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

[sancho]

Sadly I am inclined to agree with you and given what the DM has stated and the government being what it is, this playing "hardball" with them is only going to lead to one outcome- ripping up the entire procurement. Then the really hard questions will have to be asked, namely- now what? The MKI is not an option, the EFT isn't either

Options are available on our side, not like on Dassaults side, but apart of the EF none of them gets us the industrial advantages and as I told you before, it's still the fastest option available, just a matter of how the order will be made.
But it's a huge disappointment, especially after the last 3 years.

This is what confuses me, the Indian MoD/DM and French MoD have opposite interpretations of the exact same document, this simply shouldn't be possible, it is literally black and white. Both sides can't be right, so who is being mischievous here......

Actually, this is the first official French government statement about it and as shows earlier the clauses were part of the DPP2006 which is the base of the RFP, so how should that not be in the RFP?

Maybe the EF invitation to Aero India was a sign.

 

[Abingdonboy]

Options are available on our side, not like on Dassaults side, but apart of the EF none of them gets us the industrial advantages and as I told you before, it's still the fastest option available, just a matter of how the order will be made.
But it's a huge disappointment, especially after the last 3 years.

There are options but none of them will be speedy nor address the IAF's slow (to speed up in the next 2-4 years) SQD strength decline (we can argue that the SQD strength is an arbitrary and rather ignorant way of judging the IAF's straight but numbers count for something) for at least 5-6 years. I'm sorry sir but I just don't see the GoI/MoD buffoons taking any such pragmatic approach as you have prescribed in the past for faster acquisition. IF they choose to look at the EFT buckle yourself in for another 3+ years of misery but I'm not convinced the EFT will even be looked at if/when the Rafale talks collapse.

Actually, this is the first official French government statement about it and as shows earlier the clauses were part of the DPP2006 which is the base of the RFP, so how should that not be in the RFP?

Well it seems odd the French MoD (who must have some very fine legal minds) can't read a rather simple document and infer the correct information from it.

Maybe the EF invitation to Aero India was a sign.

I've looked into this, the EFT consortium paid for this privilege (quite a lot I'm guessing) and there is nothing we can really read into it. It's just like how after being kicked out of the MMRCA deal SAAB and the EFT consortium stepped up their advertisements in Delhi for their respective products.

 

[sancho]

There are options but none of them will be speedy nor address the IAF's slow (to speed up in the next 2-4 years) SQD strength decline (we can argue that the SQD strength is an arbitrary and rather ignorant way of judging the IAF's straight but numbers count for something) for at least 5-6 years.

Given that we would get only 1 Rafale squad from France and hardly 1 to 2 on the production line in India till 2020, I don't see an issue to add the same number of fighters

Option 1 - EF T3A in government to government deals, 1, 2 or even 3 squads directly from the production lines in Europe, available within the next 3 years, no issue. What takes more time is the negotiation of the industry, but even for Rafale, reportedly more than half of the negotiations were done till late 2012 till Dassault came up with the workshare issue. And if we can fix things and start production by 2018 in India, at least 1 squad T3B's could be produced at HAL till 2020 too.

Option 2 - Upgraded MKIs directly from Irkut and some added to the HAL production line, at least 3 squads available till the end of 2020.

Option 3 - Early Pak Fa from Sukhois production line, which reportedly will produce 55 of them for Russia till 2020, at least 1 squad surely could be added for us too.

 

[Abingdonboy]

Given that we would get only 1 Rafale squad from France and hardly 1 to 2 on the production line in India till 2020, I don't see an issue to add the same number of fighters

Option 1 - EF T3A in government to government deals, 1, 2 or even 3 squads directly from the production lines in Europe, available within the next 3 years, no issue. What takes more time is the negotiation of the industry, but even for Rafale, reportedly more than half of the negotiations were done till late 2012 till Dassault came up with the workshare issue. And if we can fix things and start production by 2018 in India, at least 1 squad T3B's could be produced at HAL till 2020 too.

Option 2 - Upgraded MKIs directly from Irkut and some added to the HAL production line, at least 3 squads available till the end of 2020.

Option 3 - Early Pak Fa from Sukhois production line, which reportedly will produce 55 of them for Russia till 2020, at least 1 squad surely could be added for us too.

Sorry sir but none of these options will be taken, when is the last time something as pragmatic as this was done when it came to defence? IF the Rafale is scrapped (I pray to God it is not) here's what will happen- a few more SQDs of Super MKIs from HAL and the MoD will state the LCA Mk.2 is a viable alternative when combined with additional MKIs. We can rule out the PAK FA and EFT right now that is for certain.

 

[sancho]

Sorry sir but none of these options will be taken, when is the last time something as pragmatic as this was done when it came to defence? IF the Rafale is scrapped (I pray to God it is not) here's what will happen- a few more SQDs of Super MKIs from HAL and the MoD will state the LCA Mk.2 is a viable alternative when combined with additional MKIs. We can rule out the PAK FA and EFT right now that is for certain.

Since Parrikar recently stated that he wants FGFA earlier, he can't add more MKIs to HAL's line since the additional 42 will keep the line busy till 2019. But I agree that pragmatism is not the strong side of MoD, no matter under which government.

Well it seems odd the French MoD (who must have some very fine legal minds) can't read a rather simple document and infer the correct information from it.

See my reply to Olybrius, it's hard to deny the DPP unless someone in the MoD made a huge mistake in the RFP.

 

[Abingdonboy]

Since Parrikar recently stated that he wants FGFA earlier, he can't add more MKIs to HAL's line since the additional 42 will keep the line busy till 2019. But I agree that pragmatism is not the strong side of MoD, no matter under which government.

Yes the only issue with what I forecast was the line converting to FGFAs by 2020 so perhaps they will go directly to Irkut but this would be in direct contradiction to the "Make in India" policy the GoI is trying hard to push and I don't think the DM/PM would be too inclined to cancel a legitimate Make in India deal (Rafale) for a Make in Russia deal, that would be pretty counterproductive to them I would have thought. Perhaps they simply beef up production and produce more MKIs in HAL's Naisk plant.

See my reply to Olybrius, it's hard to deny the DPP unless someone in the MoD made a huge mistake in the RFP.

But what bothers me is Dassualt is a multi Billion dollar firm and the French MoD are no idiots so how can they with some fine legal minds come to an entirely different conclusion regarding the liability/RFP obligations than the MoD? This is truly baffling.

 

[sancho]

Perhaps they simply beef up production and produce more MKIs in HAL's Naisk plant.

Doubtful that that's possible, since the line is running out, so they will slow down now from the peak production.

 

[Abingdonboy]

Doubtful that that's possible, since the line is running out, so they will slow down now from the peak production.

Like I said sir- an utter mess! India is literally between the devil and the deep blue sea except their are multiple devils (MiGs being retired, Naisk plant switching over to the FGFA) and multiple seas (Talks with EFT consortium would take years, LCA is not an adequate substitute for the Rafale neither is the MKI).

Some truly out of the box thinking is needed if the Rafale deals collapse, again for the love of God don't let them, and this is not in anyway the strong point of the MoD so we ca expect yet more headache to come.....


Getting the Rafale was just too simple a solution wasn't it? India loves to do things the hard way

 

[Bang Galore]

Well it seems odd the French MoD (who must have some very fine legal minds) can't read a rather simple document and infer the correct information from it.

I'm sure they can read it alright but to openly say you are not willing to adhere to the RFP will destroy credibility, far better to say that their understanding of the RFP was different from the MoD's.

 

[Abingdonboy]

I'm sure they can read it alright but to openly say you are not willing to adhere to the RFP will destroy credibility, far better to say that their understanding of the RFP was different from the MoD's.

They are saying the liability was not part of the RFP so they are putting themselves in an indefensible position.

 

[Bang Galore]

Getting the Rafale was just too simple a solution wasn't it? India loves to do things the hard way

You bet !. I mean who in the right mind would lump together the Mig 35, Gripen & the F-16 with the twin engined planes & yet not allow for their biggest advantage of cost to be a factor? It would have made a lot more sense to have had a target price & ask all contenders to put in their best offers for that value rather than end up selecting between the 2 costliest aircraft's on the grounds that they are the most capable. No $hit, at those prices, they better be good. MoD & IAF must also be held equally responsible for this mess, ending up with an L1 who may or may not be the L1 and who now simply does not agree to follow the rules of the contract. Forget Dassault, there should be heads rolling in the MoD & some IAF guys must pay the price too. The IAF's & the MoD's lunacy has brought us to this stage; if they didn't learn from the M2k upgrade costing, they are the ones who should be blamed for it. Dassault is not our problem, they can be replaced even if at a substantial cost but the jokers on our side who played out this charade are still comfortably sitting in their chairs.

We should have looked at the F-16 & gripen and worked out the most cost effective solution there. Any addition of the heavier platforms should have been separate from this.

They are saying the liability was not part of the RFP so they are putting themselves in an indefensible position.

To you and me, yes but that's not the story they will be telling.

 

[anant_s]

This implies nothing has changed and the Defence Minister of India has said that unless Dassualt sticks to the RFP the deal will be scrapped.

& i'm not sure how long this government is going to wait. i won't be surprised if it has already started to send some feelers to EADS or UAC as a backup plan.

 

[topgun047]

You bet !. I mean who in the right mind would lump together the Mig 35, Gripen & the F-16 with the twin engined planes & yet not allow for their biggest advantage of cost to be a factor? It would have made a lot more sense to have had a target price & ask all contenders to put in their best offers for that value rather than end up selecting between the 2 costliest aircraft's on the grounds that they are the most capable. No $hit, at those prices, they better be good. MoD & IAF must also be held equally responsible for this mess, ending up with an L1 who may or may not be the L1 and who now simply does not agree to follow the rules of the contract. Forget Dassault, there should be heads rolling in the MoD & some IAF guys must pay the price too. The IAF's & the MoD's lunacy has brought us to this stage; if they didn't learn from the M2k upgrade costing, they are the ones who should be blamed for it. Dassault is not our problem, they can be replaced even if at a substantial cost but the jokers on our side who played out this charade are still comfortably sitting in their chairs.

We should have looked at the F-16 & gripen and worked out the most cost effective solution there. Any addition of the heavier platforms should have been separate from this.



To you and me, yes but that's not the story they will be telling.

Its an open secret that MMRCA tender was cooked up from the start to ensure Rafale becomes the winner.
The requirements were laid down in such a way that Rafale meets them better than all other contenders.

 

[PARIKRAMA]

The question to ponder is
A) Who is/are responsible for time equivalent to a decade lost?
B) Why we had to get into this mess?
C) What did we do to address our domestic programs/setups issues (Like LCA MK1 and Mk2 /AMCA etc) to ensure such kind of a situation is not repeated again?
D) What will be our Plan B or Plan C? A credible Plan for Hi-Med-Lo equation not about saying lets order MKI and make it Super Upgrade or LCA MK2 will do the job (yes may be post 2025) or AMCA (Again 2025+). A proper justifiable and time bound project
E) Who is responsible till we keep flying tough fighters like Mig 21s Bisons who are unforgivable types and requires far more intensive concentration then the new fighters? What about our real squadron strength? (No pls talk 45 squadrons its utter rubbish now)
F) Why our programs like LCA MK1, MK2, naval variant, AMCA proposed, or FGFA (not even contract finalised or signed) in such a state of affairs? What steps being undertaken to priortise?

Its time, we drop all luggage of our past and make a clean fresh start. We must not get into this kind of mess again and again. It shows the propensity of bad planning and lack of vision on the part of everybody including IAF. We need to make amends and do that asap.

 

[raazh]

You bet !. I mean who in the right mind would lump together the Mig 35, Gripen & the F-16 with the twin engined planes & yet not allow for their biggest advantage of cost to be a factor? It would have made a lot more sense to have had a target price & ask all contenders to put in their best offers for that value rather than end up selecting between the 2 costliest aircraft's on the grounds that they are the most capable.
We should have looked at the F-16 & gripen and worked out the most cost effective solution there. Any addition of the heavier platforms should have been separate from this.

This is the point i never understood myself. IAF wants a single engine Mig21 replacement and that too in big numbers. Then why did it not look at single engine options like Gripen and F16. Plus when you already have a Heavy Weight double engine Su30 in numbers which can perform all the roles that may be required and you also control its production, overhaul and up gradation then why are you still looking for another different double engine plane? To top it you have plans for FGFA and AMCA, both being double engines.

If you really have to purchase another plane then It would have made more sense to go for Gripen or F16 and try to utilize its technology in all other local project esp LCA. However the best option would have been to get Saab involved in LCA and quickly develop a cost effective replacement for Mig 21 in numbers.