India selects Typhoon & Rafale for MMRCA shortlist - Part 2

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 18 Dec 2011 11:34

pehale xmas,
badme shock.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 18 Dec 2011 16:33

Punters,place your money,Raffy,Phooy or a banana (split)! Do we have odds?

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 19 Dec 2011 03:14

51:49

Boreas · Post by **Boreas** » 19 Dec 2011 08:58

90:9:1

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 19 Dec 2011 09:04

methinks 80 tiffy:100 raffy in a expanded deal. and india would adopt the CVF as basis for its IAC-2.

Will · Post by **Will** » 19 Dec 2011 09:18

Now way is it going to be a banana split

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 19 Dec 2011 09:24

If logistics are the only concern, then staying with Russkie systems are always better. If we are adding either one Raffy or Tiffy, our logistics problem are going to increase onleee [let us give this a head ache value of 1].

BTW, if both Raffy and Tiffy goes banana split, then the logistics problem only gets 1.1 times the head ache value for going for any Euro canards.

So, imho, banana split is very healthy, protein rich diet.

nash · Post by **nash** » 19 Dec 2011 09:42

I would say increase the number to 216 and split equally b/w 2 eurocanards.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 19 Dec 2011 09:52

> no banana split.

IAF will operate until 2030+ - M2K, Mig29, Jags, MKI, Tejas1, Tejas2, Pakfa...thats 7 bananas right there...8 if you consider AMCA @ 2025+

replace the Mig27 and Bisons (take away 2 bananas) and add Tiffy and Rafa (2 fresh bananas)

we believe in sustainable agriculture and supporting genetic biodiversity not a single type of commercial Chiquita banana only....a single problem can wipe out such harvests.

Will · Post by **Will** » 19 Dec 2011 10:31

Buying lesser numbers will only increase the cost of the bananas.

Mort Walker · Post by **Mort Walker** » 19 Dec 2011 11:34

Who knows, perhaps the decision will be delayed due to the possibility of a fiscal crisis in 2012 which could occur if Iran oil exports are sanctioned and oil permanently goes above $150/barrel. It seems Kangress is content with 5-6% growth rates and 7-8% inflation rates.

akimalik · Post by **akimalik** » 19 Dec 2011 11:39

Singha wrote:replace the Mig27 and Bisons (take away 2 bananas)

Sir, won't that be eating into the Tejas1+2 pie then?

OT....This is sounding more like a Desserts Menu

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 19 Dec 2011 12:49

Only Tejas-2++ can eat into Tejas-1 pie. None can eat into, when we are determined to serve the nation. It is all in our hands.

Rf and Ef:
Take one of them, and give it to HAL [very authoritative and dassaultish].
Take the other, and energize the private sector [cassadian is already making its presense].

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 19 Dec 2011 13:20

probably Tiffy given its longer timeline to where we want it to be is best suited to setup a production line in India under pvt hands EADS-India . EADS could hold 51% of it, GOI 24% and a pvt player 25%.

nash · Post by **nash** » 19 Dec 2011 15:02

SaiK wrote:Only Tejas-2++ can eat into Tejas-1 pie. None can eat into, when we are determined to serve the nation. It is all in our hands.

Rf and Ef:
Take one of them, and give it to HAL [very authoritative and dassaultish].
Take the other, and energize the private sector [cassadian is already making its presense].

That exactly what i thought, thanks for giving words to my thinking.

In this way we can have two production line and also boost the private sector to involve in production of state-of-art a/c like EF.

member_21286 · Post by **member_21286** » 19 Dec 2011 16:05

SaiK wrote:Only Tejas-2++ can eat into Tejas-1 pie. None can eat into, when we are determined to serve the nation. It is all in our hands.

Rf and Ef:
Take one of them, and give it to HAL [very authoritative and dassaultish].
Take the other, and energize the private sector [cassadian is already making its presense].

I'd better say select just one and give it to HAL, but give indigenous products like Tejas and Dhruv (and also upgrade programs like Jaguar or else) to the private sector. Given the current tax regime, giving a MMRCA to a private player could make it even more expensive eventually...

RKumar · Post by **RKumar** » 19 Dec 2011 17:13

^^^^Best I can compare these wet jingo dreams ... local "Sabji mandi", what is the price of white onions, ahh pack 1 kg ....hmmmmmm and what about red onions .... ahhh bit expensive but looks and tastes good ... pack also 1 kg

For consumable, it might be worth to buy variety for taste. Why to buy two types of bloody expensive machines, when one can do both tricks.

People calling for 216 are forgetting the cost of procurement and maintaining these planes in air for 4+ gen ... future lies with 5th gen and unmanned. Until then hang to 126 MMCRA and make up numbers with Tejas Mk1 and 2.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 19 Dec 2011 17:41

5th gen and unmanned is great in theory. but khan is ahead in both vs EU/Rus by atleast one decade and is not letting up.

so when will Rus avionics, sensor fusion and radar reach Khan stds ? will it magically get solved with the pakfa ? when will they enter into service new munitions to match stuff like jsow, jassm, sdb, amraam some that are already in use for a decade now. do they have anything comparable to the E3 and E8 ready for use?

as to the EU they dont even have a manned 5th gen project and have 1 known ucav project vs around around 5 known ones of khan and lord knows how many secret ones in phantom and skunk works. EU has no political cover for huge investments when the public are worried about losing their socialist benefits or otherwise worried about carrying along the PIIGS.

the picture is fairly ugly for the rest-of-world in 5th gen, much more so than 4++ gen.

JSF is a red herring, when you consider the wave of super-munitions, ELINT/EO superiority and spooky flying wing UAV/UCAV that khan will release from the batcave at an opportune time.

where are we when its clear we can only have EU and Rus as partners for 5th gen / UCAV = we are hamstrung by the same limitations as these two. we are working to put a predator sized UAV in the air force in the form of Rustom2 by 2015....thats our level...lets not get ahead of ourselves and think we are going to "leap" enmasse into 5th gen anytime soon.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 19 Dec 2011 18:37

Singha,neither is the US! The latest AWST paints a grim pic of the USA def. budget,cuts yet agreed upon by lawmakers.In factm,officials are now talking of the JSF being dumped and are busy drawing up alternatives,with "super" versions of intl. F-18SHs-with a "stealth" conformal weapons pod,carrying 4 AAMs or small PGM bombs).Similar options for F-15s and F-16s are being planned as export numbers to allies now will be just "5%" of US procurement! One can imagine that effect upon prices.Faced with this unprecdented decision,Israek is trying desperately to get its hands upon the very first JSFs,before the programme collapses due toi financial woes.

Therefore,in the current bleak eco scenario,what will happen to our very own MMRCA contest if costs are found stratospherically high? ? Is our desi babudom that powerful too,remembering their comments in the past about Scorpene costs,delaying the decision by almost a year,

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 19 Dec 2011 19:14

Zipang wrote: Rf and Ef:
Take one of them, and give it to HAL [very authoritative and dassaultish].
Take the other, and energize the private sector [cassadian is already making its presense].

I'd better say select just one and give it to HAL, but give indigenous products like Tejas and Dhruv (and also upgrade programs like Jaguar or else) to the private sector. Given the current tax regime, giving a MMRCA to a private player could make it even more expensive eventually...

For Tejas, we already have a wide distributed help from private, public sector and educational institutions.

We have to also be extremely careful in how regulated this market is, owing to security and classified nature of such products.

EADS is the best example and have shown a demonstrated history of private partnership spread across nations. Adding India to it, would not be such a hassle as we face with expensive French and especially Russian orgs for documents, ToTs, and parts.

We like French system too..HAL is already in deep relationship with Fr for LCA, M2K, etc so, it is a nice venture to save the Eurcanards from bankruptcy, and there by getting a free ToT in this whole deal from both.. Hope our babooze don't scam it up!

Kersi D · Post by **Kersi D** » 19 Dec 2011 20:40

PAK FA, 5th Generation, F 35, F 22,

With the present state of global economy let us forget about all these an concentrate on our Rafale and/or Typhoon AND Tejas

K

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 19 Dec 2011 20:42

Philip sir I agree the US investment is probably tapering off now. but weapons r&d and production being long duration projects (10-15 yrs even for a small thing like a new AAM), the effect of their pre-2008 investment will be felt till 2025 for sure albeit production might not be high, but the tech is already developed and needs refinement and production. the lack of investment now will be felt in a emptier cupboard post 2025.

projects are so long these days a designer might work on just 2-3 projects serially in his entire career! in ww2 era the top guys used to dip their hand in 20-30 projects in career....someone like "kelly" johnson is reputed to have contributed to some 40 projects ..which points to the scale of investment and tolerance for failure then.

RKumar · Post by **RKumar** » 19 Dec 2011 20:44

Lets buy 126 of these from one vendor and additional xxx numbers of Tejas

member_21286 · Post by **member_21286** » 19 Dec 2011 21:19

SaiK wrote: EADS is the best example and have shown a demonstrated history of private partnership spread across nations. Adding India to it, would not be such a hassle as we face with expensive French and especially Russian orgs for documents, ToTs, and parts.

We like French system too..HAL is already in deep relationship with Fr for LCA, M2K, etc so, it is a nice venture to save the Eurcanards from bankruptcy, and there by getting a free ToT in this whole deal from both.. Hope our babooze don't scam it up!

Save the Eurocanards!

I'd like to make a donation for X-Mas... But I don't have any address to send it? You have an idea, Saik?

However, integrate India to the Eurofighter consortium could be a real challenge. I don't know how you plan to proceed as it seems that there is not much room left for a fifth partner... What can India obtain at best? A part of the left wing production??

I don't want to make any stupid EF-bashing, but if you want to talk about expensive spare parts, call the Austrians, I think that they will have many things to tell you! I entrust you to post a debriefing on BR ! Thanks forehand, Saik!

Both Raffy and EF toolings/parts/ToT will be expensive. Remember the EJ200 issue, Eurojet's tooling was not especially cheap, if my memory is good. Both Eurofighter and Rafale consortia will try to make money with spares and ToTs, as they have probably tried to lower the unit flyaway cost of their respective bird... I've not much illusion on that point.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 19 Dec 2011 21:32

zipang, just think about in these lines:

1. Tatas can buy out all those failing Euro nations.. those wings manufacturing places can be easily clipped off! (italy and spain).

2. The UK and German ones are part of the assimilation process for our private industries. If you ask tatas, they will jump the gun more than they can dump it.

3. There is high promise from EADS, that they will meet our demands.. I am sure, the costs can be brought down from localizations.

4. Niche jobs is the area where the eye-ropeans may want to hold on.. this is where Joint R&D labs helps, where private desi munnas can take leadership roles (like how our people perform in CERN).

5. Rafale is HAL's favorite. Leave them alone, and they have a job to do.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 19 Dec 2011 22:51

kERSI'S PRAGMATISM IS ADMIRABLE!

However,with the JSF there appears to be a fundamental flaw that in a much lower scale bears some resemblance to the LCA project too.Let me explain.When the LCA was first unveiled to Rajiv G,and the decision to g"o" was taken,in the '80s,I remember India Today bringing out a cover page feature on the same.I may still have it somewhere.The challenge that faced us was to develop at home all the critical components of the aircraft ,which we did not possess at all,especially that of engine technology,which prematurely grounded the superb design of the HF-24.We also had to master composite tech,radar tech,FBW,etc.How much better off are we today? The aircraft still flies with a foreign engine and will do so even for Mk-2,its radar is firang,In short,the nature of the task,time and money required by the boffins was drastically underestimated.

In similar fashion has the JSF's designers also failed.They too have been overconfident especially as the US had already operated the Nighthawk,the very first stealth fighter and produced in large qty the F-22 Raptor.The "low" end,the JSF was considered to be an easy task,achievable far cheaper than the F-22 and development would be faster.In truth,it has not been a dream but a nightmare.Even if it finally comes round and into production,as I posted earlier,it will be NO more agile than an F-16 and carry limited weaponry in a "stealth pod",being used toprevent fuselage redesign .the IRST sensor revolution is making stealth less of a magic bullet with each passing day.New tactics to counter stealth are being developed especially by the US's enemies like China.China too through theft in the main,has unveiled its own ambitious stealth bird,while the Russians did a year ago,which we have signed up to jointly bring into production and service.Given the incremental approach to developing the components for the FGFA/T-50,using SU-35s and 30s as testbeds,one is far more confident that the Indo-Russian bird will fly as planned without too much of a delay.Russia has the hardware tech in abundance and India the software.The cost factor is as of now an unknown,but a budgetary figure of $100 per bird has been given officially as a yardstick.How close this figure is with the two offers for the MMRCA has to be certainly seen.The SU-30MKIs being acquired in very large number and upgraded too, and one hopes that the MMRCA,whose technology is with us in hand and not in the bush, is seen as not being too exorbitant,which might lead to tangential thought amongst the decisiin makers!

Raffoon,Typhale or "split",the cost isn't going to be "bananas" though! It is this thought that still excites hope in the breasts of the Gripen camp,though Natasha in my opinion has already not just packed bags,but has long since left for the motherland,allowing other nubile birds to do the "feather fluttering".

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 19 Dec 2011 23:03

when it comes to cost, none of these are cheap. every plane costs similar for over a period of time. some costs more initially, and some take the heck outta our budget for upgrade and maintenance.

the more indigenous solutions we have the more cost distribution for local wealth can be achieved.. and the very purpose of ToTing to get local industries establishing for more local jobs.

but, then this does not mean it focuses only pockets of babooze and middlemen or the top level executives who make it all!, and the capitalistic setup of cheap labor or labor can be kicked left, right and center policy.

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 20 Dec 2011 13:59

....and its official....

Japan selects troubled F-35 as new fighter jet

nash · Post by **nash** » 20 Dec 2011 14:14

shukla wrote:....and its official....

Japan selects troubled F-35 as new fighter jet

That would make 113 million $/ Ac , so can we assume that cost of MMRCA very much possible to come below 100 and FGFA would be around ~100...

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 20 Dec 2011 14:16

Rafale back on track UAE?

UAE's Rafale deal is no mirage

UAE has made no secret of the fact that it requires an aircraft significantly more advanced than the current Rafale versions in service with the Armée de l’Air. It specifies a longer-range active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar with ground moving target detection and tracking (GMTI/GMTT), ‘interlaced’ air-to-air and air-to-ground modes, a more capable version of the Spectra electronic warfare suite, integration with MBDA’s Meteor long-range missile and, crucially, with more powerful versions of the Snecma M88 engines, producing more than nine tonnes of thrust (about 1.5 tonnes more than the current engine). Over time, Meteor integration and some AESA and Spectra improvements have become a funded part of the core Rafale programme, but the Armée de l’Air has no stated or funded requirement for a more powerful engine, which the UAE reportedly still wants and which many analysts believe would be essential for long range air-to-ground operations with heavy weapons in the region (and certainly to allow carriage of a three-missile heavy strike loadout using the Black Shaheen). Nor are planned French radar and Spectra improvements believed to be sufficient to meet UAE requirements.

There may also have been a stumbling block in that the UAE is understood to have demanded that the existing Mirage 2000-9s must be ‘bought back’ by the French either for resale or for use by the French forces at an estimated unit price of €20 million – equivalent to about €1.2 billion for the whole fleet. Historically, Dassault has tended not to use its own resources to fund military aircraft development, preferring its government clients to do so. In this case, the cost of developing the upgrades required by the UAE has been estimated at 4-5 billion euros – or more modestly at €2 billion ($2.9 billion), a sum which the UAE has reportedly expected the French side to pay. Though the UAE has previously invested in the development of more advanced versions of fighters that it has bought (funding the development of both the Mirage 2000-9 and of the Block 60 F-16E/F in return for a share of profits from any export of aircraft with the features it had paid to develop), it seems not to have the appetite to do so for a modernised and advanced version of the Rafale, or it may be disinclined to be the launch customer and ‘guinea pig’ for such a variant.

The UAE’s licensing-for-exports deals associated with the Mirage 2000 earned hundreds of millions of dollars when Mirage 2000-9 technology was sold to other customers, and similar arrangements regarding the F-16E/F promised to earn the Emirates more if other countries buy similarly upgraded versions of the F-16E/F. But being a launch customer can bring disadvantages and problems and the UAE may have wished to avoid these, or may have felt that further Rafale export sales are unlikely. But whatever the reason for the UAE’s unwillingness to fund the required Rafale improvements, it seems as though the deal is ‘back on’, perhaps with the UAE having scaled back its requirements, or perhaps with the French government having decided that it is willing to ‘bite the bullet’ and fund the necessary development in order to try to win what could be a pivotal first export order for the Rafale.

Is the Rafale upgrade in the pipeline irrespective of exports? or are they going to make us pay for the upgrades?

SKrishna · Post by **SKrishna** » 20 Dec 2011 14:46

Now this...

Rafale price re-evaluated, comes to EUR 152 m per unit

"The total cost of the program, updated to 2011 price is € 43.56 billion for the state, telling development," the senators said. This cost was € 40.7 billion during the last evaluation. What elevates the price of a Rafale in France for € 152 million (286 units), compared with € 142 million previously.

and thats not all...

This escalation of the cost of the Rafale will continue until the end of 2012 and beyond. The Rafale program alone absorbs more than 35% of payment appropriations for the component "Engagement and Combat" in the project budget law of 2012 (from 1.57 billion euros in total), well ahead of the Barracuda nuclear attack submarines and the FREMM multi-mission frigates.

arthuro · Post by **arthuro** » 20 Dec 2011 15:42

One should understand that the "152M€" figure is of no interest for exports customer like india.

This figure is only worth for the french tax payer, ie : how much will cost the whole rafale programe over 50 years (development since the 80's, facilities, procurement etc). So it is the total cost of the rafale programe divided by the number of rafales procured. And this figure is VAT inclusive as well. So that purely french accountancy and the price an export customer will pay will be very different.

The right figure for india is the fly away cost as India will of course not have to repay 20 years of devlopment! ... (rafale marketed in India is already developed). The fly away cost is around 55M€-60M€ depending of the version. It may be a bit higher due to the fact India wants to have its own facilities but at the same time manpower is cheaper so it is hard to tell. But the number one should have in mind is 55M€-60M€ for the aircraft running out of the factory.

You will then need to add the price of weapons facilities etc but the aircraft it self worths a bit less than 60M€.

vivek_v · Post by **vivek_v** » 20 Dec 2011 16:26

arthuro wrote:.............................................
The right figure for india is the fly away cost as India will of course not have to repay 20 years of devlopment! ... (rafale marketed in India is already developed). The fly away cost is around 55M€-60M€ depending of the version.................
..........You will then need to add the price of weapons facilities etc but the aircraft it self worths a bit less than 60M€.

Normally for a Private company one would need to amortize the cost of R&D in the units sold. I find it very interesting that Dassualt or French government would not add to the Unit cost some percentage as the markup for R&D and other activities. As i understand Dassault would also need to add the cost of TOT and Offsets to the unit cost.

In that scenario , i personally find it very difficult to believe that Dassault would have quoted just the fly-away cost to IAF. It should be Flyaway cost + R&D cost + Other expenses + Support cost + TOT cost + Offsets cost + Misc Cost. Adding all this might take the unit to cost 100M Euro's.

SKrishna · Post by **SKrishna** » 20 Dec 2011 16:31

^^^^

But if it cost € 152M / unit over its development cycle for delivered 286 units, what could be the total lifecycle cost over its service life.... (flyaway cost + weapons + TOT + maintenance + consumables + MLUs + etc etc)? Any guess....?

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 20 Dec 2011 17:09

Is it Dec 20th yet?

arthuro · Post by **arthuro** » 20 Dec 2011 18:26

Normally for a Private company one would need to amortize the cost of R&D in the units sold. I find it very interesting that Dassualt or French government would not add to the Unit cost some percentage as the markup for R&D and other activities. As i understand Dassault would also need to add the cost of TOT and Offsets to the unit cost

That's wrong it is the french state that supported the R&D costs not the private company....This figure means nothing as far as an export is concerned. This figure is basically all the costs (development, procurement) of the rafale program starting in the 80's divided by the number of airframes. So it makes sense only for the french Taxpayer who supported this program from the very beginning.

In fact the bigger this figure is the better it is as it means that the french state is commited to the rafale program and is ready to fund all the necessary upgrades to remain at the top of the operational performance. I prefer this situation than being underfunded.

For export only the flyaway costs makes sense and the flyaway price of a rafale rolling out of the factory is around 55M€-60M€. Then you can compute total lifecycle costs but that is another story.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 20 Dec 2011 18:34

political fish bone sees light for the typhoon++mki.

shiv wrote:Is it Dec 20th yet?

may be, but was the deadline for this year?

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 21 Dec 2011 02:23

Lindsay Hoyle MP says Japan's BAE rejection a 'real blow'

Lindsay Hoyle, the Labour MP for Chorley, said providing Eurofighter Typhoons to Japan would have helped save jobs at the BAE Systems' plants at Warton and Samlesbury.

"Once again we are seeing the North West being hardest hit; the impact is disproportionate and it is terrible news for families at this time of the year," he said.

The BAE Systems spokesman said the company "respect Japan's decision and look forward to meeting with the Japanese government and the assessment team to discuss the key elements of our bid and the selection process in order to understand the reasons behind the decision". "With Eurofighter Typhoon, we offered Japan the most advanced and powerful combat aircraft on the world market," he said.

BAE Systems announced in November that it expected to hear in early 2012 if the Indian government would be placing an order for the Eurofighter Typhoon aircraft.

Mr Hoyle said the Indian deal was crucial to the North West and that he was "engaging with government departments, BAE Systems and the Indian High Commissioner, urging India to buy British". "I do not want to see any further job losses in our region."

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 21 Dec 2011 02:57

well, what is the point of pasting that here...[meaning there won't be any mercies for them - no bheek manging allowed] job loss or not, is all dependent on how it fairs in the ToTing plus other price comparison and offers.

when billions of jobless are in desh, we would have no concerns of their product pricing and promotions. show us the technology and tools, we will show you the money.

nash · Post by **nash** » 21 Dec 2011 09:19

BAE Systems announced in November that it expected to hear in early 2012 if the Indian government would be placing an order for the Eurofighter Typhoon aircraft.

Is it mean there is no Christmas gift to desh......

Probably for rebublic Day celebration...