Philip wrote:Let's get the figs.3 times maintenance costs cannot remotely come close to 3 times capital cost! The interest on even one MKI should take care of annual maintenance costs. To imagine that Rafale spates and maintenance costs less than that of an MKI per annum is hugely lower is open to examination .One would imagine yhat the more of a type you havd the lesser the costs are!
I wonder if you would follow in your personal life, when your life was on the line, your advice to the IAF.
Would you buy a leaky bucket for your home at half the cost of one that is not going to leak?
If you were an OLA/Uber driver, would you buy a Toyota Etios at 9 lakh or a used Ambassador at 3 lakh?
The next time you fly to Europe, would you prefer to do so on a Lufthansa Boeing 787 or on Kim Jong Un's cheap and trusty old Soviet IL-62?
I suspect you know the answer, but in your eagerness to push all things Russian (even if it means bashing Indian projects and institutions) you keep repeating this bizarre logic (apart from deliberately repeating cost numbers that you know are inaccurate) . The IAF like any professional organization (or individual; e.g an athlete) is going to go with the gear that gives them the most confidence and that they trust the most - otherwise they won't be in business. Myopic bean counting alone while ignoring other aspects doesn't really make sense.