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

[W@rwolf]

Cost of infrastructure in terms of materials and manhours now being cited to reduce per base cost from earlier Euro 1.2 Bn per base

Could you share the source that says < Euro 1.2 Billion for creation of base infrastructure?

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

 

[randomradio]

After the first investisment on ground for Rafale it would be cheaper to buy more Rafale than to buy F-18, I see no advantage in F-18 the Rafale LCC is lower, the Rafale performance is better.

The F/A-18 has no chance. I've maintained my position that it will be more expensive than Rafale even in terms of flyaway cost, not just LCC. Imagine how much SH will cost if they add avionics like FSO, DDM-NG, SATCOM, interferometers etc, even without sensor fusion. And some of those technologies are impossible for SH to achieve. But F-16 and Gripen have a chance when it comes to costs. Gripen came at $160M with 100% offsets, industrial production and ToT in Brazil. F-16 could be equally cheap even if it is inferior to Gripen.

Parrikar is throwing a bone to Boeing, but the fact is Parrikar has always talked about a single engine aircraft.

April 2015
http://www.business-standard.com/ar...o-replace-mig-21-parrikar-115041500007_1.html

"Rafale is not a replacement for MiG-21. LCA Tejas is a replacement for MiG-21. Or, if we build some other fighter under 'Make in India', that is also possible. If we build another single engine [fighter] in India, which is possible, that could be a replacement for the MiG-21", said Parrikar.

Cost is the driving factor behind this second MMRCA. It has to be Gripen or F-16, nothing else. Or there is a small chance Russia can use its lower exchange rate to sell the Mig-35. The Americans are planning to tighten rates again, and the recent emergency oil production freeze meeting failed, so ruble will depreciate again.

Could you share with us where Dassault has asked us for $1.4 Billion for creation of base infrastructure?

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

Picdel is a source. He was among the top 5 people in the French defence industry. He's supervised French nukes, supervised a nuclear fusion program, ASMP, been a part of Dassault, Matra etc. He was there when they were working out Typhoon's and Rafale's specs, he was part of both programs.

 

[Taygibay]

The IAF technicians have to be extensively trained in its management as well as operating the equipment. You have also not mentioned the installation of simulators which will require a large chunk of money too. My approximation would be upwards of $500 Million.

Maybe the veterans here can give us an idea?

It depends on cost and present infrastructures of course.
If the hangarettes are sized for Rafales, one less cost! If not ...
It also depends on what kind of maintenance is planned.
A better way than IAF is used to, cheap. Same as home set-up?
There's always Mastercard! ETC.

I wouldn't be shocked at half a million bucks.

I disagree

Me too!
One example amongst many : http://www.spherea.com
http://www.spherea.com/en/products/...pose-automatic-test-equipment-test-bench.html

RAFALE
The French Air Force and Navy have equipped themselves with SESAR 3000 GPATE MERMOZ test stations for the maintenance of the RAFALE's main on-board equipment (radar, mission computers, radio communication equipment, electronic warfare equipment, optronic systems and weapons systems).
Fixed configurations have been installed in the maintenance workshops at Air Force and Navy bases.
SESAR GPATE test benches have also been deployed on the aircraft carrier Charles de Gaulle.

Hawkeye
Support for the French Navy's Hawkeye aircraft is provided by SESAR GPATE test benches installed either at the Air Force or Naval bases, or on the aircraft carrier Charles de Gaulle.

Mirage 2000
Over 30 test benches have been delivered to 5 countries as part of the Mirage 2000 program.
5 of these testers are use to maintain the ANTILOPE radar.

Leclerc tank
33 test benches deployed either in shelters transportable by truck, or in the French Army's maintenance workshops provide the maintenance for more than 50 items of electronic and optronic equipment for the Leclerc tank.

VABOBS
Four SESAR GPATE test stations are dedicated to testing the optronic equipment for VABOBS, mainly the laser rangefinder and the sight systems.

NH90
Under the NH90 European program, SPHEREA has supplied a generic tester to maintain the avionics for the NH90 helicopter.
This test bench has been developed from a SESAR GPATE core system and is used by the six nations involved in the NH90 program.

Tiger
An optronics test station has been developed for the German Bundeswehr. This tester is used to maintain the OSIRIS sight head on the German Tiger.

In the French Army, test stations are used to maintain the Tiger's electronic equipment: control computer, radio communication equipment, multifunction display, radar, electronic warfare equipment.

And great evening all, Tay.

 

[W@rwolf]

Picdel is a source. He was among the top 5 people in the French defence industry. He's supervised French nukes, supervised a nuclear fusion program, ASMP, been a part of Dassault, Matra etc. He was there when they were working out Typhoon's and Rafale's specs, he was part of both programs.

That's great. @Picdelamirand-oil Maybe you can shed some light on the cost of setting up bases for Rafales in India?
According to Sajeev Jino, it takes only $100 Million for 2 bases. i argue that it could be upwards of $500 Million for one base itself. What do you think will be a realistic figure? Considering basic infrastructure already exists at both airbases.

It depends on cost and present infrastructures of course.
If the hangarettes are sized for Rafales, one less cost! If not ...
It also depends on what kind of maintenance is planned.
A better way than IAF is used to, cheap. Same as home set-up?
There's always Mastercard! ETC.

I wouldn't be shocked at half a million bucks.

Me too. I mean $50 Million for 1 base is just too low. @Nirjara

 

[#hydra#]

Even if MMRCA is scrapped, why would Dassault revise a price they have proposed in a competitive bidding ? Why would they undermine their price negotiations with other countries ?

Especially when they have to provide 50% offset ?

We would have renegotiated the contract, but not the price. That would always remain the same. As I said, it would be Naive to believe otherwise. Wishful thinking. Mental masturbation. call it what you want.

This also explains why only 36 is being negotiated.



I personally would have F-22 to be the backbone of the IAF. 500 of them would do quite nice.

If only wishes were horses.



"said to" by who ? Same kind of sources who have "said to" put the price at 150 million $ ?

So you pick what suits your Fantasy ?



The ONLY place where India could have negotiated to lower the price would be the base set up. I am going to bet that is the strategy we have adopted.

Base upgrade would be kept at a minimum required. Additional upgrades would come in time and will not be part of deal with Dassault. The contracts would go to Indian companies.

Why dont you add few b2s nd few growlers?

 

[Sergi]

Rafale fanboys may disappoint once again. Dassault is still stuburn on cost issue. Deal likely to fail if Dassult don't fall in line , which seems very unlikely
( NO SOURCE ; take it or leave it )

 

[randomradio]

"said to" by who ? Same kind of sources who have "said to" put the price at 150 million $ ?

Parrikar.

Cost of Rafale during MMRCA was Euro 105M, he said he's aiming to bring the price down to 75M Euros. And it's been more or less done.

 

[BON PLAN]

I thought the 88-4E engine has the same thrust as the 88-2. The report says that we will get a 10T payload capacity rather than the 9.5T. Doesn't that mean we opted for the M-88-3 engine giving 90KN thrust? That would explain the additional costs for customization that include bigger intakes and other tests that needs to be done.

10T : it's a generic term. 9.5T or 10T, it's quite same thing.

a derivative of this config, with 2xSCALP instead of 6 Hammer.

3x2000L tanks = +/-6000 Kg with empty weight of pylon and tank.
2 x SCALP = 2 x (200kg pylon ? + 1300kg missile) = 3000 kg
4 MICA = 4 x 110+ kg
2 METEOR = 2 x 165kg

YEAH : nearly 10 T

 

[randomradio]

Link ?

http://sputniknews.com/military/20160106/1032761180/india-france-rafale-fighter-jet-deal.html
Still trying to squeeze the best out of the deal, the Indian Defense Minister Manohar Parrikar said he hoped that India would negotiate up to 25 percent discount for the jets, which would be 75 million euro ($82 million) instead of 105 million euros for each aircraft.

 

[BON PLAN]

Nirjara gave a decent answer on the continuous evaluation process.
I'll add that a bench exists, the one for dry testing the M-88 after a fix.

From strict to loose :

On deployment, landing gear and wheels, engines and ejection seat are maintained in-house.
Plus weaponry of course! The rest or a major bug with one of those equates to exchange parts.

At a base, more engine care and lots more parts plus a reserve of parts,
including ones from immobilized ACs. Since all Rafales are the same,
you can switch and swap and plug and play all systems say radar or OSF.
Except for Bs versus Cs, French squadrons have a local engineering and
maintenance department that does all planes. When morning comes, pick
any that is available and use it.

On a bigger base, this way of maintenance is actually shared by many sqdns.
Then, you had a shipping/sales rep. dept that gets the spares in and out.
The OSF and engine makers can send parts, modules and systems directly.
Dassault is only concerned with structural work where you need to touch the
whole cell which frees its plant for production and R&D.

So say a FADEC goes boink* : Take it off, send it to shipping, replace it with
any from your pool, test and replace the engine. The maker picks it up, choo-
ses the way to fix it and returns it to base.

And on top of that structure, the AdlA has a SIAé, Aeronautic Industrial Ser-
vice that can do all the work between that of the bases and that of the makers.
http://www.defense.gouv.fr/air/activites/maintenance-aeronautique/maintenance-aeronautique

It works pretty darn well! Tay.

* ( Well, it does go boink exactly, the onboard monitoring signals wear and if it goes over a limit
or starts sending in-flight reports, you remove it. )

On the french nuclear carrier, a test bench for the ATAR engine of Super Etendard was installed. And only for that engine. No need for M88.
Super Etendard is now retired. The test bench will be scratched during the next overhaul of the carrier, next year.

Yes Since the M88 is a modular engine the downtime will be very less which inturn will increase the availibility of the platform. But the cost is more since the whole module will be changed of issues with part or the lifecycle of it.

A replaced module will be overhaul, and not scratch, so it cost far less than a new one..

Rafale fanboys may disappoint once again. Dassault is still stuburn on cost issue. Deal likely to fail if Dassult don't fall in line , which seems very unlikely
( NO SOURCE ; take it or leave it )

WE LEAVE IT !

 

[Stephen Cohen]

Rafale fanboys may disappoint once again. Dassault is still stuburn on cost issue. Deal likely to fail if Dassult don't fall in line , which seems very unlikely
( NO SOURCE ; take it or leave it )

Party pooper

 

[W@rwolf]

10T : it's a generic term. 9.5T or 10T, it's quite same thing.

a derivative of this config, with 2xSCALP instead of 6 Hammer.
View attachment 301481
3x2000L tanks = +/-6000 Kg with empy weight of pylon and tank.
2 x SCALP = 2 x (200kg pylon ? + 1300kg missile) = 3000 kg
4 MICA = 4 x 110+ kg
2 METEOR = 2 x 165kg

YEAH : nearly 10 T

Yes, the 10T is a rounded up figure i guess. But even then the report suggests that an increase in payload is expected (otherwise they wouldn't have mentioned anything about the payload)
What are the chances of SNECMA agreeing to integrate the new engine for the Indian jets? AFAIK the M-88-2E4 (-4E) was derived from the M-88-3 (ECO) proposal (retaining only the improvement in materials) and not the upgrades to the LP compressor and other modifications. The proposal was shelved since AdlA was not interested, not because it was unfeasible.

Even if MMRCA is scrapped, why would Dassault revise a price they have proposed in a competitive bidding ? Why would they undermine their price negotiations with other countries ?

Especially when they have to provide 50% offset ?

We would have renegotiated the contract, but not the price. That would always remain the same. As I said, it would be Naive to believe otherwise. Wishful thinking. Mental masturbation. call it what you want.

This also explains why only 36 is being negotiated.

I hope you have seen the link shared by @randomradio. As, i said earlier, the negotiations were started from square one. (even the specification was updated) The 50% offset does not affect the fly-away cost. The offset and customization cost comes to around $2 Billion.
As for the low number of 36, it's just the first tranche. My sources tell me that the negotiations for the rest 90 are going in parallel to the one for 36. Another negotiation for Rafale-Ms have also been started. As of now the total number of Rafales under negotiations stand close to 200 in 4 tranches.
Do you really think the Govt. is foolish enough to go for another aircraft type after paying for setting up the infrastructure for Rafale?

The ONLY place where India could have negotiated to lower the price would be the base set up. I am going to bet that is the strategy we have adopted.

Base upgrade would be kept at a minimum required. Additional upgrades would come in time and will not be part of deal with Dassault. The contracts would go to Indian companies.

Not quite, Indians lowered the price of the overall deal by reducing the price of the fly-away cost of each jet, by reducing the maintenance contract from 15 to 10 years, and also re-negotiating the price for customization and offset.

 

[BON PLAN]

Yes, the 10T is a rounded up figure i guess. But even then the report suggests that an increase in payload is expected (otherwise they wouldn't have mentioned anything about the payload)
What are the chances of SNECMA agreeing to integrate the new engine for the Indian jets? AFAIK the M-88-2E4 (-4E) was derived from the M-88-3 (ECO) proposal (retaining only the improvement in materials) and not the upgrades to the LP compressor and other modifications. The proposal was shelved since AdlA was not interested, not because it was unfeasible.

Qatar is intended to receive its Rafale with two 8.3 tons M88. Maybe the same for India ?

 

[WhyCry]

M88 doesn't require overhaul. AL-31FP requires overhaul every 1000 hours, nozzle every 500 hours. But IAF is performing overhauls even before the stipulated 1000 hours due to problems which are being fixed only now.

This is not a true statement. AL31 are definitely maintenance hog but not to this extreme. They are rated for 3000 hours life time and MTBO at 1000. but IAF is known to do it earlier.

 

[Taygibay]

... future purchases of Rafale will not have any offset amount attached to it, since we appear to be paying for offset in advance. That is impossible.

Unless it was planned before hand, all along and the likes?
If you know how much you can cram in the first order, it makes
the MII ones that much better.

I'm ready to believe that GoI took that approach.
Why don't you think it can?

Good day to you, Tay.