India selects Typhoon and Rafale for MMRCA shortlist

[UBanerjee]

Contesting the results would put any of the losers on thin ice with regards to future participation in contracts. For this reason alone I doubt any actual serious efforts will be made to get the results changed - from the companies.

Govt. may be a different story. Still, the line coming out of the GOTUS is more like "I'm taking my ball and going home" rather than "the process was corrupt! redo! redo!"

[ramana]

Generally the losing side gets debriefed about why they lost.

This is what I wrote to an author late last night:

I do not agree with your assessment.
On technical reasons the European planes were selected. In fact the others didn't even take off with external stores from Leh.
- India needs planes they can use as they chose without four and five letter treaties and agreements.
- By choosing either India props up one of the major competitors just as SU 30 choice propped up Russia in mid-late 90s.
- C-17s and a whole lot of stuff is just compense for others.
- Also recall the high pressure sales tactics used. India would look even more softer by buying planes that didn't make the technical cut-off.

India will have better standing by acting in her interests.

As to Af-Pak , its a major requirement of US that India stay-out to assuage their pet monster.
just a week ago there were gratuitous statements about not having to seek healthcare in India.
It was a realistic decision. It tells them we will take our money where the seller satisfies the requirements.
Now for steps to hedge for adverse consequences.

ramana

and got this in response:

Thanks. Yours is the only sensible & reasoned response I've seen yet.

Where we do agree is that we need steps to hedge adverse consequences.

[Gagan]

IAF deal: US cos want to know why they lost
Indian Express

The US companies hope to get explanations that will let them better understand Indian processes and procedures with an eye to future competitions.

The fact is that the companies already know why they lost, in detail, and also why the two that were selected for the finals won.

It is the Media, Anal-yst Ayotullahs, Lawyers and Sales teams of the losing contenders, Netas of the states where jobs might be potentially affected who want to spin this otherwise.

Another point - the word on the streets is that the Pentagon had something to do with the level of tech that would go into the planes on offer to India. Now if that level of planes didn't make the cut, that means that the two US companies will be hankering for greater freedom in future sales, and will point out that the GOTUS is in some way responsible for all this mess. Both LM and Boeing understood the seriousness of this contest, of what they were up against vis-a-vis the other contenders and the IAF parameters. If any of this is true, then it would be sad that both these companies did not have the final say on what version / level of tech went in.

The fact that this is going public is in one way good. That means that the back channels are not working. MoD's 'public' announcement leaves GoI in a corner, with no room for manoeuvre at all. (Isn't this what happened with Bofors hain ji? After the Army evaluated and ranked the guns, the gun that was not number 1 was bought?). IMHO the UPA will NOT risk another scandal.

Meanwhile there is going to be a media tamasha, with Anal-ysts of all hue pitching in with, how these injuns are unworthy of technically evaluating these hi-fi planes etc, and our lifafa media joining in the chorus to try and spin things. GoI won't respond here, because if GoI responds, then Indo-US relations unnecessarily get weighed down, they are going fine AFAIK.

This is a very serious issue for the Planes that didn't make it - All future sales are seriously threatened, because the word is on the streets that they failed to make the bar that the IAF set on technical parameters.

[negi]

This is a very serious issue for the Planes that didn't make it - All future sales are seriously threatened, because the word is on the streets that they failed to make the bar that the IAF set on technical parameters.

This is a hyperbole it's just that MRCA deal was the single largest deal of it's kind so obviously not having made the final cut will irk the looser for sometime .

[ramana]

Rajat Pandit gives details of the evaluation.....

Gagan is right this seriously casts doubts on the candidates that were not down selected...

US pressure fails to pull its fighter through IAF testRajat Pandit, TNN | Apr 29, 2011, 03.13am IST
[url=http://timesofindia%20.indiatimes.%20com/india/%20US-pressure-%20fails-to-%20pull-its-%20fighter-through-%20IAF-test/%20articleshow/%208113027.cms]LINK[/url]

NEW DELHI: From a US versus Europe battle, it has become a Europe versus France tussle. The US did mount a high-voltage campaign over the last four years, with even President Barack Obama making a strong sales pitch for American fighters in the final stages but in the end India went "purely" by the gruelling technical evaluation.

Officials, in fact, said both PM Manmohan Singh and defence minister A K Antony had made it clear that the selection process for the gigantic $10.4 billion project to acquire 126 medium multi-role combat aircraft (MMRCA) should be guided solely by IAF's operational requirements, not by "any other extraneous factor", as also the prospect of further modernizing the jets during their 40-year lifespan.

This came even as representatives of only Eurofighter Typhoon (EADS, backed by the UK, Germany, Spain and Italy), French Rafale (Dassault) jets were called to the defence ministry on Thursday to extend the validity of their yet-to-be-opened commercial bids, within two weeks, till December 31.

Rejection letters, in turn, have already been handed over to the other four contenders, American F/A-18 'Super Hornet' (Boeing) and F-16 'Super Viper' ( Lockheed Martin), Swedish Gripen (Saab), and Russian MiG-35 (United Aircraft Corporation) .

Though the Europeans were apprehensive that the Americans might use their clout to swing the MMRCA project, like US has done in other defence deals in the past, their fears have now been laid to rest.

The Eurofighter, followed closely by Rafale, "came closest" to meeting the 643 technical attributes specified by India during the long-drawn field trials held by IAF test pilots both in India and abroad under different weather conditions. "The other four fell below the base line of minimum air staff qualitative requirements to be met," said the official. It is, of course, no secret that India remains unhappy with US for supplying more F-16s to Pakistan on the pretext of the war against terror. Neither is the defence ministry, led by Antony, convinced about the "utility and benefits" of the Logistics Support Agreement (LSA), Communication Interoperability and Security Memorandum Agreement (CISMOA) and Basic Exchange and Cooperation Agreement for Geo-Spatial Cooperation (BECA), the foundational military agreements being pushed by US.

While the absence of CISMOA restricts US from transferring certain high-tech equipment to India, the already-inked End-Use Monitoring Agreement (EUMA) gives Washington the right to inspect the military equipment sold to New Delhi as well as puts certain restrictions on their operational use.

Is it any wonder then that India seems to be restricting its military aircraft purchases from the US to transport and reconnaissance planes the like three Business Boeing Jets, six C-130J 'Super Hercules', 12 P-8I Poseidon and 10 C-17 Globemaster- III, which together cost upwards of $8 billion.

Moreover, it's not as if the Eurofighter and Rafale were pushovers despite the geo-political clout of the US. The former is, after all, backed by UK, Germany, Spain and Italy. France, too, has been a long-term defence partner of India and, incidentally, did not impose sanctions after the Pokhran-II nuclear tests in 1998.

[Gagan]

I don't think this will affect future sales from the companies in India either.

LM: India likes the C-130, without the CISMOA, EULA, etc etc. There might be a re-order for more planes. Who knows if the 3-4-5 worded treaties issue is resolved with GoI the F-35 might come in at a future date.
The risk is that if the issue that India has with these treaties is not resolved, F-35 at a future date might meet the same fate as the current contenders, albeit on strategic parameters rather than technical ones.

Boeing will continue to do business with Indian Cos and with GoI in the future too. The C-17 is coming in (@ highway robbery prices right?).

And finally this does not affect Indo-US relations at the government level or in the way these companies deal with India.

Only the group consisting of Media, Analysts with inflated egos, Sales and marketing teams of the various losing contenders, and some politicians of the areas where jobs might be affected, and perhaps some others who are doing all the halla-gulla.

[Klaus]

Thanks. Yours is the only sensible & reasoned response I've seen yet.

Where we do agree is that we need steps to hedge adverse consequences.

Was it vaunted pride that led him/her to conclude that there was complete divergence except for that last line?

[negi]

Gagan niether P-8I, C-130 J or C-17 are nuke delivery platforms, CISMOA can be bypassed by having the relevant equipment removed but not EUMA. IAF chief has categorically stated the IAF's stance on CISMOA and that is why the C-130J are being inducted without the secured communication (afaik the datalink) and other stuff which depends on military grade GPS signal, same will happen with the C-17s too however the MRCA is a nuke delivery platform so EUMA imho was a deal breaker.

[Gagan]

Yes eggjactly.

But GoI had better seal this one quickly.
The Brazilians might flip back towards the Rafale.

[Gagan]

Can't but help thinking that there would be considerable mirth in national capitals across the world. Especially the munna national capitals.

This is the second high profile thing that the messiah has lobbied for and not gotten selected. The first was the olympics. Wonder what message that conveys for 2012?

Boss the Media and all kinds of people will be having an EchEnDee issue with this! Guys India ain't seen anything like this yet. Good practice for MMS and co. If they can ride this one out, they know what ABV and team had to go through.

[Anujan]

As a compensation for not buying the AC, India should buy towed and SP arty from the US.

Win-win for everyone.

[negi]

Arty has never been in Unkil's big scheme of things even the M777 happened just because of Af-Pak else it's Arty inventory is a joke (unless ATACMS and HIMARS are included which are in different league) when compared to likes of Germay and Ru despite having a gigantic military budget.

[ramana]

Thanks. Yours is the only sensible & reasoned response I've seen yet.

Where we do agree is that we need steps to hedge adverse consequences.

Was it vaunted pride that led him/her to conclude that there was complete divergence except for that last line?

I respect him for his views. His worry is there is a lot of things that US can do which will have adverse consequences and India be prepared for it. In the Indo-US thread I asked for top 10 things the US can do which they are already not doing.

Gagan, Another thing NRI lobbyists in DC who pretended they can navigate thru Delhi decision process are re faced as they took money and proven wrong. Some jokers were role-play acting as Indian babus for US companies to improve negotiating tactics.

[Singha]

> As a compensation for not buying the AC, India should buy towed and SP arty from the US.

pls quit the notion we OWE them anything. we owe only as much as we get , which is not much. the fact we are still going ahead with the overpriced C17 deal is compensation enough if anyone wants to call it that.

brazil will go with france eventually. its a long term deal which involves france suppying its rubis / barracuda class n-sub tech for brazilian SSN program too. Unkil cannot match that.

and the shameful shortfalls of the Shornet in desert and high alt cold ops will be noted with mirth by its brazilian enemies

if the US tries to squeeze our balls we should leak full details of the F16/F18 shortfalls to the media - unkil will be left with no chaddi to cover its backside in other competitions we bedded 5 beautiful women repeatedly, decided to marry two, but we know what lies beneath the clothing of the other three...if they want to marry others and want to hide 'performance' shortfalls they better hope we dont circulate the videotape of our nightly encounters on MMS (pun unintended)

[Gagan]

If one avenue closes, another one opens.
India is on a defence spending spree, and is breaking notions that have been held as gospel for half a century.

Another carrot that might, perhaps, maybe have been dangled.
Someone's pointed out that India is willing to spend as much as $1billion per sub for the second line of conventional subs, and that a US SSN that is not the latest thingie they have (though still more advanced than the rest of the world) costs less than that.

Need to watch out for movements on that front too.

[Patni]

Exclusive: U.S. long feared India arms-sale snags, cable shows

By Jim Wolf
WASHINGTON | Fri Apr 29, 2011 10:31pm EDT
(Reuters) - The United States has fretted for years that its ties to Pakistan and past sanctions against India would harm its efforts to win arms deals such as the $11 billion fighter order that slipped away from two U.S. suppliers this week, a U.S. diplomatic cable showed.

"Our ability to seize the opportunities presented by this newly improved environment is limited by the commonly held view that the U.S. will not prove to be a reliable supplier of defense equipment," Timothy Roemer, the U.S. ambassador to India, said in an October 29, 2009, cable to Michele Flournoy, a top Pentagon official then about to visit India.

U.S. officials from President Barack Obama down subsequently pushed hard to sell U.S. fighter jets to India to crown expanding security ties. The United States also is eyeing tens of billions of dollars in other potential arms deals with India, the cable showed.

Roemer announced Thursday he was leaving his post for professional and family reasons. "The new environment" reference in his 2009 cable concerned the emergence of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's government with "a clear mandate not beholden to coalition partners" for the first time since post-Cold War U.S.-Indian strategic ties took shape.

U.S. competitors use the economic sanctions imposed by Washington after Indian nuclear tests in 1998 to try to harm U.S. sales prospects, the cable said.

They also point to "our close defense relationship with Pakistan as rationale that the U.S. should not be trusted," Roemer wrote in the message obtained by the anti-secrecy group WikiLeaks and made available to Reuters by a third party.
The cable cited one unnamed source as saying the Indian army will never put U.S. equipment in divisions facing Pakistan, India's historic foe, "because they expect the U.S. will stop military supplies in the event of Indo-Pak hostilities."

"DEEPLY DISAPPOINTED"

The U.S. Defense Department said on Friday it was "deeply disappointed" by rejection of the U.S. bid to supply 126 new fighter aircraft. Instead, India set up a contest between France's Rafale and the Eurofighter Typhoon made by Britain, Germany, Italy and Spain.

"We look forward to continuing to grow and develop our defense partnership with India," said Navy Commander Leslie Hull-Ryde, a Pentagon spokeswoman, "and remain convinced that the United States offers our defense partners around the globe the world's most advanced and reliable technology."

She said U.S. officials were closely studying Indian-provided documentation on the short-listing decision, and looked forward to a full "debrief" from the Indian Air Force.

A State Department spokeswoman, Heide Fulton, declined to comment on Roemer's 2009 cable as a matter of policy.

A senior State Department official said the United States was not aware of any allegations of impropriety "so far" in the fighter matter. The full field included the two American planes, three Europeans and a Russian model.

Asked about the possible impact of any Indian concerns over U.S. reliability as a supplier, the official said the elimination of Boeing and Lockheed seemed to be based on technical considerations.

"I think, if anything, the concerns are that it was only made on that basis and without looking at the wider strategic implications of this," the official said.

In the past three years, India has agreed to buy some $10 billion in U.S. military hardware including six Lockheed C-130J military transport planes and eight long-range Boeing P-8 maritime reconnaissance and anti-submarine warfare aircraft.

(Additional reporting by Andrew Quinn; Editing by Paul Simao)

[Sumeet]

if the US tries to squeeze our balls we should leak full details of the F16/F18 shortfalls to the media - unkil will be left with no chaddi to cover its backside in other competitions we bedded 5 beautiful women repeatedly, decided to marry two, but we know what lies beneath the clothing of the other three...if they want to marry others and want to hide 'performance' shortfalls they better hope we dont circulate the videotape of our nightly encounters on MMS (pun unintended)

this is Singha classic. no one else on forum could have thought of this.

[sohels]

Honestly, I'm a little bummed. I thought Obama's recent visit to India was no less significant than Nixon's visit to China.

Are you kidding me? We were a pariah nation before Obama's visit? No one wanted to come do business with us?

Good point, but no. Arguably, it was meant to formally signal America's intent and desire to extend support to India, whose rise in and of itself is viewed as a favorable outcome since a stronger India would check the influence of America's primary adversary (China), even in the absence of overt antagonism. China was viewed in a similar light in the 1970s vis the USSR, but was not offered this level of access to American armament.

Concerns about America's fickleness and interference, though valid, ought to be tempered by the great importance the US now attaches to its relationship with India.

Yes, US does attach important to its relationship with India. However, that relationship is strictly bilateral and has not changed US interaction with TSP in any shape or form. For that matter nor has its relationship and interaction changed with respect to China. Does that make the relationship with India less - no. Though beneficial both ways, it is a strictly bilateral relationship and not in any way strategic.

See above. The US-India relationship is most certainly strategic, at least from the US perspective.

In my opinion, this relationship more closely resembles US-Israel than US-Pakistan.

ugh! no. Please do not bring in this Israel-India parity business... how we are same, have same problems, and how our relationship with US is same. It is not. There is some aspects with Israel that India can relate to, but no equivalence as such. As for relationship with US -- sorry, it is nothing similar. Annually, Israel gets billions of dollars in free arms as part of military aid and that too come with with offsets! How is this relationship same? If you are going to make statements like that, you must come up with more than your perception and feeling -- hard facts on how this relationship resembles. IMHO US-India relationship is US-India relationship. It is unique in its characteristics. That uniqueness is equally good and also the source of much heartburn in both countries because they are having to learn to deal with each other rather than draw from other experiences.

Let me substantiate. The US-Pakistan relationship features only transient and incomplete alignment of objectives, which has led to the oft mentioned fickleness. US-India interests are aligned in a more complete and robust manner, as far as the power structure in Asia is concerned. Like Israel and unlike Pakistan, India is unlikely to outlive its usefulness anytime soon. Further, both Israel and India enjoy strong domestic support in the US (lobbies, electorates, free democracies etc).

The F-18 has the best operational AESA radar on offer and arguably the best strike capability amongst the six. It is a mature, battle-proven platform with a solid future and costs much lesser than either the Rafale or the Typhoon. While I'm happy that both these latter aircraft have made the shortlist, I think the F-18 should have been included as well.

What good is a battle proven platform with exceptional AESA if it cannot get off the ground in Leh, and/or the radar complains about the discomfort proverbial beach sand in the underwear kind of problems. SH is an exceptional platform - Yes. However, the design itself is optimized for carrier operations. Changing the landing gear is not sufficient to optimize it for ground-based operations. Should IAF be willing to suffer through learning pains with the SH in the fleet? I think not under current circumstances with seriously depleted strength.

Good points, if true, but we have no confirmation of these problems and we do not know how difficult (or easy) it is to rectify them. However, developing a new, functional and reliable AESA (Rafale and Typhoon), or a new, more powerful engine (Rafale), or extensive ground strike capabilities (Typhoon) are likely to be even greater challenges.

In any case, I'm not pushing for either a US-India alliance or F-18's victory in this contest. I was just bummed to see the rejection of a very effective platform for reasons that are neither very clear, nor convincing.

[shiv]

Rajat Pandit gives details of the evaluation.....

The Eurofighter, followed closely by Rafale, "came closest" to meeting the 643 technical attributes specified by India during the long-drawn field trials held by IAF test pilots both in India and abroad under different weather conditions. "The other four fell below the base line of minimum air staff qualitative requirements to be met,"

[ramana]

Also slowly its dawning that the planes got rejected on technical merits while SD cables fret about non-issues like Support to TSP etc!

Telugu saying :Someone shouted Water melon thief and the guy checked his shoulders!
Usually one carries a watermelon on the shoulder.

They should have sent their best products and not sub-standard planes.


Admins got a MUTU mail too bad to publish.

[abhishek_sharma]

Another point - the word on the streets is that the Pentagon had something to do with the level of tech that would go into the planes on offer to India. Now if that level of planes didn't make the cut, that means that the two US companies will be hankering for greater freedom in future sales, and will point out that the GOTUS is in some way responsible for all this mess.

US companies (or companies from any country) just care for profits. They would like to sell their stuff to everyone. No nationalism etc.

However, $10-15 billion is still small compared to what the US military pays. So the concerns of US Govt will prevail (at this moment).

Even in future when our budgets become significantly large, US Govt can create significant problems. R&D work in US is significantly funded by the US Govt (through grants to universities). Without access to that basic research, what are they (i.e., Boeing, LM, BAE) going to sell?

This goes back to that old problem: Govt funds the research, and the private sector reaps the profits.

[shiv]

Gagan, Another thing NRI lobbyists in DC who pretended they can navigate thru Delhi decision process are re faced as they took money and proven wrong. Some jokers were role-play acting as Indian babus for US companies to improve negotiating tactics.

They will now be marked as snake oil sellers and are likely to be very very angry. It is their anger we will see in the media rather than US official whinery.

[Gagan]

Mig-35 feeling the heat: from Livefist
Who'll Buy This Fulcrum Now?

They're pronouncing its doom already in the Russian press. Predicting that the official elimination of the MiG-35 from India's M-MRCA fighter competition means curtains for the programme, such as it is. If that's true, the MiG-35 will be the one Fulcrum that nobody ever bought.

The facts are pretty brutal. A victory in the Indian tender was virtually mandatory for MiG to be able to generate the economies of scale that would allow it to sell 72 MiG-35s at an affordable unit price to the Russian Air Force. A Russian government indent for a certain number of MiG-35s was hinged to the platform's selection by the IAF -- not the other way round. With the MiG-35 officially out, the programme could effectively collapse, with structural implications for RAC-MiG Corp too.

Read it all...

[RKumar]

^^ Chinpanda

Congrats to Jingos

Of course US diplomat has professional reason to leave as he has failed to force India to buy US stuff. Good luck next time.

I hope Katrina makes the final cut.

[Prem]

They will now be marked as snake oil sellers and are likely to be very very angry. It is their anger we will see in the media rather than US official whinery.

MUTUa re kaun tera desh re ?
Dulla ban gya Videsh me.
In good old USA every one knows Customer is always reight. No one will want loose rest of the 100+billion orders coming up to modernize indian armed forces. Both Lockehead and Boing have the orders worth Billions and they will get some more along with GE etc. Basically MRCA decision tells them ,all these businesses can be yours, make no attempt to create leverage, lest you loose the mega $$ moolas. Now AF part is taken care of , they can participate in IA and Navy tenders.

[Gagan]

WRT the Mig-29/35 versions sales.
They might still sell them in SE Asia, Africa, Latin America.
RuNavy is going to buy 29Ks for the Aircraft Carriers. Is the IN planning to further extend the order?

There will be a MMRCA type competition for the IAC-2 & 3 flight wing too. And the usual suspects - Rafale-M, F-35, F-18E/F, Mig-29K and maybe the EF-Typhoon-Naval might be there.

So that covers almost all the current suppliers.

Fall in line or else... kyon ji?

[Austin]

To be fair to the loosers even if they lost on technical grounds those technical grounds and test done were very IAF specific requirement and not meeting few of the 600 plus odd requirenments may not necessarily reflect its a bad product for every one , it simply means it does not meet IAF specific requirenment.

Much like Eurofighter and Rafale loosing to other fighters in competition abroad does not mean it was a bad fighter , it simply did not meet the requirement laid out by host airforce.

We might just see some of the loosing aircraft winning more deals in the future against the same fighter they lost out to India.

[Gagan]

Exactly.
IAF does have very difficult requirements. Just the variety of geographical locations that the IAF deploys at is mind boggling.
India has every possible type of environment that a fighter could be deployed at - from very high altitude (The most high altitude airfields), to very dusty deserts to sea level airports, to hot and humid airfields and everything in between.

And the IAF flies out of these 24x7 and kicks ass. Splendid achievement - no other parallel.

[manum]

I am not surprised at france and europe not being able to sell more than America...for obvious reasons...than one being better than other...

So definitely after this, again there will be lull in def sales less aggressive nations compared to USA...but winning in India means they are essentially better than the aircrafts USA fielded...because we wanted better aircrafts...thats it...not strategic rhetoric...

[Austin]

And the IAF flies out of these 24x7 and kicks ass. Splendid achievement - no other parallel.

Yes IAF does and so does most professional airforces around the world , in the end one had to win and others had to loose , the IAF just chose what it thought was the best according to its needs and laid out requirement.

It does not speak any thing bad of the looser as it is being made out and certainly it speak good about who has won.

[Sumeet]

Those are some wise words from Old sage (Austin)

Well guys if you want to know about:

Ongoing X-Band AESA for Rafale
MMIC technologies current GaAs and future GaN based from Thales
Corechips and MEMs RF Switch
Future Shared aperture conformal AESA much like what is being done for PAK-FA/FGFA.

Thales components and technologies for T/R Modules -- Technical Paper from Y Mancuso of Thales Group


X-post from an earlier post:
Lots of papers here to get some idea of AESA radar's future right from horse mouth. I will keep people updated on more news on AESA development from EADs and Thales.
http://www.reveyrand.fr/publications

[Austin]

I think from now on it will be the question of who bids the lowest and who can provide the best offset , the lower bidder would win the day as it would be easy to justify in simpler term rather then the complex offset proposal.

Both sides can provide good offset but who can bit lowest would be interesting.

Seems Rafale has a lower unit cost compared to Eurofighter all things being equal , surprising for an aircraft that has lower sales compared to EF.

[abhishek_sharma]

Both sides can provide good offset but who can bit lowest would be interesting.

The learning curve (for high quality R&D) is very steep. So I think we should focus more on technology transfer even if it costs more. In the medium term, it would prove to be a better (and even cheaper) strategy.

[manum]

In that sense Eurojet guys have experience of facing a loss even after apparently putting lower cost tender in MK2 engine bid...so I am sure they must be knowing what is at stake....how calculations are done to calculate overall lower bidder...

Lets see if its fate of Rafale or EF has a hidden life line...

[negi]

Both sides can provide good offset but who can bit lowest would be interesting.

I am getting old so don't remember the exact details but wasn't the offsets part waived off by the GoI for the MMRCA ?

[Austin]

The learning curve (for high quality R&D) is very steep. So I think we should focus more on technology transfer even if it costs more. In the medium term, it would prove to be a better (and even cheaper) strategy.

I really do not know how many of those TOT has helped the Indian R&D and Industry speed up the high learning curve , I have been hearing ToT argument for nearly a decade and since then every deal comes with TOT of some sort , only to lately realise that we just end up lic producing and no TOT of any sort has made us speed up learing curve.

In the end Indian R&D and Industry has improved and grew based on home grown project that was learnt and done the hard way , much like others have done it.

Dont have high hopes of any TOT that would speed us on a learning curve with MMRCA deal , what we can best hope is to have complete access to Sofware that would allow us to reprogram the aircraft in the way we want to and industry that can Lic produce most of the stuff ( if not all ) for the aircraft we build in India from our own raw materials , that would lower the production cost at best and generate more jobs in public and private sector.

[Austin]

I am getting old so don't remember the exact details but wasn't the offsets part waived off by the GoI for the MMRCA ?

There are conflicting and contradictory claims on this , some even says offset is high as 50 % but the bottom line to me is lowest bidder L1 will win apart from offset or no offset.

[abhishek_sharma]

Okay. If we are not going to get high quality research input, then we should just focus on capabilities and cost of planes.

[sohels]

To be fair to the loosers even if they lost on technical grounds those technical grounds and test done were very IAF specific requirement and not meeting few of the 600 plus odd requirenments may not necessarily reflect its a bad product for every one , it simply means it does not meet IAF specific requirenment.

But as I understand it, a proven AESA and ground strike capability (multirole) were the two foremost IAF requirements. How then does the Typhoon make the cut and the F-18 doesn't? It cannot be on technical grounds, since the Typhoon lacked both during the time the trials were conducted.

[Prasad]

Because an AESA under development + MTOW takeoff at Leh > working AESA + failure to takeoff from Leh. Or something on those lines.