IAF Rafale News and Discussions - 26 May 2015

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 15 Aug 2015 05:23

French will not bite, certainly nowhere close to whatever teaser price supposedly being offered.

Secondly, I just do not see the F-16IN impacting the LCA-MKII. In fact, there could be more breathing space to do a better or complete job on the MKII.

The cheap F-16 could be a stop gap solution - for 15 years or so. AMCA and call it a day.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 15 Aug 2015 05:26

Have a feeling that the US may try to lure India with some engine ToT as bait.

Which engine? The US SD declined the tech India wanted. Doubt the US will ever offer that.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 15 Aug 2015 05:37

I highly doubt the offer if it is even real (as in serious) is anything more than " lets just put something out there like every other OEM".. Btw Cain, The XL was not the best version of the F-16..It was an F-15E competitor..The best multi-role designed on paper was the F-16U...

There is nothing that you modify an F-16 to that you can't with an LCA given access to engine tech.. so the entire thing is pointless.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 15 Aug 2015 06:38

Aah, that's the one, kept thinking it is the xl, had no idea it was designated as U.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 15 Aug 2015 07:06

Wake me up when the F-15 is offered.

RoyG · Post by **RoyG** » 15 Aug 2015 07:12

NRao wrote:
Have a feeling that the US may try to lure India with some engine ToT as bait.
Which engine? The US SD declined the tech India wanted. Doubt the US will ever offer that.

Hence the "some". They'll never part with the critical tech. I agree that this purchase may buy us some time to keep the 1A line open and start development work on the MKII.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 15 Aug 2015 08:57

From what I can tell "engine tech" cannot be given to anyone. I mean a lot of tech can be given but ultimately local human skills are required. Those have to be developed in house on the workshop floor. That is different from shipping presses and robots and kits to assemble cars in India.

For example individual engine blades have to be machined and finished partly manually to conform to some very stringent specs and that is apart from the actual blade metallurgy. The same goes for blisks. Then those blades/blisks have to sit in an engine whose parameters in terms of stresses, airflow and temperatures have all been worked out and tested.When all these things sit together you have an engine that spins at 15000 rpm at very high temperature and has to last for several hundreds or thousand hours before anyone needs to look at it. Heck as far as I am concerned - if you build a cheap enough engine even 50 hours is OK.

"Transfer of tech" for engines is like transfer of screwdriver and paintbox.

chaanakya · Post by **chaanakya** » 15 Aug 2015 11:59

Viv S wrote:Smelling blood in the water?

Make in India: US offers to jointly manufacture fighter jets with India

Make In India is mainly for exporting to the world. I hope we can export all of it it to Russia if F16 is manufactured under Make in India category.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 15 Aug 2015 12:43

F-16 in any avtar would certain kill IAF Tejas Mk2 program like the case of SAAB peddling Gripen-NG

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 15 Aug 2015 12:51

Which madman in the IAF would want the inferior F-16,which ran away at Kargil when faced with un-upgraded MIG-29s? Secondly,Pak has been using F-16s for decades.Forget about it ever appearing with IAF roundels. The US will instead peddle the F-18SH,offering it as a carrier fighter too.That may strike a chord with some pro-US sailor-boys.

However,the US ambassador is simply flying a kite.Both these aircraft were rejected earlier.The MMRCA deal is dead.The Q now is what (western) aircraft is cheaper than the Rafale and which can be inducted in reasonable numbers to replace the MIG-21s,as the LCA is way behind development and time? Answer: Gripen. SAAB assistance in perfecting LCA MK-2/3 whatever is the sweetener. This seems to be the Plan B of the MOD,not the IAF.

Cosmo_R · Post by **Cosmo_R** » 15 Aug 2015 17:14

@vivS^^^:Based on what LM said when the MMRCA contract was first announced (around the dawn of life), my guess is the F-16IN as a transitional (gap filler) platform to the JSF with a buyback of the F-16s. They had even mentioned a number : 180 f-16s to replace ~400 MiGs (at that time). Keeps the line going in TX and locks in a customer for the 2020s when the JSF line has capacity.

Boeing will counter with the 'advanced' SHornet as a transition to the 6G/NG fighter and dangle 'co-production' (we get to make various knobs and levers).

What is singularly frustrating is that so much time and energy has been expended and will be expended to find a gap filler. GoI never makes a decision until it's too late and the bill keeps going up and up.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 15 Aug 2015 17:23

Do we even know at what price this offer is at?

Manufacturing processes, tools, etc certainly will be an attraction.

Israelis had encouraged to get the F-16IN and that certainly cannot be bad - in fact that should be really good.

20 F-16s a year, starting 2016/17 should be good.

This cannot kill any Indian efforts. Do not see that happening.

I would think the Grippen is a better option, but until we know the price cannot make a BR decision.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 15 Aug 2015 17:29

Cosmo_R wrote:@vivS^^^:Based on what LM said when the MMRCA contract was first announced (around the dawn of life), my guess is the F-16IN as a transitional (gap filler) platform to the JSF with a buyback of the F-16s. They had even mentioned a number : 180 f-16s to replace ~400 MiGs (at that time). Keeps the line going in TX and locks in a customer for the 2020s when the JSF line has capacity.

Boeing will counter with the 'advanced' SHornet as a transition to the 6G/NG fighter and dangle 'co-production' (we get to make various knobs and levers).

What is singularly frustrating is that so much time and energy has been expended and will be expended to find a gap filler. GoI never makes a decision until it's too late and the bill keeps going up and up.

This will never happen. Given the current delay in the Rafale deal pretty much every OEM has come out and tried to offer something under the Make In India umbrella..SAAB did it first, right off the bat, then it was the Eurofighter GmbH (I think), and now its Lockheed. Companies make offers all the time because they are always looking to expand there business but i seriously doubt that anyone seriously considers a lockheed F-16 production line in India as something that may become a reality.

Cosmo_R · Post by **Cosmo_R** » 15 Aug 2015 19:43

brar_w wrote:.. but i seriously doubt that anyone seriously considers a lockheed F-16 production line in India as something that may become a reality.

They were not (then) offering a production facility in India. The F-16/JSF combo offer was predicated IIRC, on buying planes built in TX. The argument again IIRC, was that this way they could confidently 'buy back' the planes upon JSF delivery.

On a somewhat related note, many posts on this forum have been quick to fear that the Gripen/F-16 would kill the LCA. IMHO, any major purchase of any a/c from abroad (including more MKIs) would kill the LCA. It's a question of money. There is not enough of it to go around.

It's an interesting (and depressing) conundrum: buy any MMRCA and kill the LCA. Don't buy the MMRCA, kill the IAF.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 15 Aug 2015 19:54

They were not (then) offering a production facility in India. The F-16/JSF combo offer was predicated IIRC, on buying planes built in TX.

Don't know exactly what the proposals were back then but the current news stories (accurate or not) have pointed to a Make in India effort, and that is what all seem to be offering. Anyhow when the MMRCA was offered it REQUIRED production in india with technology transfer so all competitors had to let HAL produce those jets beyond initial squadrons that would come from their home production lines. There may have been other proposals, but OEM's talk with potential customers all the time and make all of sorts of offers but until and unless there is a firm plan and direction with specified requirements there can't really be ANY meaningful proposal from any OEM thats worth taking seriously. Thats why one off report and a tweet lacking any sort of detail don't really point to any sign of any serious offer other than one OEM going " we can offer you XYZ" in line with pretty much what others (here, here and here) have also done..It doesn't take a rocket scientist to deduce (from the delay and the reports in the media) that there are differences in the Rafale negotiations, and companies that have a business interest are trying to get a foot in the door... This is a consequence of a long and lengthy process that the aircraft-acquisition process has become and all of this will go away when a contract is signed with Dassault or an alternate plan developed and communicated.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 15 Aug 2015 19:56

BrarW correct. Dassault is doing all it can to lose that deal as well.

RoyG · Post by **RoyG** » 15 Aug 2015 20:06

NRao wrote:Do we even know at what price this offer is at?

Manufacturing processes, tools, etc certainly will be an attraction.

Israelis had encouraged to get the F-16IN and that certainly cannot be bad - in fact that should be really good.

20 F-16s a year, starting 2016/17 should be good.

This cannot kill any Indian efforts. Do not see that happening.

I would think the Grippen is a better option, but until we know the price cannot make a BR decision.

Nope. But Jha seems to have heard from one of his sources that it is damn low. Honestly, if comes out to much lower than anyone else and they are partnering with a private to manufacture most of it in India, it may just be the best option. Lightweight, relatively cheap, high payload and range with the CFTs, and we can even become a critical node in the maintenance and supply chain for many counties. Who know's, eventually we may be able to fully indigenize it over time barring the radar and engine.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 15 Aug 2015 20:09

By some reports the F-16 IN had the lowest price when compared to its MMRCA competitors. But the point still stands that there CAN BE NO production for at least 4-5 years as it takes time to set up shop and get a trained workforce going. This gets you to 2020 and awfully close to the LCA MK-2 which is a far better investment because you "OWN" the aircraft in totality thanks to the mission systems. If we were in 2005, it would have made sense in 2020 it does not.

tushar_m · Post by **tushar_m** » 15 Aug 2015 20:12

Can we expect some sweet deal from Russians as well .

IAF might go for Su35mki which is a most feared platform of Russia.(before PAK-FA comes)

IAF is looking for a fighter that can serve for 30+ years & F16 is a dead end.

Also F16 failed the parameters set by IAF in MMRCA.

tushar_m · Post by **tushar_m** » 15 Aug 2015 20:14

20 F16 starting 2016/17 is close to impossible. It needs a lot of time to train & educate the workers.

They are not manufacturing metal rods where a little bit of error's here & there doesn't matter.
Fighter manufacturing is a challenging job.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 15 Aug 2015 20:18

The MMRCA's acquisition process was faulty in my humble opinion because it failed to balance out technical parameters and hard to negotiate things like TOT and full domestic production. If TOT and Full production is the goal it has to be blended into the RFP and the operator and acquisition folks allowed to trade one capability for the other, otherwise you will end up in the same situation again..the fighters that you can afford won't meet some of your technical parameters and the ones that do aren't affordable therefore leaving with you a smaller purchase/production run that has its own impact on overall capability. I doubt the MMRCA route is going to be followed in the future and acquisition practices globally have developed hybrid models blending technical and acquisition priorities into one model.

What the now cancelled program has shown is that 126 odd Rafale's procured as per the TOT/Production plan designed in the MMRCA WERE not affordable with the cost escalating from the initial $12 Billion to (as per some reports) beyond $20 Billion. This leaves you with two options, either procure a very small fleet of fighters, adjust the TOT ambitions or allow the IAF to alter technical parameters and balance them with the procurement numbers that are affordable. Would you want 120 fighters that may be the "80% solution" or are you comfortable with 50-60 fighters that is the "100% solution"? The operator should be given that trade space or acquisition ambitions changed at the MOD level. And an interesting consequence of this may just be that the LCA-MKii could come in and actually be a better value proposition than some of the larger aircrafts on offer precisely because you are looking for that sweet spot between capability and acquisition/affordability concerns.

And finally, this is not a question of "the air force should get the absolute best of the best etc"..All militaries have made capability trades in tactical aviation, the Euro-forces did when they decided not to pursue 5th generation capability, the US did when they decided to favor the F-35 over the F-22A, the USN when it favored the Super Hornet over the more capable (technically) Super Tomcat, and the RuAF seems to be doing this as well as it adjusts its Su-35 to Pakfa ratio in favor of the former as its energy price dependent economy has taken a nose dive.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 15 Aug 2015 21:01

Says who?

Just googled, LM line open till 2020. If serious you can get an early lot by end of next year, just like the Su-27 deal. F-16 should be found in parking lots and as door stops, for heaven's sake.

Next, I just hope this emergency procurement is not competing with an Indian product, I do not see it doing that. Why not a 150 cheap F-16 and 200 MK-II? Emphasis is on cost.

Get Israeli help to keep paki in place if need be.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 15 Aug 2015 21:02

MMRCA is dead.

Thankfully.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 15 Aug 2015 21:32

brar_w wrote:The MMRCA's acquisition process was faulty in my humble opinion because it failed to balance out technical parameters and hard to negotiate things like TOT and full domestic production. .

Basically UPA told the IAF to select and plan was to dip into the commissions, whichever fighter was selected and make hay (they might have had some plan in works to bypass the FMS process too). Win win. IAF gets what it wants. UPA ditto. Full domestic production wasn't planned, some 60% was stated. 50% offsets. Both would allow deal value to rise.

Things took a nosedive when the eNREGA boondoggle and gross corruption in all sectors made the UPA broke and election sops were required. So the MMRCA became too expensive to work with.

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 15 Aug 2015 23:43

RoyG wrote:
{quote="NRao"}
Have a feeling that the US may try to lure India with some engine ToT as bait.

Which engine? The US SD declined the tech India wanted. Doubt the US will ever offer that.}{quote}

Hence the "some". They'll never part with the critical tech. I agree that this purchase may buy us some time to keep the 1A line open and start development work on the MKII.

This is exactly how the goras killed the HF-24 project too.

History is being repeated and no doubt a costly solution will be offered soon by some "interested" parties.

Every greedy supplier has his eyes on the $350 odd Billion reserves that India has and sees the LCA contretemps as his opportunity to make a real killing.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 16 Aug 2015 00:26

Cosmo_R wrote:@vivS^^^:Based on what LM said when the MMRCA contract was first announced (around the dawn of life), my guess is the F-16IN as a transitional (gap filler) platform to the JSF with a buyback of the F-16s. They had even mentioned a number : 180 f-16s to replace ~400 MiGs (at that time). Keeps the line going in TX and locks in a customer for the 2020s when the JSF line has capacity.

Actually, the F-35 has more than enough capacity to meet any requirement the India may right off the bat.

Production order by year -

2017 - 129
2018 - 172
2019 - 176

They've got more than enough aircraft going into production to divert aircraft to serve an Indian order, without complaint. Might even be able to conclude deliveries before Dassault.

Its just too late for the F-16. Even at its lowest cost, it would be unlikely to match the Tejas Mk2's prices, would come in roughly the same time-frame, and given the overlapping capabilities it would divert funds from the LCA program (which is absolutely essential for the long term future of the domestic aviation industry).

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 16 Aug 2015 00:28

If anything kills the LCA it would be Indians. You can no longer keep on leaning on history and expect to get away. India needs to stand up and be counted. Cannot be that weak.

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 16 Aug 2015 01:43

NRao wrote:If anything kills the LCA it would be Indians. You can no longer keep on leaning on history and expect to get away. India needs to stand up and be counted. Cannot be that weak.

Things seem to be getting tougher for the frenchies because the congressi culture which they were well used to working with, also the culture that the israelis had exploited, is not visible with the new govt.

GOK, the difficulties that the Modi PMO must be having in keeping the middlemen out and their own eager BJP party men from cashing in on such arms deals.

Spending money and chai paani must also have been hit for the netas because of the fear of Modi and his watchful Pigeon. Interesting times ahead. If itchy fingered netas are keeping their hands in their pockets, then the noose must be closing in fast on several netas of the previous govt. Even some big industrialist brothers seem to be keeping very very quiet onlee.

.

RoyG · Post by **RoyG** » 16 Aug 2015 02:20

NRao wrote:If anything kills the LCA it would be Indians. You can no longer keep on leaning on history and expect to get away. India needs to stand up and be counted. Cannot be that weak.

I agree. If we can't get something like the f-16, just cancel the entire rafale deal with the french, induct more Su-30mki and transfer at least the entire production line for the LCA to a private and start cranking out the numbers. IA and II.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 16 Aug 2015 02:25

>>Things seem to be getting tougher for the frenchies because the congressi culture which they were well used to working with, also the culture that the israelis had exploited, is not visible with the new govt.

You said it.

Cosmo_R · Post by **Cosmo_R** » 16 Aug 2015 02:31

Viv S wrote:
Cosmo_R wrote:@vivS^^^:Based on what LM said when the MMRCA contract was first announced (around the dawn of life), my guess is the F-16IN as a transitional (gap filler) platform to the JSF with a buyback of the F-16s. They had even mentioned a number : 180 f-16s to replace ~400 MiGs (at that time). Keeps the line going in TX and locks in a customer for the 2020s when the JSF line has capacity.
Actually, the F-35 has more than enough capacity to meet any requirement the India may right off the bat.

Production order by year -

2017 - 129
2018 - 172
2019 - 176

They've got more than enough aircraft going into production to divert aircraft to serve an Indian order, without complaint. Might even be able to conclude deliveries before Dassault.

Its just too late for the F-16. Even at its lowest cost, it would be unlikely to match the Tejas Mk2's prices, would come in roughly the same time-frame, and given the overlapping capabilities it would divert funds from the LCA program (which is absolutely essential for the long term future of the domestic aviation industry).

Well, that's even better. How does that compare to Dassault being able to deliver even 36 Rafales during next four years?

Cosmo_R · Post by **Cosmo_R** » 16 Aug 2015 02:44

RoyG wrote:..

Nope. But Jha seems to have heard from one of his sources that it is damn low. Honestly, if comes out to much lower than anyone else and they are partnering with a private to manufacture most of it in India, it may just be the best option. Lightweight, relatively cheap, high payload and range with the CFTs, and we can even become a critical node in the maintenance and supply chain for many counties. Who know's, eventually we may be able to fully indigenize it over time barring the radar and engine.

With the F-16 as a make in India project, we are still driving by looking at the rear view mirror and hoping the road ahead looks exactly like the road behind. Great plane in its day but there is a reason why it is cheap and why the Israelis love the F-15 over the F-16s and want to replace both with the JSF.

Great idea to lease as stop gap either to a MK2, MCA or JSF. Not a great idea to gum up the make in India concept with a 1980s fighter. All the tools and dies are fully depreciated over a 4500 unit production run and they will be cheap. Too bad Dassault never though of offering the same for M2Ks. The IAF would have ejaculated as it were. It would still be 1984 but we live in the past WRT to defense planning.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 16 Aug 2015 03:01

Too bad Dassault never though of offering the same for M2Ks.

They did offer to transfer the line, but do not know at what cost.

Cosmo_R · Post by **Cosmo_R** » 16 Aug 2015 03:04

NRao wrote:
Too bad Dassault never though of offering the same for M2Ks.
They did offer to transfer the line, but do not know at what cost.

Was that in 1984 or thereabouts? I don't they did it just before the MMRCA saga.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 16 Aug 2015 03:21

IIRC India turned it down and the MMRCA was born.

Cosmo_R · Post by **Cosmo_R** » 16 Aug 2015 03:31

NRao wrote:IIRC India turned it down and the MMRCA was born.

Are you sure? I recall the original 126 plane M2K order as being produced in France. The single vendor clause prevented GoI from accepting the offer, it was re-conceived as an open bid for a single engine fighter which was turned into an all comers event under pressure from Russia, Boeing (initially F-15 and then F/A-18) and EF. When the 2 engine fighters came into the bake-off, Dassault IIRC, had a Gallic hissy fit and entered the Rafale because they said time had run out to keep the M2K line open.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 16 Aug 2015 06:25

>>re you sure? I recall the original 126 plane M2K order as being produced in France.

Nope. HAL was to make it in Bangalore. There was already a HAL team working on the details when the plan changed.

ldev · Post by **ldev** » 16 Aug 2015 17:04

Rafale deal: France says no to offset clause, yes to Make in India

They added the French have instead offered to undertake 'Make in India' initiatives. "The French can look at the option for making Falcon business jets in India or even the Rafales for future besides other projects," the sources said, adding the French government has made it clear that their companies would like to be part of 'Make in India' initiative.

The sources said the offset clause will simply drive up the cost of each aircraft.

It is not just the offset clause that the French are worried about. Indian Air Force wants to integrate a Israeli helmet mounted display with the Rafale fighter jets besides tweaking the weaponry technology so that the aircraft can fire a missile other than what the Rafales carry. The missile, sources said is of American make.

"The changes asked for are not like changing tyres in cars. It takes time, effort and money, all of which will again drive up the cost," the sources said.

I think the French have become confident with Rafale sales to Egypt and Qatar...and are playing hardball with India and leaking this information to the media as this article illustrates.

Thakur_B · Post by **Thakur_B** » 16 Aug 2015 17:18

Just move on and buy the f-35. Will also put Russians in a fix to deliver the Pak-Fa.

ldev · Post by **ldev** » 16 Aug 2015 17:30

^^^
No idea as to what the IAF strategy is wrt China, but if the IAF wants to establish local air control over the Indian-Chinese border, one option is to get 36-60 F-35s and to utilize their stealth feature to "kick down the door" as such by neutralizing Chinese C^3 and radar networks....something the Rafale will not be able to achieve. And after neutralizing the Chinese C^3, send in the 4G aircraft such as SU-30s and Jags for strikes. Meanwhile keep plugging away at Tejas.