IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

All threads that are locked or marked for deletion will be moved to this forum. The topics will be cleared from this archive on the 1st and 16th of each month.
Locked
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21537
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by Philip »

The Rafale having been selected after the most comprehensive contest ever,has got its foot in the door,so to speak.Therefore,all that has to be done is to bargain hard on the price escalation and see what gives. If the figure is still exorbitant,then we have to look at "plan B",whatever,most probably extra MKIs,which will be cheaper .The French can still snatch defeat out of the jaws of victory!
arthuro
BRFite
Posts: 627
Joined: 06 Sep 2008 13:35

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by arthuro »

IAF pushes for 20 more Rafale fighters from France

NEW DELHI: India and France are now trying to swiftly finalize the government-to-government deal for direct acquisition of 36 Rafale fighters, even as the earlier $20 billion MMRCA (medium multi-role combat aircraft) project for 126 such jets stands scrapped.

The IAF is pushing for at least 20 additional Rafales over the 36 decided during the Modi-Hollande summit in Paris on April 10. But India is unlikely to buy more than 36 Rafales at this stage, less than one-third of the 126 jets envisaged under the MMRCA project.

"It will take another month or so to clinch the new G-to-G deal, which will entail better terms than what was conveyed by Rafale-manufacturer Dassault Aviation during the MMRCA negotiations. Once the deal is finalized, the deliveries of the 36 jets in a flyaway condition will begin in two years," said an official.

In a written reply in Rajya Sabha, defence minister Manohar Parrikar said the Indian and French teams were negotiating the terms and conditions for the 36-jet deal and would recommend a draft agreement.

"The RFP (request for proposal) issued earlier for procurement of 126 MMRCA has been withdrawn. In this multi-vendor procurement case, the Rafale met all the performance characteristics stipulated in the RFP during the evaluation conducted by IAF," he said.

"The (36) aircraft and associated systems would be delivered on the same configuration as had been tested and approved by the IAF, and with a longer maintenance responsibility by France," he added.

Under the now-scrapped MMRCA project, which had remained deadlocked after Rafale emerged the winner in January 2012 following a hotly-contested global competition among six vendors, the first 18 jets were to come in "a flyaway condition". The rest 108 were to be made by Hindustan Aeronautics in India after transfer of technology.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 289304.cms
Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5301
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by Viv S »

pankajs wrote:
pankajs wrote:Plus there are other issues with JSF like those 3/4 lettered agreements, TOT, localization, code sharing, customization, future weapons integration, etc
All these negotiations will take time especially those having to do 3/4 lettered agreements, code sharing for later DIY, customization, future weapons integration.
All these are issues that are currently unresolved vis a vis the Rafale. And the fact we tend to miss here is that the Rafale is a NATO aircraft, with NATO-standard weapons interfaces, NATO data-links, IFF, ground support and so on.
TOT and 50% localization too are going to be huge hurdles. Will the Americans part with their latest and greatest tech. especially when they don't need the Indian order to sustain their production? Is the JSF supply chain geared to allow 50% localization on an order of 36/56 planes?
Except that we're not getting ToT or 50% localization with the Rafale either. All that went out of the window when the MMRCA was scrapped. The only requirement now is 50% offset value, which would be easier for Lockheed Martin to achieve than it would be for Dassault.
Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5301
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by Viv S »

Austin wrote:Rafale wont falter as too much water has flown and neither MOD or Dassult is hinting at it.
Very likely. On the other hand, $8 billion is a steep price to pay for a 4.5 gen fighter and that fact may slowly be sinking into the heads at the MoD.
Most likely both parties would end in some compromise and we would end up getting 80 Rafale for the IAF and perhaps more the IN later.

I see remote hope for Eurofighter much less for JSF or any other stuff.
I suspect the IN has its eye on the F-35B. Its the only type that can bring its Vikrant/Vikramaditya air complements from mediocre to world class.

The Eurofighter's prospects are much worse than the F-35. It'll come at a price similar to the Rafale without offering any huge increment in capability. What might swing it for EF is an offer for 75 used T1s offered at good terms, but surprisingly the EF consortium doesn't' seem to be employing that card.
Cybaru
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3031
Joined: 12 Jun 2000 11:31
Contact:

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by Cybaru »

LockMart prices seem pretty decent for f-35 compared to the rafale. Half the price.

http://breakingdefense.com/2014/11/new- ... 6m-c-102m/
Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5301
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by Viv S »

Cybaru wrote:LockMart prices seem pretty decent for f-35 compared to the rafale. Half the price.

http://breakingdefense.com/2014/11/new- ... 6m-c-102m/
That's just the flyaway cost. The acquisition cost will be cheaper than the Rafale but not hugely so. Where it will win out is the cost of the weapons complement (unfortunately the French munitions are typically handicapped by lower production scales).
Kakkaji
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3894
Joined: 23 Oct 2002 11:31

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by Kakkaji »

I heard on the radio today that the unit acquisition cost of the F-35B for the USMC is $140M. It has been declared 'combat-ready' by them now.

From some of the articles above, it appears that the cost of Rafale that was being negotiated under MRCA was $250M, and the new direct purchase cost being negotiated is $200M per unit. These are insane prices, quite unaffordable for a poor country like India. Perhaps an SH at half the cost of the Rafale would be more bang for the buck.
Cybaru
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3031
Joined: 12 Jun 2000 11:31
Contact:

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by Cybaru »

f35 seems miles ahead of rafale. will be a common platform for the navy with c version.
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by Austin »

Viv S wrote: I suspect the IN has its eye on the F-35B. Its the only type that can bring its Vikrant/Vikramaditya air complements from mediocre to world class.
I doubt they would beyond Tejas and 29K , I see IN standardising on either Rafale or/and Naval PAK-FA , logistics work in its favours and having a twin engine at sea is a great asset to have.
Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5301
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by Viv S »

Austin wrote:I doubt they would beyond Tejas and 29K , I see IN standardising on either Rafale or/and Naval PAK-FA , logistics work in its favours and having a twin engine at sea is a great asset to have.
The naval PAK FA is just a concept (Russian carrier ambitions are still just.. aspirational). The Rafale would lead to logistical commonality, but we're talking in terms of its impact on the current situation where the negotiation for the aircraft is still ongoing. I strongly doubt the IN is lobbying for the purchase in its interactions with the MoD, and I wouldn't be surprised if its actively lobbying against the purchase.

Also, the Rafale and the PAK FA are (or will be) CATOBAR-optimized aircraft, significantly hampered when operating from a STOBAR ship. I can see them as possibilities for the Vishal, but for an upgrade to the Vikramaditya & Vikrant, the 'Bee' remains the best solution. (Also, by the time the Vishal is launched, the Rafale production line will be wrapping up). Its not an immediate requirement but once the new Chinese carriers start fielding naval J-31s, the IN will have no choice but to follow suit.

Single engines were a strict no-no in an era where engine reliability was a major concern (though this still applies to both the AL-31 & RD-33). In contrast, the single-engined F-16 has a better safety record than the twin-engined F-18. On a similar note, in two decades of operations the Gripen hasn't suffered a single engine-related casualty. And even the worst critics of the LCA program would admit that its been rock-solid on the safety front, which is at least partially down to the F404.
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by Austin »

Single engine is critical in Naval Operation as you can try to bring back your aircraft if one if your engine gets damaged for what ever reason , in single engine the only option is to bail out , There is a stastics which shows twin engine aircraft has 3x time more survivability over single engine all things being equal.

JSF has too many baggages that IN may not want to carry along let alone putting a CBG fleet at US Laws mercy etc reason too F-18/16 did not make the cut but political issues aside , if there was a naval F-22 then it would have been worth the money perhaps.

As I see it Rafale/PAK-FA is the best choice for IN lets see what comes up
Yagnasri
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10540
Joined: 29 May 2007 18:03

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by Yagnasri »

J-31 coming from a carrier of China attacking our Vishal. That is will be the day of days.
Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5301
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by Viv S »

Austin wrote:Single engine is critical in Naval Operation as you can try to bring back your aircraft if one if your engine gets damaged for what ever reason , in single engine the only option is to bail out , There is a stastics which shows twin engine aircraft has 3x time more survivability over single engine all things being equal.
Fortunately that it happens rarely enough for the trade-off to be worth it. And given the gaping capability differential between the Rafale and F-35, its more than worth it.
JSF has too many baggages that IN may not want to carry along let alone putting a CBG fleet at US Laws mercy etc reason too F-18/16 did not make the cut but political issues aside ,<SNIP>
Eh? I could have maybe still understood that in the IAF's context , but the IN...

The IN's critical anti-submarine duties will be spearheaded by the P-8I (its looking to buy the MQ-4C to supplement that), a substantial part of the IN fleet will be powered by GE engines and we'll be receiving design/planning assistance from the USN for the IAC-2. The IN's carrier pilots are trained in Florida (last phase of which takes place on a Nimitz-class carrier), US-India have been sharing data on the PLAN (including collaboration on monitoring of PLAN ops in the IOR) and the largest exercises the IN has engaged in have inevitably included the USN.

I don't see political issues being a hinderance for either side, notwithstanding some tectonic development in China.
</SNIP>if there was a naval F-22 then it would have been worth the money perhaps.
On the contrary, its lunacy to pay a greater amount for the Rafale than we would for the F-35 (which BTW is every bit as good as the F-22 when it comes to crucial ISTAR functions).
As I see it Rafale/PAK-FA is the best choice for IN lets see what comes up
Rafale is a bad deal. Out and out. Both for the IN and for the IAF. The PAK FA might be a decent buy for the IAF (cost & reliability questions still linger). However, a naval variant does not exist (though to be fair, neither does the Vishal) but yes it should receive close scrutiny for the IAC-2 program.
Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5301
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by Viv S »

Yagnasri wrote:J-31 coming from a carrier of China attacking our Vishal. That is will be the day of days.
Not the Vishal, the MiG-29K equipped Vikrant & Vikramaditya.
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19332
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by NRao »

Years ago the IN explicitly stated that the naval Rafale will not be considered. Has that changed?

IN has explicitly requested presentations for the JSF. Do, has that changed?
pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14746
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by pankajs »

Viv S wrote:
pankajs wrote:All these negotiations will take time especially those having to do 3/4 lettered agreements, code sharing for later DIY, customization, future weapons integration.
All these are issues that are currently unresolved vis a vis the Rafale. And the fact we tend to miss here is that the Rafale is a NATO aircraft, with NATO-standard weapons interfaces, NATO data-links, IFF, ground support and so on.
TOT and 50% localization too are going to be huge hurdles. Will the Americans part with their latest and greatest tech. especially when they don't need the Indian order to sustain their production? Is the JSF supply chain geared to allow 50% localization on an order of 36/56 planes?
Except that we're not getting ToT or 50% localization with the Rafale either. All that went out of the window when the MMRCA was scrapped. The only requirement now is 50% offset value, which would be easier for Lockheed Martin to achieve than it would be for Dassault.
There are no 3/4 lettered agreements that need to be signed with France before we get a fully functional Rafale but remains a major hurdle wrt JSF. NATO-standard does not mean we can't have French designed, developed and produced components/Interface modules for Rafale.

To repeat the original point I was making, Euro-bird is already tested and approved by the IAF. Euro-bird is also not hampered by any 3/4 lettered agreements. While Eruo-bird may not be as immune as the Rafale to US sanctions/pressures (depending on how many US components are on it) but is certainly better than JSF on that count.

IF Rafale fails to make the cut for whatever reason the Euro-bird has a better chance and will see faster delivery as compared to JSF given all the above points.

TOT, Localization, code sharing and customization may be out of the picture for now given that India has decided to procure directly from France.
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19332
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by NRao »

Both the Euro and Rafale will be huge financials burdens. No two ways about that. I think the releuctance on the part of the MoD is more about finance and not anything else.

BTW, Rafale thread notwithstanding:

2013 :: HAL’s AMCA Stealth Fighter India’s Feature-Packed Aircraft
In fact a marine version is also confirmed as the Indian Navy contributed to its funding too.
That for the AMCA.

News that I certainly missed.
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by Austin »

Viv S wrote:Fortunately that it happens rarely enough for the trade-off to be worth it. And given the gaping capability differential between the Rafale and F-35, its more than worth it.
Not really , I war getting hit on the engine even with ack ack and ability to fly in a single engine back to base is a premium quality to have , else no one would have invested in twin engine fighter for naval aviation. The survivability increases by 3x time. The F-14 , 18 , 27 ,Rafale ,29K all are twin engine for a reason more so in maritime environment.

Also the payload bring back capability increses in twin engine aircraft else you got to dump
The IN's critical anti-submarine duties will be spearheaded by the P-8I (its looking to buy the MQ-4C to supplement that), a substantial part of the IN fleet will be powered by GE engines and we'll be receiving design/planning assistance from the USN for the IAC-2. The IN's carrier pilots are trained in Florida (last phase of which takes place on a Nimitz-class carrier), US-India have been sharing data on the PLAN (including collaboration on monitoring of PLAN ops in the IOR) and the largest exercises the IN has engaged in have inevitably included the USN.

I don't see political issues being a hinderance for either side, notwithstanding some tectonic development in China.


We will see how things go into the future , right now the US component is just too small to affect over all operational rediness.

Memory can be short but the Sea king fleet was grounded post 1998 sanctions

Rafale is a bad deal. Out and out. Both for the IN and for the IAF. The PAK FA might be a decent buy for the IAF (cost & reliability questions still linger). However, a naval variant does not exist (though to be fair, neither does the Vishal) but yes it should receive close scrutiny for the IAC-2 program.
Rafale is a good deal better then investing in Shornet or Teen , Eurofighter with multiple nations is a murky affair but the aircraft per say is good.

I see Rafale has logical for IN carier fleet , PAK-FA a distant opportunity , but in near and medium future bets are on Tejas and 29K lets see.
pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14746
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by pankajs »

IF the cost benefit is tilted *so much* in favor of JSF why is the Modi GOI so adamant on going with the Rafale? I mean when the deal for 36 was being contemplated GOI knew that the original tender was going to be cancelled and they were free to open up the field and invite the likes of JSF.

There must be some point/consideration (Perhaps political) that tilt the cost benefit back in favor of the French/Rafale.

Or are we on the slide path to cancellation of the whole deal? And the negotiation for 36 a farce, designed to keep the all the stakeholders hopeful till the end.
Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5301
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by Viv S »

pankajs wrote:There are no 3/4 lettered agreements that need to be signed with France before we get a fully functional Rafale but remains a major hurdle wrt JSF. NATO-standard does not mean we can't have French designed, developed and produced components/Interface modules for Rafale.
P-8I, AH-64E, MQ-4C, (SOF)C-130J - all available without '3/4 lettered agreements'. What exactly makes the F-35 different?

[Also, for the record, highly customized modifications for just a couple of squadrons worth of aircraft will be brutally expensive. More so if its a French contract, given our previous record.]
To repeat the original point I was making, Euro-bird is already tested and approved by the IAF. Euro-bird is also not hampered by any 3/4 lettered agreements. While Eruo-bird may not be as immune as the Rafale to US sanctions/pressures (depending on how many US components are on it) but is certainly better than JSF on that count.

IF Rafale fails to make the cut for whatever reason the Euro-bird has a better chance and will see faster delivery as compared to JSF given all the above points.
There's the little matter of China (which BTW is on excellent terms with France). Can we afford to compromise on capability (and it IS a compromise like it or not) given the scale of the military challenge we face? There's a good reason why every country bordering Russia & China is opting for the F-35 instead of the Eurocanards.
TOT, Localization, code sharing and customization may be out of the picture for now given that India has decided to procure directly from France.
No reason why any of that should be different in LM's case.
Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5301
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by Viv S »

Austin wrote:Not really , I war getting hit on the engine even with ack ack and ability to fly in a single engine back to base is a premium quality to have , else no one would have invested in twin engine fighter for naval aviation. The survivability increases by 3x time. The F-14 , 18 , 27 ,Rafale ,29K all are twin engine for a reason more so in maritime environment.
If you've gotten hit with ack-ack, something has gone dreadfully wrong. But in that context the Rafale is still handicapped, lacking as it is in any LO capability, and is thus less survivable in wartime.
Also the payload bring back capability increses in twin engine aircraft else you got to dump
Payload bring-back is a not a function of the engine count AFAIK.
We will see how things go into the future , right now the US component is just too small to affect over all operational rediness.

Memory can be short but the Sea king fleet was grounded post 1998 sanctions
8 + 4 = 12 P-8Is. (Plus the S-60 which reportedly leads the IN's MRH contest.) And at least for the next decade or so the primary threat from the PN & PLAN comes from their undersea wings.

Memories aren't short, times are changing. A superpower is in decline, while another one is emerging. Right on our doorstep. And unlike the USSR, this one has firm roots.

Besides, we're only talking what.. two squadrons? Maybe with an option for one more. Hardly enough to be a major security liability.
Rafale is a good deal better then investing in Shornet or Teen , Eurofighter with multiple nations is a murky affair but the aircraft per say is good.

I see Rafale has logical for IN carier fleet , PAK-FA a distant opportunity , but in near and medium future bets are on Tejas and 29K lets see.
$200 million+ is an unacceptably steep price for a non-LO fighter (and this includes the EF & SH). And if the Mirage upgrade is any evidence, the support costs will be equally steep.
Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5301
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by Viv S »

pankajs wrote:IF the cost benefit is tilted *so much* in favor of JSF why is the Modi GOI so adamant on going with the Rafale? I mean when the deal for 36 was being contemplated GOI knew that the original tender was going to be cancelled and they were free to open up the field and invite the likes of JSF.
Why are more T-90s being produced with the Arjun program facing closure? Why is the Scorpene infrastructure being written off in a U-209 redux? What is the urgency driving the AH-64E acquisition?

Fact is, the current govt has also made mistakes and this effort to find a 'middle ground' between a full scale MMRCA deal and a total cancellation has saddled us with the 'worst of both worlds', resulting in the only real gainer being Dassault (assuming the deal goes through).
pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14746
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by pankajs »

Viv S wrote:
pankajs wrote:There are no 3/4 lettered agreements that need to be signed with France before we get a fully functional Rafale but remains a major hurdle wrt JSF. NATO-standard does not mean we can't have French designed, developed and produced components/Interface modules for Rafale.
P-8I, AH-64E, MQ-4C, (SOF)C-130J - all available without '3/4 lettered agreements'. What exactly makes the F-35 different?

[Also, for the record, highly customized modifications for just a couple of squadrons worth of aircraft will be brutally expensive. More so if its a French contract, given our previous record.]
To repeat the original point I was making, Euro-bird is already tested and approved by the IAF. Euro-bird is also not hampered by any 3/4 lettered agreements. While Eruo-bird may not be as immune as the Rafale to US sanctions/pressures (depending on how many US components are on it) but is certainly better than JSF on that count.

IF Rafale fails to make the cut for whatever reason the Euro-bird has a better chance and will see faster delivery as compared to JSF given all the above points.
There's the little matter of China (which BTW is on excellent terms with France). Can we afford to compromise on capability (and it IS a compromise like it or not) given the scale of the military challenge we face? There's a good reason why every country bordering Russia & China is opting for the F-35 instead of the Eurocanards.
TOT, Localization, code sharing and customization may be out of the picture for now given that India has decided to procure directly from France.
No reason why any of that should be different in LM's case.
We know that P-8I had some system downgraded or removed and replaced. The "3/4 lettered agreements" did impact P-8I. Such a solution might work with one aircraft but might not work with F-35 given what systems will be impacted. US keeps insisting that signing those agreements facilitate deeper co-operation allowing US to offer equipments/systems that have been held back till date.

The French plane need not be customized for India for they would mostly have French manufactured NATO-std components/Interface modules. China is an emerging situation and surely the GOI is aware.
pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14746
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by pankajs »

Viv S wrote:
pankajs wrote:IF the cost benefit is tilted *so much* in favor of JSF why is the Modi GOI so adamant on going with the Rafale? I mean when the deal for 36 was being contemplated GOI knew that the original tender was going to be cancelled and they were free to open up the field and invite the likes of JSF.
Why are more T-90s being produced with the Arjun program facing closure? Why is the Scorpene infrastructure being written off in a U-209 redux? What is the urgency driving the AH-64E acquisition?

Fact is, the current govt has also made mistakes and this effort to find a 'middle ground' between a full scale MMRCA deal and a total cancellation has saddled us with the 'worst of both worlds', resulting in the only real gainer being Dassault (assuming the deal goes through).
No government take all correct decisions but that does not mean ALL decisions are wrong. So whatever my views on T-90 s Arjun or Scorpene I will keep focus on Rafale/JSF here.

Fact is the GOI and IAF are in agreement that Rafale fits their plan best all things considered. I am sure the GOI has taken all factors including Price/tech./capability/Gen./etc into consideration while arriving at the decision.

Indian 5th gen requirements are to be met by the Russian 5th gen plane so the space for JSF simply does not exist.
GeorgeWelch
BRFite
Posts: 1403
Joined: 12 Jun 2009 09:31

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by GeorgeWelch »

pankajs wrote:Fact is the GOI and IAF are in agreement that Rafale fits their plan best all things considered.
Which explains why the GoI cut the buy to 36.
pankajs wrote:I am sure the GOI has taken all factors including Price/tech./capability/Gen./etc into consideration while arriving at the decision.
I'm pretty sure GoI is looking strictly at price. 'You want Rafale? Fine, but you can only get 36 of them'

So you have IAF looking strictly at tech and GoI looking strictly at price and you end up with the worst of all possible worlds with a hugely expensive subfleet that doesn't bring any game-changing capabilities and isn't large enough to cover the gap in falling squadron numbers.
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by Austin »

36 Number is not something thats carved in stone and it would most certainly increase going by past trends like the initial purchase of Su-30 was around 40 , M2K was around the same 40 , 29 was around 43 etc.

Most certainly the 36 number would gradually increase and reach 3-4 squadron atleast in next 10-15 years ....if IN shows intrest in Rafale then add another 2 squadrons.

Rafale sits in a nice sweet spot where Tejas Mk2 and FGFA are some years away from squadron service atleast 5 years optimistically , All IAF needs now needs is to put a nice note to MOD called acceptance of necessity for critical short fall in squadron numbers for 2 Additional Rafale squadrons and voila they would get that magically :lol:
Prasad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7812
Joined: 16 Nov 2007 00:53
Location: Chennai

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by Prasad »

NRao wrote:Both the Euro and Rafale will be huge financials burdens. No two ways about that. I think the releuctance on the part of the MoD is more about finance and not anything else.

BTW, Rafale thread notwithstanding:

2013 :: HAL’s AMCA Stealth Fighter India’s Feature-Packed Aircraft
In fact a marine version is also confirmed as the Indian Navy contributed to its funding too.
That for the AMCA.

News that I certainly missed.
A lot of us missed I think. I don't remember seeing any other source mentioning IN involvement in the AMCA project.
sankum
BRFite
Posts: 1150
Joined: 20 Dec 2004 21:45

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by sankum »

36 nos Rafale will cost $8b which can be very well be paid over next 5 years by 2020 @ $1.6b/year.

After that if financial commitment remains @$1.6b/year 8 Rafales /year can be bought over next 5-6 years to take the total to 80nos as desired by IAF.

Minimum 56nos (3sq) operating out of single base like Mirage 2000 and Mig 29 to cut down on infrastructure cost should be expected which will take the total deal to $ 12b.

Direct import is more logical as it will be cheaper than building in India.
Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5301
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by Viv S »

pankajs wrote:We know that P-8I had some system downgraded or removed and replaced. The "3/4 lettered agreements" did impact P-8I. Such a solution might work with one aircraft but might not work with F-35 given what systems will be impacted. US keeps insisting that signing those agreements facilitate deeper co-operation allowing US to offer equipments/systems that have been held back till date.

The French plane need not be customized for India for they would mostly have French manufactured NATO-std components/Interface modules. China is an emerging situation and surely the GOI is aware.
What part of the P-8I was downgraded/removed/replaced? The major difference with the P-8A AFAIK is the presence of the MAD boom. Also, the IFF & data-link are BEL-supplied. If there's something else you're aware about, do share.

The customization on the Rafale - IFF, data-links plus non-source weapon systems is exactly the same as would be applied on an US-origin aircraft. In fact, come to think of it the Rafale may require slightly greater customization - Python 5 + Litening G4.
pankajs wrote:No government take all correct decisions but that does not mean ALL decisions are wrong. So whatever my views on T-90 s Arjun or Scorpene I will keep focus on Rafale/JSF here.

]Fact is the GOI and IAF are in agreement that Rafale fits their plan best all things considered. I am sure the GOI has taken all factors including Price/tech./capability/Gen./etc into consideration while arriving at the decision.
I never said that 'all decisions' were wrong. What I actually said was that the govt wasn't beyond reproach. It is capable of making mistakes and if it bulls ahead with the Rafale acquisition, it will be a blunder.

You're basing your argument on faith instead of reason i.e. the govt's position is by default the correct one. A faith that should logically also apply to the Arjun situation.
Indian 5th gen requirements are to be met by the Russian 5th gen plane so the space for JSF simply does not exist.
That might justify buying the PAK FA in lieu of the Rafale. It does not justify paying 5th gen prices for a 4.5 gen fighter.
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19332
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by NRao »

Apparently IN requested information on the naval Rafale a few months ago.

I just do not see either the -29 nor the fgfa as viable solutions right now
srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5866
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by srai »

^^^

FGFA/PAK-FA is too big to be a naval fighter. Even USN's super carriers couldn't accommodate similar sized F-22. Another heavy fighter Su-33 could only be launched with limited payloads.
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19332
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by NRao »

^^^^^

News items claim that the Russians have promised that it will occupy the space of a MiG-29 on the deck and below.

But check out my post in the fgfa thread. Does not seem to be going too well.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by brar_w »

Viv S wrote: Fortunately that it happens rarely enough for the trade-off to be worth it. And given the gaping capability differential between the Rafale and F-35, its more than worth it.
Quite true, even during the operational deployment in OIF and OEF, the single engined F-16 had an all engine (GE or Pratt) class A mishap rate of 0.47 per 100,000 hours, and of all the Class-A mishaps in the year 2003 less than 20% were attributed to the engine. Modern engines have just become extremely reliable post the last GEW, and those that decide on 4 digit fleets in the US do so based on some fairly substantial data on modern aircraft and how it compares to historic data. Even with the F-16, reliability over the years has resulted in this phenomena being quite clear based on the data. Besides the IN (N-LCA), and the USN (that had the A-7 and the A-4 in the past and in plenty of numbers) Brazil will also be using a single engine Gripen E in the future for its carriers. There are plenty of single engine reliability data on an extremely larger F-16 C fleet worldwide based on which the JSF decision was taken..Two engines trade was made on commonality on cost, based on data. While traditionalists may still want or like 2, the decision was based pretty much on an analysis of data just as a decision was made based on historic data to set other performance thresholds. When taken as a relative number based on fleet size, i doubt the USN will see a significance difference in their reliability and class-A losses in the F-35 and F-18E/F/C/D fleets over a long arc of time..


Image
Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5564
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by Cain Marko »

srai wrote:^^^

FGFA/PAK-FA is too big to be a naval fighter. Even USN's super carriers couldn't accommodate similar sized F-22. Another heavy fighter Su-33 could only be launched with limited payloads.
Why? Iirc, tomcat was a pretty big boy, the pakfa could be smaller
SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36427
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by SaiK »

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 318408.cms
MMRCA - II - #MakeInIndia - time to open a new MMRCA dhaaga?
srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5866
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by srai »

Cain Marko wrote:
srai wrote:^^^

FGFA/PAK-FA is too big to be a naval fighter. Even USN's super carriers couldn't accommodate similar sized F-22. Another heavy fighter Su-33 could only be launched with limited payloads.
Why? Iirc, tomcat was a pretty big boy, the pakfa could be smaller
When I see it I'll believe it then :)
Bhaskar_T
BRFite
Posts: 279
Joined: 13 Feb 2011 19:09

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by Bhaskar_T »

Oh My Lord. A new RFP, the full saga again? 36 Rafale in fly-away condition at expensive costs of 6-8 Billion$ and now 90 new MMRCA which fighter, when will it get delivered, what cost? Has finally Devendra Fadnavis, Parrikar and Modi found a solution in Gripen - "IAF, please with the money we have, kindly manage with Gripens for now". (It is better to speculate on a cheap fighter such as Gripen, with the pictures of Fadnavis floating around some time back). (AFAIK, Gripen probably was the lowest ranked fighter by IAF among 5).

Is this Lifafa article? Not being covered by any media or twitter.

PS - Whosoever writes such article should be beaten by bamboos and sticks for typing '30 million program' instead of '30 billion program'.
In another major step towards self reliance in the defence sector, a plan is being finalised to produce 90 Medium Multi-Role Combat Aircraft (MMRCA) in India, informed sources said.

A Request for Proposal (RFP) is expected to be drafted soon after the new Defence Procurement Procedure (DPP) comes in place.

Expected to be one of the biggest projects under the Make in India campaign, the cost of the programme is expected to be around $30 million, the sources said.

The Indian Air Force requires 126 MMRCAs. With India getting into an agreement with France to get 36 Rafale fighter jets in flyaway condition, there was a lack of clarity on how the rest of the gap will be filled.

The sources said that now these remaining jets will be made in India, in what will be a major step in domestic manufacturing of such aircraft.

According to the sources, the air force does not have enough squadrons in the event of a joint war with Pakistan and China.

"An RFP is expected to be drafted soon for making 90 MMRCAs in India. A global tender will be floated. The private sector will also have an active participation," said an official from the defence ministry.

As many foreign bidders were in the race when India set out to buy 126 MMRCAs, for which Dassault Aviation, the makers of Rafale, was finally chosen, the sources said all original bidders will be invited.

The list of fighters that were in competition for the MMRCA bid included Russia's MIG-35 (RAC MiG), Swedish Gripen, Dassault, American Lockheed Martin and Boeing's F/A-18 Super Hornet and Eurofighter Typhoon made by a consortium of British, German, Spanish and Italian firms.

The sources said that out of the 90 aircraft, 54 will be single-seaters and the remaining 36 tandem-seaters. There will be an option of acquiring 45 additional fighters as a follow-up order.

The Indian Air Force is expected to be down to 32 squadrons by the end of this year, 576 fighter jets short of the 750-strong fighter jet fleet required as per vision documents to face simultaneous two-front wars with Pakistan and China.

At least three squadrons of the vintage Soviet origin MiG-21 and MiG-27 single engine aircraft are scheduled to be phased out.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by brar_w »

$30 Billion is too high for 90 fighters so even a typo does not explain the figure. Why not also issue a needs document to HAL, and let them put together a plan (and be held up to it) using the LCA-Mk2 followed later by the AMCA?
eklavya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2181
Joined: 16 Nov 2004 23:57

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by eklavya »

This F-35 seems to be a dud:

http://www.military.com/daily-news/2015 ... fight.html

Apparently it can't deal with an F-16 in a dogfight.

Would be good to get it tested by the IAF though, to find out the truth about its capabilities, rather than listen to the excuses rolled out after every time negative data appears ...
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

Post by brar_w »

^^ http://fightersweep.com/2548/f-35-v-f-1 ... e-garbage/

http://fightersweep.com/2574/f-35-vs-f- ... -thoughts/

http://fightersweep.com/2698/f-35-worst-fighter-ever/

The F-15 routinely looses to the F-16 in an energy dogfight..So does the F-18..Yet they also do well in certain other DACT conditions, not to mentions the F-15 destroys it when overall air-combat envelope is exploited. The T-38 has gun kills on the F-22A, with a video on youtube as a reference. The F-35 did not face an F-16 in a dogfight, it used an F-16 as a reference to study and analyze the CLAWS on an DEVELOPMENT test Jet so that recommendations could be provided to the development-test team in terms of making changes to an Under-development CLAWS as they go through test-points towards a full software build operational evaluation towards the beginning of 2018..There are fighters that manage energy better than others..The F-18 and F-16 are stark contrasts..simply put if you fight against an F-16 using an F-18 but tactics that would favor the F-16, you would loose...Same thing if the F-16 fights a Hornet using Hornet's tactics...As even the typhoon drivers agree too, below 15,000 feet in a pure gun-fight the Viper is pretty much as good as you are going to get if you are fighting in "its envelope"...It was designed around energy maneuverability, as a light weight no nonsense gun-fighter..However all fighters that are different or inferior to it in certain envelopes such as the F-15, and F-18 C/D and E/F still get plenty of kills on it. This particular outing was to test the F-35, not for it to go out and fight no holds barred against an F-16...That will be done elsewhere by operational folks (not test pilots) at the weapons school !!

Read the 3 articles posted above, they are written by a pilot with many hours on the F-16 and F-18..and one does not particularly like the F-35 as a program, yet understands the difference between sending a development test jet out fitted with test kit (and without mission systems and avionics) to use an aircraft as a reference in a series of BFM to test, and develop recommendations to further tweak the CLAWS and sending an operational aircraft with all its bells and whistles against another in a similar state and letting them duel out to see who comes out on top. Apparently some in the blogosphere don't see a difference but can we really blame them? I mean, one of the persons who has an extremely successfully blog (at the moment) and loves to make GIF's of about everything is in the business of selling hot dogs and ice-cream floats..thats his level of expertise ;) Of course the internet changes a lot :)

As the veteran pilot puts it -
But at the end of the day, this aircraft has done one thing no other aircraft has ever been able to do – turn an entire generation of aviation bloggers, journalists, and commenters into overnight military aviation experts.
Last edited by brar_w on 02 Aug 2015 20:08, edited 6 times in total.
Locked