Dassault Rafale, tender | News & Discussions [Thread 2]

[randomradio]

That's a wrong approach in your first sentence. There is no such thing as versions so far.
One of the major advantages to Rafale is that standards rule and tranches mean orders only.
All the Rafales produced can and are being upgraded ( w/w-o optional equipments onboard )
to the latest standard. That means that up to the MLU that may include cell re-design ...
all Rafales are one model with adaptation work and the idea of splitting orders on that base is
null and void.

Tranches in our case contrary to the Typhoon lines for example are the same as going to the store
once a week for a month to get 3 bread loafs each time. That gets you the same 12 loafs as if bought
in bulk and since freshness is not as much of a problem with fighters than with baguettes, there is no
need save cash flow/ capitalization to split the orders.

I think there is some confusion here. Rafale versions are F1, F2, F3, F3-04T and F3R. All these have different configurations. Tranches are merely the times orders have been placed.

Pilot numbers are a problem for the IAF.

No such thing. We are phasing out old jets, so free pilots are available as and when new jets are inducted. And unlike France where growth is limited, the population in India is getting richer by the day, so more capable youngsters get the qualification to become pilots ever year. In a decade from now, we will have more youngsters and less jobs. So many will opt for IAF.

Anytime anyone mentions the SH in relation to India, I stop listening / reading. That plane lost the MMRCA!!!
Only in India do people keep harping on such things. The Royale tried to get F-18s back before the Raffy got
started and delayed and then restarted. Then it got so-so aircrafts with little ready, a hurried if not botched
order to compensate the delays. Yet even then, no one came back with the Hornet-SH buys!

SH, F-16, EFT and Gripen are back in contention for a second MMRCA. This is independent from Rafale deal.

You are referring to 80 flyaway jet news which so called our DM Mp did not agree for right?

Yeah, that's right.

 

[Picdelamirand-oil]

I just find something!

I can't give you the link yet

 

[Taygibay]

I think there is some confusion here. Rafale versions are F1, F2, F3, F3-04T and F3R. All these have different configurations. Tranches are merely the times orders have been placed.

The confusion is entirely yours! All Rafales are to the same standard, period! Ask Dassault.

The rest being of the same caliber, I'll let you go at it.

GL, Tay.

 

[PARIKRAMA]

@randomradio
I will agree here with @Taygibay as i had discussed this in detail with @Abingdonboy too
See this

Its source is

The solution suggested by committee is

@Picdelamirand-oil @Vauban @MilSpec @AUSTERLITZ
I would love to hear your opinions on this..

 

[randomradio]

The confusion is entirely yours! All Rafales are to the same standard, period! Ask Dassault.

The rest being of the same caliber, I'll let you go at it.

GL, Tay.

Why Dassault when Picdel is here?

All Rafales can eventually be upgraded to the same standard, but all these versions are different.

F1 had no Spectra
F2 had basic capabilities
F3 had full capabilities of RBE-2 PESA and Spectra
F3-04T had new upgrades to Spectra, like DDM-NG and also the new RBE-2AA AESA radar
F3R will have new Spectra upgrades like GaN + new upgrades for radar like multiplexing.
F3R2 will have conformal array radar with GaN + new upgrades from new programs.

You can upgrade F1 to F3R standards, but these are versions.

So every time new capabilities are inserted, new versions are created, so new orders have to be placed. In France, there are already 4 tranches of orders, and Picdel says a new 5th tranche order will be placed. This is different from versions of aircraft.

@randomradio
I will agree here with @Taygibay as i had discussed this in detail with @Abingdonboy too
See this
View attachment 294157
Its source is

View attachment 294158

The solution suggested by committee is

View attachment 294160

@Picdelamirand-oil @Vauban @MilSpec @AUSTERLITZ
I would love to hear your opinions on this..

I'm aware of the number. This ratio can be changed in one or two years. We don't have problem with pilot induction, we had problems with pilot training. Once we have achieved the required strength for the Pilatus and Hawk trainers, we won't have problems anymore.

It's a very temporary problem now.

 

[Taygibay]

Why Dassault when Picdel is here?

Because his real name is not Trappier?

So every time new capabilities are inserted, new versions are created, so new orders have to be placed.

Not at all! See below :

F1 had no Spectra

F3-04T had new upgrades to Spectra, like DDM-NG and also the new RBE-2AA AESA radar

And yet the F1s are back on the F3+/F4 line as we speak!
Either you can't or you don't want to understand.
In any case, I'm done answering such nonsense.

Goodbye, Tay.

 

[Picdelamirand-oil]

Why Dassault when Picdel is here?

So I have to answer
All French Rafale are currently F3-04T And it's a policy to have the same standard for all plane.
How it is possible?
Take the example of the new AESA Radar : it seems that there is only few such Radar and then few F3-04T, but it's not true because F3-04T is able to manage AESA and PESA, so we have upgraded all Rafale to the last standard and when needed we plug and play the right antenna on the Rafale.
Idem for FSO or FSO-IT; idem for DDM or DDM NG and so on.
And I hope that when we will have GaN antenna for SPECTRA they will be plug and play too.

 

[AUSTERLITZ]

@randomradio
I will agree here with @Taygibay as i had discussed this in detail with @Abingdonboy too
See this
View attachment 294157
Its source is

View attachment 294158

The solution suggested by committee is

View attachment 294160

@Picdelamirand-oil @Vauban @MilSpec @AUSTERLITZ
I would love to hear your opinions on this..

I'm shocked.Very important point u have highlighted.

 

[Picdelamirand-oil]

I'm shocked.Very important point u have highlighted.

The availability of the plane could be a problem too
Dassault Rafale, tender | News & Discussions [Thread 2] | Page 126

 

[randomradio]

Because his real name is not Trappier?



Not at all! See below :





And yet the F1s are back on the F3-04T line as we speak!
Either you can't or you don't want to understand.
In any case, I'm done answering such nonsense.

Goodbye, Tay.

So I have to answer
All French Rafale are currently F3-04T And it's a policy to have the same standard for all plane.
How it is possible?
Take the example of the new AESA Radar : it seems that there is only few such Radar and then few F3-04T, but it's not true because F3-04T is able to manage AESA and PESA, so we have upgraded all Rafale to the last standard and when needed we plug and play the right antenna on the Rafale.
Idem for FSO or FSO-IT; idem for DDM or DDM NG and so on.
And I hope that when we will have GaN antenna for SPECTRA they will be plug and play too.

And hence the confusion.

You are confusing variant with version.

Su-30MKI also comes in various versions, Mk1, Mk2 Mk3 etc. Variant is like Su-30MKK, Su-30MKI or Rafale A, Rafale C etc.

Su-30MKI, MKA, MKM, SM are all same variant, different versions.

Su-30MK, Mk2, MKK are all same variant, different versions.

So Su-30MKK can never be upgraded to MKI because they are different variants.

But Su-30MKI can be upgraded to the superior Su-30SM because they are just different versions.

However in IAF's case, IAF has to order one version, and then pay for another version in another lengthy process of bureaucracy and negotiations. That's why we are still building Su-30MKI on the production line and only upgrading them to a new version when they go for overhaul after many years.

So if IAF orders the F3-04T today, they will have to keep building the F3-04T forever, even if F3R2 becomes available in France. To change from F3-04T to F3R2, they will have to place new orders according to Indian procurement laws. Or they will have to upgrade them to a new standard after buying the originally ordered standard in a separate process.

But if IAF also shifts to production in tranches like ADLA, they never did that for MKI, they can buy the new versions whenever they are available like France does. So this is my point.

You are assuming I'm saying F3-04T and F3R are different variants. This is my previous quote.

You can upgrade F1 to F3R standards, but these are versions.

So I hope it is much clearer now.

 

[Abingdonboy]

and now we know that with Rafale IAF will made 16 planes squadron. It is because the real objective is to have 14 planes availables and with a 90% availability 16 plane by squadron are enough.

Well this is the answer to a lot of the dismay going on around here about a fighter deficit. And whilst it is true that there is a vast requirement for new fighters to be inducted, some of the numbers floating around are going to be a bit faulty because they are assuming 1 SQN=18 planes. However, the IAF is satisfied with 16 aircraft Rafale SQNs- with 90% availability offering 14 "ready" aircraft at any one time, which fits with the 75% availability of 18 unit MKI SQNs that would deliver 13.5 "ready" aircraft at any one time.

Hence, an induction of 200 Rafales would translate to 12.5 SQNs and not 11 SQNs (as with 18 unit SQNs)-an entire SQN has been gained just by taking account of the higher availability of the Rafale. This clearly wouldn't be enough to reach the sanction 42 SQN strength by 2027 but it will help and is something we need to be aware of because remember that talking about outright fighter numbers is meaningless- the IAF (and GoI) measures its strength by SQN figures and this is the defeiceny all reports talk about. You will never hear the IAF/MoD/GoI complaining about a desrth of fighter numbers, it is always about SQN strength- this is the metric.


@PARIKRAMA interestingly this is also something the media absolutely fails to talk about when proposing the MKI as an alternative to the Rafale- in a SQN you would have to procure 2 extra units per SQN (in today's MKI market that's >$200 million) just to get the same force levels of 1 Rafale SQN. Multiply that by >10 SQNs and their LCC and the savings to be made in this one area alone are in the billions of USD.

The Rafale just makes too much sense- which is my fear, Indian leadership is rarely driven by logic and sense.

@Taygibay @Vauban @Picdelamirand-oil @randomradio @Masterhunter @anant_s @mkb95 @MilSpec @nair @SpArK @SrNair @sathya @AUSTERLITZ @Levina

 

[PARIKRAMA]

@Abingdonboy
Actually it's all about availability rate.. Take an example of LCA tejas..

If for example per squadron its 20 jets then @75% availability its 15
@70% availability its 14
@80% availability its 16

Now high number in a fleet is a one thing and coat of having high availability another..

To me this logic of too many numbers don't matter at all as I am more concerned about pilots availability plus adequate training experience in those frames actually that they are experienced enough to handle the strategies and mission in an optimum efficiency level.

Thus I see end to end 4-5 years from induction to training in different trainer jets to ajts to finally getting first sortie in the squadron assigned to proper on the go experience for optimum efficiency levels...

This makes me believe that every new face taken today will start showing true performance 5 years from now.. Which implies every higher availability aircraft helps me address the critical human shortage issue also and ability to maintain strength doctrine..

Yes you are right that every additional jet is also a cost.. But then I will let it go for MKI owing to the numbers we have and roles it has to undertake since rest of our tiers are practically short handed in birds as well as pilots..

It's a deep rooted issue and I pointed before pilots plus a clear plan of MII implementation is the need of hour

 

[Dash]

@Abingdonboy
Actually it's all about availability rate.. Take an example of LCA tejas..

If for example per squadron its 20 jets then @75% availability its 15
@70% availability its 14
@80% availability its 16

Now high number in a fleet is a one thing and coat of having high availability another..

To me this logic of too many numbers don't matter at all as I am more concerned about pilots availability plus adequate training experience in those frames actually that they are experienced enough to handle the strategies and mission in an optimum efficiency level.

Thus I see end to end 4-5 years from induction to training in different trainer jets to ajts to finally getting first sortie in the squadron assigned to proper on the go experience for optimum efficiency levels...

This makes me believe that every new face taken today will start showing true performance 5 years from now.. Which implies every higher availability aircraft helps me address the critical human shortage issue also and ability to maintain strength doctrine..

Yes you are right that every additional jet is also a cost.. But then I will let it go for MKI owing to the numbers we have and roles it has to undertake since rest of our tiers are practically short handed in birds as well as pilots..

It's a deep rooted issue and I pointed before pilots plus a clear plan of MII implementation is the need of hour

Just for fun. pilot to cockpit ratio is 0.84 then how much will be the availability for twin seaters?

 

[Masterhunter]

@randomradio..

At least we agree on one thing till now that IAF needs about 20-22 sqn of jets by 2027...and IN need about 6-7 sqn by 2027. So total of 26-29 jets...

Now what IAF is getting is about 2su30, 6 LCA, 2 rafale +1 FGFA.. 11 sqn..
IAF needs about minimum 9-11 sqn by 2027... That is about 200 jets.

IN too needs about 120 odd jets by 2027.. I am saying its NLCA (2sqn) plus 24-32 order of MIG29.. Leavin g requirement of 2-3 sqn that about 50-60 planes..

A total of 260 jets. Max by 2027.

Now that point is from where IAF can get this... U are saying second MRCA of F18/ gripen.. This is in addition to a rafale prod line in India.
Also u are saying being and gripen will be cheaper than rafale...

Mate, few things u have missed in this calculation
1. A new type of plane in MII means investment of few billion dollars to make it.. I read somewhere in this forum that boieng asked for minimum order of 200 planes to make it economical viable to MII.. Or else cost of each plane will increase.

2. Cost of base infrastructure creation... Dassult asking for 1.4 billion dollar for one base for rafale and already two bases are created in present order. In your view point of second MRCA of 126 fighters, we need creation of infrastructure on minimum 03 bases...that means an investment of 4.2 billion dollars.

3. Cost of training/spares and logistics. 1-1.5 billion for 36 planes in rafale pricing. So what is it for new variety of 126 planes.. Training will be more. Spares may cost same even if we order more rafale.

4. Also you were saying gripen NG is better and u also contradict that IAF won't buy single engine after 2027 while countering my argument for LCA so u think that gripen will make a production line in MII just for 126 planes and after 2027 close its line as IAF not interested.. Do you think it is financially viable.

5. You are saying no private firm can make second prod line for LCA in 5-10 years, yet dassault/Boeing/Saab..in collaboration of pvt sector are saying they can start producing in 3yrs max. You wanna say no pvt firm can make LCA second production. Line operational in 3-4 yrs in India if given a order of 126 planes?

6. Again you are saying IAF only wanna buy FGFA and AMCA after 2030... And still you advocating that new prod line along with rafale line, what will happen to these production lines? And is it not that this investment will get waste..

7. Su30 and HAL line will be converted to FGFA and AMCA.. So can be utilised. More so HAL is DPSU..

To conclude, if IAF operates 12 sqn (2 old and 10 new) of rafale.. Then it needs 4 bases max. And if IAF operates 7 rafale (total 9) and 6 second MRCA.. It needs to create one more bases for rafale and three for second MRCA.. So it comes to approx 4 billion dollar extra expenditure.

Rafale flyaway cost is 83 M dollar and F18 SH is 65-70 M dollar and gripen NG will cost samabout 60-65M.
With MII and 200+ order for rafale cost will be 10-15% cheaper as its development cost is distributed over larger order and cheaper labour .. And also the cost of production is spread over bigger order.. It comes to 75M dollar...
If we get say rafale production line for 108 sqn and 108 from gripen/F18 the cost of establishing production line will increase the cost of these planes. And cost of rafale will also increase as the economies of scale is reduced.

And mate AMCA will start inducting after 2030-32.. And operating FGFA/AMCA in big numbers will be prohibitive in long run.. So IAF will go for max 10 sqn of FGFA and 10 sqn of AMCA and keep 30 sqn of 4.75++ Gen jets like rafale and supersukoi... Til 2045-50 or so..

The way out is same as I said again.. It's 2016 now..
1. Get a pvt player for second prod line for LCA and churn out minimum of 8/yr (max 16) starting 2020.. Till 2027.. We can get 56-112 odd LCA that is 03-06 sqn... After 2024-27 HAL line will produce NLCA (46). The additional LCA can be inducted by IAF is 4 sqn (80) taking the total number to 10 sqn. Rest 32 can be exported. And LCA is cheap..about 40M each...

2. Tell dassault to establish a line of 12/24/36 or 15/30/45... If cleared by 2016 end they can start producing by 2021 Jan.. So the possible number wud be like this..
2021/22/23 -16*3= 48
2024-27-- 24* 4= 96
So a total of 144 Rafales.....
Out of IAF can induct 96 and can also get 18 from France taking a total induction to 108.

So total aircraft that can be inducted by IAF 108 rafale ( 6 sqn) and 80 LCA ( 4sqn). That means a total of 10 sqn by 2027..

Rest 54 (3sqn) can be inducted by IN.. What estimate I have give for rafale line is conservative one.. It can increase production a bit more also..

This calculation does not have scope for new production line for new aircraft.

In your rafale export order possible can go vey big... Like Saudi 72 and fifth trance of FrAF.. But if dassault make rafale in India..every other is not even required..bcoz IN/IAF alone can ask for about 250+ rafale..and add about 80-100 for FrAF.. These two will become priority and rest all will wait except Egypt and Qatar..dassult can increase merignac production line to 22-33 / yrs.. And after fulfilling orders for qatar+ India(54) + FrAaF(45)... After 2023 or so they can start exporting Saudi order if its placed..but the point is Rafale cost will come dwon will such big orders... And it will better for both india and France.

Well this is the answer to a lot of the dismay going on around here about a fighter deficit. And whilst it is true that there is a vast requirement for new fighters to be inducted, some of the numbers floating around are going to be a bit faulty because they are assuming 1 SQN=18 planes. However, the IAF is satisfied with 16 aircraft Rafale SQNs- with 90% availability offering 14 "ready" aircraft at any one time, which fits with the 75% availability of 18 unit MKI SQNs that would deliver 13.5 "ready" aircraft at any one time.

Hence, an induction of 200 Rafales would translate to 12.5 SQNs and not 11 SQNs (as with 18 unit SQNs)-an entire SQN has been gained just by taking account of the higher availability of the Rafale. This clearly wouldn't be enough to reach the sanction 42 SQN strength by 2027 but it will help and is something we need to be aware of because remember that talking about outright fighter numbers is meaningless- the IAF (and GoI) measures its strength by SQN figures and this is the defeiceny all reports talk about. You will never hear the IAF/MoD/GoI complaining about a desrth of fighter numbers, it is always about SQN strength- this is the metric.


@PARIKRAMA interestingly this is also something the media absolutely fails to talk about when proposing the MKI as an alternative to the Rafale- in a SQN you would have to procure 2 extra units per SQN (in today's MKI market that's >$200 million) just to get the same force levels of 1 Rafale SQN. Multiply that by >10 SQNs and their LCC and the savings to be made in this one area alone are in the billions of USD.

The Rafale just makes too much sense- which is my fear, Indian leadership is rarely driven by logic and sense.

@Taygibay @Vauban @Picdelamirand-oil @randomradio @Masterhunter @anant_s @mkb95 @MilSpec @nair @SpArK @SrNair @sathya @AUSTERLITZ @Levina

This is exactly I wa talking about...the number game of IAF.... ... If availability of Su30 is increased to 75-80% .. We can get a sqn with 18planes.. Think over a figure of 350 Su30 (number we all are talking about .. It's 17 sqn (20 planes) and 19 sqn(18 planes)... Same with rafale ... 200 planes will give u 11 sqn(18 planes) and and 12.5 sqn (16 planes)... So u automatically gets 3.5 sqn without actually inducting anything and then IAF nothing to say about falling numbers....

 

[Abingdonboy]

@Abingdonboy
Actually it's all about availability rate.. Take an example of LCA tejas..

If for example per squadron its 20 jets then @75% availability its 15
@70% availability its 14
@80% availability its 16

Now high number in a fleet is a one thing and coat of having high availability another..

To me this logic of too many numbers don't matter at all as I am more concerned about pilots availability plus adequate training experience in those frames actually that they are experienced enough to handle the strategies and mission in an optimum efficiency level.

Thus I see end to end 4-5 years from induction to training in different trainer jets to ajts to finally getting first sortie in the squadron assigned to proper on the go experience for optimum efficiency levels...

This makes me believe that every new face taken today will start showing true performance 5 years from now.. Which implies every higher availability aircraft helps me address the critical human shortage issue also and ability to maintain strength doctrine..

Yes you are right that every additional jet is also a cost.. But then I will let it go for MKI owing to the numbers we have and roles it has to undertake since rest of our tiers are practically short handed in birds as well as pilots..

It's a deep rooted issue and I pointed before pilots plus a clear plan of MII implementation is the need of hour

Just for fun. pilot to cockpit ratio is 0.84 then how much will be the availability for twin seaters?

The pilot ratio issue is a bit of red herring IMO as the situation as it is as a result of training capacity issues caused by the insufficent trainer fleet. This has only very recently been addressed with the induction of the Hawk Mk.132s and PC-7s, now the IAF is increasing annual training of pilot batches on a consistent basis. It takes a long time to train a pilot but by 2018 this issue should largely be recitified and by 2020 it will certainly be a thing of the past (the one thorn being the outstanding >100 requirement for BTTs that should have gone to Pilatus but HAL twisted the MoD's arm and now we have to wait at least 4-5 years for the HTT-40 ).

@randomradio..

At least we agree on one thing till now that IAF needs about 20-22 sqn of jets by 2027...and IN need about 6-7 sqn by 2027. So total of 26-29 jets...

Now what IAF is getting is about 2su30, 6 LCA, 2 rafale +1 FGFA.. 11 sqn..
IAF needs about minimum 9-11 sqn by 2027... That is about 200 jets.

IN too needs about 120 odd jets by 2027.. I am saying its NLCA (2sqn) plus 24-32 order of MIG29.. Leavin g requirement of 2-3 sqn that about 50-60 planes..

A total of 260 jets. Max by 2027.

Now that point is from where IAF can get this... U are saying second MRCA of F18/ gripen.. This is in addition to a rafale prod line in India.
Also u are saying being and gripen will be cheaper than rafale...

Mate, few things u have missed in this calculation
1. A new type of plane in MII means investment of few billion dollars to make it.. I read somewhere in this forum that boieng asked for minimum order of 200 planes to make it economical viable to MII.. Or else cost of each plane will increase.

2. Cost of base infrastructure creation... Dassult asking for 1.4 billion dollar for one base for rafale and already two bases are created in present order. In your view point of second MRCA of 126 fighters, we need creation of infrastructure on minimum 03 bases...that means an investment of 4.2 billion dollars.

3. Cost of training/spares and logistics. 1-1.5 billion for 36 planes in rafale pricing. So what is it for new variety of 126 planes.. Training will be more. Spares may cost same even if we order more rafale.

4. Also you were saying gripen NG is better and u also contradict that IAF won't buy single engine after 2027 while countering my argument for LCA so u think that gripen will make a production line in MII just for 126 planes and after 2027 close its line as IAF not interested.. Do you think it is financially viable.

5. You are saying no private firm can make second prod line for LCA in 5-10 years, yet dassault/Boeing/Saab..in collaboration of pvt sector are saying they can start producing in 3yrs max. You wanna say no pvt firm can make LCA second production. Line operational in 3-4 yrs in India if given a order of 126 planes?

6. Again you are saying IAF only wanna buy FGFA and AMCA after 2030... And still you advocating that new prod line along with rafale line, what will happen to these production lines? And is it not that this investment will get waste..

7. Su30 and HAL line will be converted to FGFA and AMCA.. So can be utilised. More so HAL is DPSU..

To conclude, if IAF operates 12 sqn (2 old and 10 new) of rafale.. Then it needs 4 bases max. And if IAF operates 7 rafale (total 9) and 6 second MRCA.. It needs to create one more bases for rafale and three for second MRCA.. So it comes to approx 4 billion dollar extra expenditure.

Rafale flyaway cost is 83 M dollar and F18 SH is 65-70 M dollar and gripen NG will cost samabout 60-65M.
With MII and 200+ order for rafale cost will be 10-15% cheaper as its development cost is distributed over larger order and cheaper labour .. And also the cost of production is spread over bigger order.. It comes to 75M dollar...
If we get say rafale production line for 108 sqn and 108 from gripen/F18 the cost of establishing production line will increase the cost of these planes. And cost of rafale will also increase as the economies of scale is reduced.

And mate AMCA will start inducting after 2030-32.. And operating FGFA/AMCA in big numbers will be prohibitive in long run.. So IAF will go for max 10 sqn of FGFA and 10 sqn of AMCA and keep 30 sqn of 4.75++ Gen jets like rafale and supersukoi... Til 2045-50 or so..

The way out is same as I said again.. It's 2016 now..
1. Get a pvt player for second prod line for LCA and churn out minimum of 8/yr (max 16) starting 2020.. Till 2027.. We can get 56-112 odd LCA that is 03-06 sqn... After 2024-27 HAL line will produce NLCA (46). The additional LCA can be inducted by IAF is 4 sqn (80) taking the total number to 10 sqn. Rest 32 can be exported. And LCA is cheap..about 40M each...

2. Tell dassault to establish a line of 12/24/36 or 15/30/45... If cleared by 2016 end they can start producing by 2021 Jan.. So the possible number wud be like this..
2021/22/23 -16*3= 48
2024-27-- 24* 4= 96
So a total of 144 Rafales.....
Out of IAF can induct 96 and can also get 18 from France taking a total induction to 108.

So total aircraft that can be inducted by IAF 108 rafale ( 6 sqn) and 80 LCA ( 4sqn). That means a total of 10 sqn by 2027..

Rest 54 (3sqn) can be inducted by IN.. What estimate I have give for rafale line is conservative one.. It can increase production a bit more also..

This calculation does not have scope for new production line for new aircraft.

In your rafale export order possible can go vey big... Like Saudi 72 and fifth trance of FrAF.. But if dassault make rafale in India..every other is not even required..bcoz IN/IAF alone can ask for about 250+ rafale..and add about 80-100 for FrAF.. These two will become priority and rest all will wait except Egypt and Qatar..dassult can increase merignac production line to 22-33 / yrs.. And after fulfilling orders for qatar+ India(54) + FrAaF(45)... After 2023 or so they can start exporting Saudi order if its placed..but the point is Rafale cost will come dwon will such big orders... And it will better for both india and France.

Very well put, there simply doesn't seem to be any need for a "second MMRCA", yes the induction of new aircraft is the largest issue going foreward as productive capacity all across the board will be strained but the costs (both start up and life cycle) simply don't support the idea for a second type. In the long run this would be a gross misallocation of resources and would cost the Indian taxypayers billions in wastage. If needed, take the pain of 2 years of delay in meeting the sanactioned strength- it' not particuarly palatable but better than the alternative.


Hopefully, going by the figures provided by @Picdelamirand-oil I hope the production line in India is closer to a capacity of 30/year than 15- this is essential to making this work. I also think it makes a lot of sense to opt for an addtional SQN (or two) of Rafales alongside the 36 being delivered off the shelf from France, what is the harm?