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

[randomradio]

No, rule this out right now. 100% no more Russian jets beyond the MKI and FGFA.

The Indian Govt is preparing for war. They will buy whatever best suits our needs.

Those Rafales are coming. Apart from Rafales, there will be a second western line as long as it is cheaper than Rafale.

The third line would be a Mig-35 line 'cause it could very well cost just $10M flyaway. We can buy 200 jets for $2B. With production and ToT for another $1B. Why miss out on that when the purpose is to create a whole new aerospace industry in India?

 

[Picdelamirand-oil]

How many electronic components in Rafale come from china ? return the favour and Make me laugh.

0%
Our electronic components for Rafale come from Stmicroelectronic Crolles France
STMicroelectronics
It is not allowed to use foreign components for Rafale except if there is a French equivalent.
During prototype phase it was a derogation to use such components, but it was not allowed for serial plane, so you have to develop an equivalent component for the serial.

 

[randomradio]

Except for raw material, 100% of Su30MKI is Made in India.

You have a lot of wrong information even though you claim to work with HAL as a subcontractor.

The cost of raw materials and other equipment is 49% of the cost of manufacture in India. But that's subject to change due to the ruble devaluation and increase in costs of manufacturing by HAL.

In terms of components, 76% of the aircraft is made in India, set to rise to 85% in time. The landing carriage and ejection seat are supplied directly from Russia. 87% of the engine components are made in India, the most exotic materials come from Russia directly for assembly.

The Rafale MMRCA deal was supposed to bring in even more ToT, including manufacturing 100% of the airframe and engine in India. Much more than MKI ToT. In terms of costs, MKI ToT is 51% of the total costs. For MMRCA, it was supposed to be 65%. Only electronics were supposed to have low ToT component. But with MMRCA canceled and GTG initiated, a lot of tech will not be made in India for now. Like the landing carriage will come from France. Such things are meant to reduce costs. But ToT will increase if the Indian companies are able to make components at a lower cost than in France.

Eventually the plan is to even run exports from Indian factories. French subcontractors were saying they would prefer to manufacture Falcon spares over Rafale spares, so it is possible most of the global need for Rafale spares would come from India. So India could eventually end up supporting the entire global Rafale fleet except for ADLA/MN fleet as long as costs are lower. That's the scale of the Rafale business today. Many countries are lining up to buy Rafale now.

 

[Abingdonboy]

Effectively is it not end game for LCA MK2?

Yes, Gripen is the final nail in the LCA's life size coffin. IAF will effectively close it down. Remember IAF is buying LAC against its will and Gripen is just the damn excuse they were looking for.

There is no way anyone can deny that buying any number of Gripens will kill the LCA outright. Just 1 SQN of Gripens will do that.

But, this is the reason I don't see it happening. Everyone is making out that the IAF wants the LCA dead, whilst I only partially agree with this I would say it is not for any malcious reasons but that they want the very best and they don't think that is the LCA- right now. But, give it a few years, let the LC enter SQN service, let the sketicism be addressed by first hand expereince and those views in the IAF will change and they will be the most prolific LCA supporters there are- don't forget these are likely to be some of the biggest patriots around, the "Indian tag" will fly (excuse the pun) very well with them. And as the notion goes, pilots eventually end up loving their planes- no matter what it is and will excuse its flaws. So to build up an LCA support base in the IAF it needs to be in service and in large numbers ASAP. One can forgive the IAF for being rather cynical as of now but this will change quite quickly once it is "theirs".

The turning point will be the LCA gaining operational status in the IAF and then the IAF won't be able to praise it highly enough- guaranteed.

Secondly, do not forget that what the IAF wants/says/thinks has very little weighting on the decsion makers ie the politicans- DM and PM. As polticans, who sees them being willing to kill the LCA in favour of a foriegn product? I mean this is poltical suicide, the oppostion would, rightly, have their heads for such a move. It just can't happen, there is far too much poltical capital invested in the LCA and now "Make in India" intiative- the LCA is the poster child for that scheme as far as defence goes. Has this GoI shown any intent to shun the LCA or kill it off? No. In fact it has been the EXACT OPPOSITE. This GoI has intiated a more effective review process of the LCA and has taken unprecendted steps like sending it to Bahrain (for BIAS 2016) where the Minister for External Affairs no less was present to sing the praises of the LCA. And then there is the news that the DM had got the IAF to accept 100+ LCA MK.1A (as a comprrimise to 20-40 MK.1 and then waiting on the MK.2).

Actions speak louder than words. No way the Gripen is coming to India, it makes no sense on any level.

The turning point will be the LCA gaining operational status in the IAF and then the IAF won't be able to praise it highly enough.


+ friends let's not forget the MMRCA competitor known for spending BY FAR the most in advertisiment in India that continues to this day is not Boeing, Dassualt (they basically don't do any by the way) or the EFT consortium but SAAB. Put the links together.

If Gripen E/F, then why not Mig35?

There is little interest from anyone (GoI/IAF/MoD) for another twin engined Russian bird that will not address the crippling availability issues across the fighter fleet. Do you think the MiG-35 can promise 90% availability? 1-2 hour turn around times for an engine change? On the spot maintainence (as opposed to being sent to a BRD)? No, no and no again.

 

[raktaka]

I don' think there was any oversight on their part. Dassault's job was to give their estimates based on HAL's prices, which they did. Infrastructure costs were separate. Automation has high startup costs, but they reduce total cost of manufacturing over the long term.

And you get better quality with automation.

Dassault job was to provide an accurate and workable PROPOSAL for MMRCA. Any and All Due Diligence is SOP. The most obvious fact would be that the estimate will be provided based on EXISTING infrastructure. Not ASSUMED Infrastructure and UNKNOWN cost.

The problem is Dassault has no control over HAL's production. So they cannot mitigate risks. And when Dassault wanted executive control over HAL's Rafale production, it was denied.

Even if Dassault HAD control over HAL production, how can they mitigate risk ? What will they do if HAL employees go on strike ? or if equipments and material is stuck in customs or with local vendor ? Can Dassult overwrite Labour rights guaranteed under our constitution if the yhad Executive control over HAL ?

HAL KNOWS how to operate in India, Dassault DO NOT. Its FOOLISH of Dassalut to demand executive control over HAL. It would Guarantee Failure.

I don't disagree. That's why Make in India will have less ToT, that will control price. And Dassault will bring in automation in India.

With SAAB there is a greater chance of getting ToT of available tech. They need us as badly as we need them.

Dassault had practically agreed with everything except for being a guarantor for HAL produced Rafales which they had no control over. HAL agreed to be the guarantor, but MoD rejected that. It was CNC that said Dassault should guarantee quality, even without executive control. You don't have the full picture here.

Not True. How can HAL be held accountable if Dassault refused to share critical production detail or delay sharing tech ? What was the safeguard ? HAL will be blamed for the delay. HAL refused to play ball and take responsibility for delays outside its control and asked Dassault to assume responsibility.

Same dilemma existed for dassalut. IAF and CNC wanted to know where the buck stopped. IAF should have stepped up and assumed Program Responsibility. It did not. (Something which IN does)

Are you sure you have the full picture ?

 

[Abingdonboy]

The third line would be a Mig-35 line 'cause it could very well cost just $10M flyaway. We can buy 200 jets for $2B. With production and ToT for another $1B. Why miss out on that when the purpose is to create a whole new aerospace industry in India?

$10m flyaway? Go for 1000 then- $10BN will get you a brand new air force with 55 SQNs, problem solved.

 

[Dash]

they will be the most prolific LCA supporters there are- don't forget these are likely to be some of the biggest patriots around, the "Indian tag" will fly (excuse the pun) very well with them.

Thoda pun may bhi , Looks like the same patriots think Breitling and Ray-Ban dont go hand in hand with Suzuki Alto(LCA) but Rangerover (Rafale)

The turning point will be the LCA gaining operational status in the IAF and then the IAF won't be able to praise it highly enough- guaranteed

I am sure it will be

LCA and now "Make in India" intiative- the LCA is the poster child for that scheme as far as defence goes. Has this GoI shown any intent to shun the LCA or kill it off? No. In fact it has been the EXACT OPPOSITE.

No disagreement there.

+ You mentioned that IAF considers LCA to be below potential,and thats why it doesnt want to induct a fighter which is not upto the mark. I feel they sabotaged the development process in many ways from their % of contribution, whatever number that may be. They were not upto the speed and mark themselves, while it was getting developed. So the theory of IAF being saint, falls flat.

So even if they cry now, no one's gonna listen..

 

[Taygibay]

I'm suddenly wondering why I'm trying to sell the Tejas over the Gripen to a bonafide Bharati linked to HAL ...



Yeah, makes no sense! I'll let his more balanced compatriots take care of it!

GL gang, Tay.


P.S. À Pic, c'est ce que je sous-entendais par /what I meant by how MB conducts business.
delocalize plants and sub-let rights or redraw patents locally until your product is "national".

I just wanted to be discreet in explaining basic industrial stuff to him. One could ask him why
Eurocopter has a plant in the US that makes green machines with an Indian tribe's name.

Of course, that's not the same kind of Indians but it may still work ...

 

[raktaka]

That was also an option, buying automated systems from the market through tenders. But what Dassault said was if foreign tools were used, then Rafale would require requalification and certification which would bring more delays. IAF wanted the least amount of delays.

True, so its not ToT. ToT is proprietary tech. Not infrastructure upgrade.

 

[Dash]

I'm suddenly wondering why I'm trying to sell the Tejas over the Gripen to a bonafide Bharati linked to HAL ..

You didnt listen when I asked you to have your afternoon nap, see the consequences now...

Yeah, makes no sense! I'll let his more balanced compatriots take care of it

Sad...I hope you had said "I actually makes sense". It would have been a diplomatic coup for India!!

$10m flyaway? Go for 1000 then- $10BN will get you a brand new air force with 55 SQNs, problem solved.

Main pagla gaya tha post padhke

 

[raktaka]

You have a lot of wrong information even though you claim to work with HAL as a subcontractor.

The cost of raw materials and other equipment is 49% of the cost of manufacture in India. But that's subject to change due to the ruble devaluation and increase in costs of manufacturing by HAL.

In terms of components, 76% of the aircraft is made in India, set to rise to 85% in time. The landing carriage and ejection seat are supplied directly from Russia. 87% of the engine components are made in India, the most exotic materials come from Russia directly for assembly.

The Rafale MMRCA deal was supposed to bring in even more ToT, including manufacturing 100% of the airframe and engine in India. Much more than MKI ToT. In terms of costs, MKI ToT is 51% of the total costs. For MMRCA, it was supposed to be 65%. Only electronics were supposed to have low ToT component. But with MMRCA canceled and GTG initiated, a lot of tech will not be made in India for now. Like the landing carriage will come from France. Such things are meant to reduce costs. But ToT will increase if the Indian companies are able to make components at a lower cost than in France.

Eventually the plan is to even run exports from Indian factories. French subcontractors were saying they would prefer to manufacture Falcon spares over Rafale spares, so it is possible most of the global need for Rafale spares would come from India. So India could eventually end up supporting the entire global Rafale fleet except for ADLA/MN fleet as long as costs are lower. That's the scale of the Rafale business today. Many countries are lining up to buy Rafale now.

LOL.... I am not a subcontractor. kindly do not assume.

I'm suddenly wondering why I'm trying to sell the Tejas over the Gripen to a bonafide Bharati linked to HAL ...



Yeah, makes no sense! I'll let his more balanced compatriots take care of it!

GL gang, Tay.


P.S. À Pic, c'est ce que je sous-entendais par /what I meant by how MB conducts business.
delocalize plants and sub-let rights or redraw patents locally until your product is "national".

I just wanted to be discreet in explaining basic industrial stuff to him. One could ask him why Eurocopter has a plant in the US that makes green machines with an Indian tribe's name.

Of course, that's not the same kind of Indians but it may still work ...

Are you talking about me ? I am not a stakeholder in this as I have already clarified.

 

[Ankit Kumar]

See this

https://twitter.com/x/status/699880415859970048

Going for SAAB will mean agreeing to negotiate for 10 more years if we are looking for any type of TOT

 

[PARIKRAMA]

Ok people here is what i am thinking,,,

Let me imagine here a beautiful scenario..

Imagine there are 3 new lines under MII

Line 1 Rafale
Line 2 Gripen NG/F18s
Line 3 Mig35/Su35.. anything Russian

Now Line 1 Tie up partner is a pvt sector company/ consortium
Line 2 also same as line 1
Line 3 - Russia would insist on HAL

Each of these lines will carry minimum guarantees of at least 100 Jets..
In all probability the line will bear "assembled from Kits" and then may be later licensed production with partial localisation

So the big question comes here

IF MII liens are decided within next 1 year what will be the price to start these lines

Line 1 Rafales off the shelf with offsets funds MII line for Rafale
Line 2: We need to directly fund the manufacturing line or a similar 36 purchase to fund
Line 3 same case

Imagine Line needs say Euro 3 Bn then x 3 = Euro 9 Bn outlay just for lines (thats offsets)
Imagine another Euro 4 Bn each for all 3 lines off the shelf -- thats Euro 12 Bn

In simple words just to facilitate that line manufacturing is initiated we need to make provision for Euro 9 Bn or USD 10 Bn
Can anybody understand how much money we are talking for a 3 line setup need?

IF we dont do that the 3 lines will require a funding for setup meaning financial cost when borrowed from any financial institution.. Thats of course gonna add up to our purchased cost in case of deferred payments with just signing amount...

So for a successful outlay for MII we need to provision USD 10 Bn within next 12 months to pay for this...

Possible YES, practical NO

I think DM MP is bluffing here just to add pressure..

 

[Abingdonboy]

You mentioned that IAF considers LCA to be below potential,and thats why it doesnt want to induct a fighter which is not upto the mark

To be fair, the FOC requirements outlined by the IAF are perfectly reasonable for an aircraft being inducted in 2016- IFR, higher AOA, relatively decent radar detection (Quartz crystal radome required as a result) etc etc.

I feel they sabotaged the development process in many ways

I think this has been MASSIVELY overstated. The IAF's "moving of goalposts" in the form of updating the ASQRs was just that-updating them to keep them in line with contemporary products.


I've been of the mind for a while now that, once the LCA is in operational service, there will be a large degree of revisionism about the LCA project but most crucially the IAF's role in its development. The IAF setting a high bar through its rigid procurement policy outlining that it won't accept a plane that doesn't meet its FOC requirements was actually the making of a beast of a machine. Look at other projects that have accepted planes into SQN service whilst it had only attained IOC. In the long run the pain of the LCA project will be a major asset rather than a liability and it has forced the ADA to create a truly impressive machine for a first time effort and the foundations are now increidbly strong- look at the Mk.1A that is just a 1-2 years away (rather than 4-5 years away).

One can already see the revisionism setting in preceding, during and since the BIAS 2016 performance.

So the theory of IAF being saint, falls flat.

I'm not saying that exactly but they aren't the devil either (as some would have you beleive). I am just presenting their perspective, they have a very specific mandate- securing India's skies, and for a long time that hasn't meant supporting Indian efforts (the IN accepted this reality earlier) but simply getting the best possible kit they could. This mindset may be changing now but it is a gradual process that should be expedited with the induction of the LCA. There was little malcious intent behind the IAF's brass stance all of these years, remember that most of them would be former fighter jocks themselves and thus want a fighter with all the "bells and whistles".


Anyway, give it a few years, I know the change in perceptions is coming- once the LCA goes from being "their's" (as in HAL's) to "ours" the IAF will be singing its praises for all to see. Listen to the test pilots of the LCA and whilst they are frank about any of the issues the project has faced thus far, they can't praise "their" bird enough- it's a universal trait of aviators to form such an emotional attatchment to their birds and the "Indianness" of the LCA will simply extenuate this even more.

 

[randomradio]

Dassault job was to provide an accurate and workable PROPOSAL for MMRCA. Any and All Due Diligence is SOP. The most obvious fact would be that the estimate will be provided based on EXISTING infrastructure. Not ASSUMED Infrastructure and UNKNOWN cost.

That's one of the reasons why MMRCA was canceled. The proper procedures were not outlined correctly. Dassault did everything that was asked for, so you have to blame the MoD for incomplete procedure.

That's why Dassault is still in and HAL is out.

Even if Dassault HAD control over HAL production, how can they mitigate risk ? What will they do if HAL employees go on strike ? or if equipments and material is stuck in customs or with local vendor ? Can Dassult overwrite Labour rights guaranteed under our constitution if the yhad Executive control over HAL ?

This is outside Dassault's control. This type of risk exists regardless of what HAL or Dassault does. Dassault won't be penalized if the employees stir up problems, that will be HAL's HR department's problem.

Dassault's job was quality, not day to day running of HAL.

HAL KNOWS how to operate in India, Dassault DO NOT. Its FOOLISH of Dassalut to demand executive control over HAL. It would Guarantee Failure.

Now you know one of the reasons why MMRCA failed. Dassault demanded executive control after CNC said Dassault should deliver quality. Else Dassault would never have asked for it.

"Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) chairman T Suvarna Raju on Thursday said that HAL is willing to take full responsibility for the Rafales that it manufactures if the contract with French Defence major Dassault is signed. The comment assumes significance in the backdrop of a disagreement between India and Dassault over who would take guarantee for the Rafale fighter jets."

CNC did not agree to it.

Not True. How can HAL be held accountable if Dassault refused to share critical production detail or delay sharing tech ? What was the safeguard ? HAL will be blamed for the delay. HAL refused to play ball and take responsibility for delays outside its control and asked Dassault to assume responsibility.

There was inbuilt mechanism to prevent delay in ToT. It was a bit complicated. HAL can blame Dassault for not supplying ToT and Dassault can blame HAL for not absorbing tech in time. A study would determine who was at fault and penalize the right party.

HAL never asked for anything from Dassault. As mentioned above, HAL wanted to be the guarantor.

IAF should have stepped up and assumed Program Responsibility. It did not. (Something which IN does)

IAF cannot do that. IN cannot either. Only MoD deals with contractors and subcontractors. IAF is simply the end user. IAF tried it once upon a time, and that was rejected. That's when IAF wanted an Air Marshal to lead HAL.

The Indian Air Force (IAF) has made a proposal to the government that one of its air marshals be appointed as the chief of the aerospace PSU Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL).

"We have proposed that a senior IAF three-star officer be considered for the post," IAF Chief Air Chief Marshal NAK Browne told a press conference here.

This was rejected by MoD. HAL said IAF doesn't know anything about running an aerospace industry, even though IAF said the USAF does the same, a Lt Gen heads the F-35 program with executive powers.

Are you sure you have the full picture ?

Far more than you do.