said, adding that India’s radar technology was on a par with its global counterparts.

“In the 1990s, we had a technology gap of 15 years. With the development of the passive phased array Rajendra radar, we close this gap to about 7 years. Today, with a host of radars catering to the Army, Navy and Air Force, I am proud to say that we are on a par,” he said.

Lack of will in bureaucracy has prevented India’s acclaimed battlefield surveillance radar system (BFSR) being shared with South Korea and North Atlantic Treaty Organization, Varadarajan said.

He added that the LRDE was also working on wall imaging radars to detect human signatures through walls.

“Academics can contribute for this as well. I have seen that Israel has one but it has its own problems. We are pushing with Indian Institute of Technology, Madras for research into wall imaging radars,” he said.

His laboratory is working on detection of micro-movement Dopplers based on respiratory chest movement and heart beats in the event that the human is in a still position, he explained. “We expect challenges with this,” he said.

srai · Post by **srai** » 24 Jan 2013 08:37

Victor wrote:What people are really forgetting is that Rafale was chosen based on the promise of *full* ToT. The French trumpeted aloud many times that unlike (name your country), to them full ToT meant FULL ToT. If they find some creative ways to wriggle out of that commitment now, the deal is technically off.

...

In terms of fesibility, there is no such thing as "full" TOT ... unless you are willing to pay extremely high price; instead of $12 billion for 126 Rafales, it would be more like $100 billion or much more for everything. No one will sell its hard earned technological lead for "cheap" because once sold, Indian companies will become competitors in the same arena within a few years. If selling hard to acquire technology, then you would need to include price for many decades of R&D costs, future market loss as a result of competitor arising, future R&D costs for follow-on next gen products, and other markup. And/Or you would want to put in place an agreement that any future product derived from TOT would be subject to a license/commission fees for each one sold. Is it feasible for India to pay that much? Will Indian companies absorb all of the tech right away? That's why negotiations take long.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 24 Jan 2013 20:23

Rafale can't be that expensive.. they are passing the R&D cost to us or something really wrong with your projections.. 100b for 126 fighter jets is a ransom! no nation including the French can afford that price. something really wrong in your math.

Sagar G · Post by **Sagar G** » 24 Jan 2013 20:27

SaiK wrote:Reduced ToT in the specifications and more screw drivers, and lower prices.

Now, focus on home grown technologies rather begging this way. They are not going to sell it (tech) even for a price.

Wow Saar when did India beg for any kind of tech ??? We have always done deals and paid hefty sums for it, no country can claim that we begged for tech from them by saying so you do an inadvertent == with pukes.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 24 Jan 2013 20:30

Me: RFI for IPR product
You: RFP given to gain market
Me: You are selected
You: I can't give you the tech details or blueprint
Me: You agreed in the RFI
You: Your RFI is confusing
Me: I want what I have asked for..

story continues. In world's opinion, it is a business deal asking for IPRed product to be purchased for tech transfer. IMHO, it is begging.

Sagar G · Post by **Sagar G** » 24 Jan 2013 20:41

Nope, it's negotiation in a business deal.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 24 Jan 2013 20:44

Would you think if I ask you to reconsider your opinion as begging?

Sagar G · Post by **Sagar G** » 24 Jan 2013 20:56

SaiK wrote: Would you think if I ask you to reconsider your opinion as begging?

I would have bought your opinion had India been doing a puki but it is not. The way I see it is that this deal targets two major things one is to arrest the falling no. of squadron in IAF and two is to cut the design time required for making a system from scratch. We already have fighter AESA radar in our lab being tested for LCA but if through a deal we can get some more info about the design/testing process what's the harm in it ??? You or anyone must not feel ashamed of what India is doing it's not like as if we won't be paying for what we are asking for (a la pukistyle) we are ready to pay given the other partner is willing to share the tech. If they relent fine if they don't scrap the deal we have other options as well.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 24 Jan 2013 22:18

France was the last to say anything (did they ever publicly announce acceptance to ToT?) on technology transfer.

France was the first to impose how IAF should strategize.. when they said buy 40 Rafale outright now some years back (not a bad suggestion, but it can hurt IAF ego).

France had issue in the RFI, were pulled out, and they were again in.

France withdrew from competition earlier.

France complained heckuva lot more than other competitors.

..the list goes on.

So going by their behavior, you can expect more to come.

however, I honestly wish they sign this deal before March 31st.

SagarAg · Post by **SagarAg** » 24 Jan 2013 22:30

SaiK wrote:France was the last to say anything (did they ever publicly announce acceptance to ToT?) on technology transfer.

France was the first to impose how IAF should strategize.. when they said buy 40 Rafale outright now some years back (not a bad suggestion, but it can hurt IAF ego).

France had issue in the RFI, were pulled out, and they were again in.

France withdrew from competition earlier.

France complained heckuva lot more than other competitors.

..the list goes on.

So going by their behavior, you can expect more to come.

however, I honestly wish they sign this deal before March 31st.

March 31st, 2015. You have a deal.

Sagar G · Post by **Sagar G** » 24 Jan 2013 22:48

SaiK wrote:France was the first to impose how IAF should strategize.. when they said buy 40 Rafale outright now some years back (not a bad suggestion, but it can hurt IAF ego).

If being non committal to indigenous programmes and hence the need to buy these foreign fighters isn't "hurting" IAF ego then I am pretty sure the theatrics by France or any other country is water under the bridge for them.

abhik · Post by **abhik** » 24 Jan 2013 23:33

NRao wrote:
And based on what we seem to be hearing that even the MMRCA is not worth it. Some 200 Rafales for $20 billion, not counting ammo? Not worth it. Just like the others.

And wait till the French are approached for more sensitive ammo. France will screw India - again.

We have not seen any leaks on the actual figure. I think $20 billion for 200 is quite conservative. Most posters have not fully considered what effect buying this expensive fighter will have. Currently we have only one production line for fighters which is the Su-30MKI. If the MRCA deal goes through it will become 3 (i.e. MKI/Pakfa, MRCA and LCA) with in the end of the decade. There was an assumption that there will be a corresponding increase in the defence budget to fully sustain all three. But this assumption that the budget will always keep increasing was shattered this year. The MKI, Pakfa and the Rafale will already be paid for and their orders will be more secure then that of the LCA and this may jeopardize the indigenous effort.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 25 Jan 2013 04:42

The big Q is can we truly absorb cost-effectively "full TOT?".Does every nut,bolt and screw ( you get my meaning!) be indigenised and is it worth it? Consider the Europeans.They parcel out the components of their product amongst their member states.Engines here,wings,there,tail elsewhere,etc.,etc.It doesn't make sense for every state to make some of the more mundane items.perhaps if their is a "basket" or "menu" of TOT available of the entire product,where one can pick and choose-each item coming with an individual price,one can better identify which items are critical and need to be manufactured at home and which are cheaper bought from the OEM.There is no point in re-inventing the wheel and paying a heavy price for it.Stocking up on spares in India a manner perhaps similar to the Indo-Russian support JVs,where one can buy when needed,may be a good route to follow for the Rafale and other French systems too.

Brando · Post by **Brando** » 25 Jan 2013 05:15

NRao wrote: The planes that lost are not worse than the Rafale, just at that point in time the ones that lost did not measure up to the IAF processes. That is all.

I'm sorry but that's the lousiest cop out I've ever heard! The IAF process measured these aircraft in over 600 parameters - let's not forget that.

I guess we can expect the Rafale to be similarly more able "just at that point in time" when we need them the most to do what needs to be done. The rest of them can hold out in the hopes of prizes for "participation" and "good behavior".

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 25 Jan 2013 07:44

No. not every bolt or nut, but every process that is different and better that helps us get our production lines operate more efficient would be something good. Otherwise,

- AESA integration and if available stores API - most important to deliver the nukes
- Meteor integration - so, that the same can be replicated on LCA and AMCA
- Kaveri++ on Rafale is fantastic, but that deal is remote
- ECM and Avionics is a learning (SPECTRA
- netcentric interfaces
- omni role / multi role capability - operational changes

some of the advantages

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 25 Jan 2013 15:08

An interesting chat with a pilot of a friendly nation,who has flown both the MIG-29 and F-18,says that in close combat,the Fulcrum whips the ass off the Hornet every time.Avionics is another story.

member_20453 · Post by **member_20453** » 25 Jan 2013 19:06

Arthuro you are a gone case buddy...you really lack logic and its funny to see you call me dillusional. Apart from the Raffy and what comes out its ass end, you really have no awareness of whats going on.

SH will remain in active service for USN well beyond 2030. USN has no intention on suddenly giving up on the SH, not when it delivers everything they need at a very good operational cost. The USN has in the past supported research and developments of upgrades to the SH and will continue to do so. Most of the suggested International upgrades are not extensive and do not require copius amounts of cash to accomplish. SH USN fleet is a hefty number, a lot of aircraft will need MLU sooner or later and they will be upgraded. Even if half the USN fleet is upgraded it will still be more than the number of Rafale that France and India will have in inventory. The F-35 was never meant to replace the SH you silly man but to compliment it.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/89067363/DoD-Aviation-Plan

Just because IAF downlisted the Rafale and dropped the SH didn't stop the IAF chief from clearly claiming Amreeki supriority over weapons and avionics.

Who gives a flying **** what the French president says about TOT. That certainly hasn't stop Dassault from screwing up and all French claims of TOT have fallen flat. Nothing but marketing bs. I am sure France will finally screw us with the TOT and we'll end up getting the same level as Unkil.

So why should we buy an aircraft that in its current state is twice as expensive to operate, gives us no strategic advantages and comes with the same level of tot as the SH.

Just because it has been downlisted doesn't mean the deal is done, I hope this gets cancelled, we are wasting enormous amounts of money by going for the Rafale, money that could be used to make up for budget cuts to the IA.

http://www.upi.com/Business_News/Securi ... 355310735/

http://en.mercopress.com/2012/12/10/bra ... aulo-media

SH is by no mean on a lower footing in Brazil and might end up winning.

koti · Post by **koti** » 25 Jan 2013 21:00

Septimus P. wrote: I am sure France will finally screw us with the TOT and we'll end up getting the same level as Unkil.

Does that make SH any superior to Rafale?

Septimus P. wrote:So why should we buy an aircraft that in its current state is twice as expensive to operate, gives us no strategic advantages and comes with the same level of tot as the SH.

That's new to me. Any credible sources to the claimed prices? And also, operational costs, how are they any higher?

arthuro · Post by **arthuro** » 25 Jan 2013 22:41

Arthuro you are a gone case buddy...you really lack logic and its funny to see you call me dillusional. Apart from the Raffy and what comes out its ass end, you really have no awareness of whats going on.

SH will remain in active service for USN well beyond 2030. USN has no intention on suddenly giving up on the SH, not when it delivers everything they need at a very good operational cost. The USN has in the past supported research and developments of upgrades to the SH and will continue to do so. Most of the suggested International upgrades are not extensive and do not require copius amounts of cash to accomplish. SH USN fleet is a hefty number, a lot of aircraft will need MLU sooner or later and they will be upgraded. Even if half the USN fleet is upgraded it will still be more than the number of Rafale that France and India will have in inventory. The F-35 was never meant to replace the SH you silly man but to compliment it.

You are persisting in your internet armachair general delirium. You must have quite an ego and be quite deluded to believe that your arguments are more relevant than IAF selection process conclusion.

1) The SH lost the technical evaluation despite its AESA radar and despite your beloved american weapons package. That alone disqualifies all your non sense. It is the whole package of aircraft performance, avionics, weapons and sustainability that was evaluated. Even in the Brazilian competition the SH is regarded as inferior to the rafale (according to their criteria).

2) You are foolish to believe that the IAF would have make a 20 billion $ gamble on an hypothetical US navy upgrade to the "international" standard that was proposed to India.
With the F35 coming and increasing budget constraints there is vey very little chance the US navy will ever go for the massive SH international upgrade proposed to india. History tells that this kind of high end upgrade is not a traditional option for the US navy : A-7 corsair, F18 etc...Your arguments are as always your usual wishfulthinking.

3) France and ToT: As far as I know most recent/up to date informations about the contract negotiation the issue is to work out the offsets package which is resulting in a few months delay but ToT does not seems to be a case to delete or postpone the contract signature. "A decision has already been taken" said the indian ambassdor in France. If the deal is signed it means that India is happy enough with the conditions. The rest is your own speculation.

The Rafale contract is in its final stages and we hope to be concluded within three to four months," had yet told Rakesh Sood, the Indian ambassador in France, Indian journalists gathered at the Indian House in London on November 6."The formal clauses were intended to ensure technology transfer and compensation, and Dassault Aviation has accepted", had then assured the ambassador.

PS : You did not brought anything new so my first answer is still perfectly appropriate

get real and don't take your wishes for reality :

"I'm sure that.."
"Most of the suggested International upgrades are not extensive and do not require copius amounts of cash to accomplish".

AmitG · Post by **AmitG** » 25 Jan 2013 22:58

There is something that I have always wondered. And I am not sure if it is OT...but in the 1962 war against China, USA was prepared to defend India, even if it required nuclear weapons. Here is an except from Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Indian_War)

"The Kennedy administration was disturbed by what they considered "blatant Chinese communist aggression against India". In a May 1963 National Security Council meeting, contingency planning on the part of the United States in the event of another Chinese attack on India was discussed. Defense Secretary Robert McNamara and General Maxwell Taylor advised the president to use nuclear weapons should the Americans intervene in such a situation. McNamara stated "Before any substantial commitment to defend India against China is given, we should recognize that in order to carry out that commitment against any substantial Chinese attack, we would have to use nuclear weapons. Any large Chinese Communist attack on any part of that area would require the use of nuclear weapons by the U.S., and this is to be preferred over the introduction of large numbers of U.S. soldiers."[52] After hearing this and listening to two other advisers, Kennedy stated "We should defend India, and therefore we will defend India."

Although in the 1971 war against Pakistan, US was prepared to use Nuclear weapons on India. I am not sure what changed in these 9 years, but in the past, US did help India. The very fact that our LCA was designed with US support (and got hit because of sanctions after 1998), shows that there has been support from US.

I am not against Rafale and I am sure it will prove itself when time comes. IAF chose the best aircraft that they needed. I am sure if the Americans had fielded the F-15, probably the things might be different.

member_22872 · Post by **member_22872** » 25 Jan 2013 23:10

^^^ Isn't it true that US confiscated everything? and sent Indian scientists home empty handed? if that is true, then what you mean by "very fact that our LCA was designed with US support" ?
US doesn't care about India, in 1962, they wanted to nuke China and the same US wanted to nuke us in 1971, so what changed? nothing, just that US is more interested in it's interests than rescuing us.

member_20292 · Post by **member_20292** » 25 Jan 2013 23:19

Septimus P. wrote:Arthuro you are a gone case buddy...you really lack logic and its funny to see you call me dillusional.
SH is by no mean on a lower footing in Brazil and might end up winning.

Leave all these journalistic reportings folks.

The ONLY and ONLY leaked report from any of these fighter competitions, the swiss evaluation, placed the Rafale>EF>Gripen/F18

So we should use THAT report and not some "claim" from a journalist who is reporting on a selection process.

Admit it o fellow Americans. The Rafale is better , per unit, than the F18.

Christopher Sidor · Post by **Christopher Sidor** » 25 Jan 2013 23:20

^^^
When did the Americans help us in 1962? Apart from making some soothing noises the Americans did nothing. Let me clarify, nothing of material value. All the help that came, came after the Chinese had withdrawn across the McMohan Line in Arunachal.

But that is not the point. We had to go begging hand in bowl to the Americans, after all the good things that we had said about them in the name of anti-imperialism anti-colonialism and some misguided sense of socialism-fraternity, was bad.

Any large Chinese Communist attack on any part of that area would require the use of nuclear weapons by the U.S., and this is to be preferred over the introduction of large numbers of U.S. soldiers.

Americans were never ever going to use nuclear weapons against the PRC and especially against India. That was given. If they could have they would have used them in the Korean war against the PRC. What the writer has done is selectively quoted some words without taking the bigger picture into hand.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 26 Jan 2013 01:46

venug wrote:^^^ Isn't it true that US confiscated everything? and sent Indian scientists home empty handed? if that is true, then what you mean by "very fact that our LCA was designed with US support" ?
US doesn't care about India, in 1962, they wanted to nuke China and the same US wanted to nuke us in 1971, so what changed? nothing, just that US is more interested in it's interests than rescuing us.

All the effort is to make sure that India is behind PRC in terms of military, economy and global influence. If this is understood that all the history can be understood why India was subjected to various external situations and wars.

srai · Post by **srai** » 26 Jan 2013 05:36

arthuro wrote:...

2) You are foolish to believe that the IAF would have make a 20 billion $ gamble on an hypothetical US navy upgrade to the "international" standard that was proposed to India.
With the F35 coming and increasing budget constraints there is vey very little chance the US navy will ever go for the massive SH international upgrade proposed to india. History tells that this kind of high end upgrade is not a traditional option for the US navy : A-7 corsair, F18 etc...Your arguments are as always your usual wishfulthinking.

...

"I'm sure that.."
"Most of the suggested International upgrades are not extensive and do not require copius amounts of cash to accomplish".

Isn't it a bit strange that the SH upgrade package is called "international"! That should give a clue as to US Navy's interest in it