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

[randomradio]

I really don't know how some people assume that Gripens are 80-90 million USD a piece ... If I remember it was 2012 and Switzerland was offered a price of 3.5 Billion USD for 22 aircrafts , not including service and upkeep contracts and also not including other lifetime costs. And also to mention it was C/D version. 160Million USD per aircraft ....

If I include all costs like that is happening in that of Rafale case , Gripen E/F will not cost below 220 million USD per air craft.

If its less than 120 million USD or less including airframe, training, weapons and infrastructure and local manufacturing with TOT as SAAB calls it, I am all for Gripen E/F.

Nobody knows the unit cost of a Gripen E, but the actual contract costs are significantly lower than Rafale's. At least by half.

If you want proof, just look at the Brazil deal. The Gripens are coming in for about $150M with customization, ToT, 170% offsets, industrial production, weapons, co-development etc. Notice 170% offsets.

If you buy the Gripen without all the above, then it could easily come below $120M, with training, base infrastructure, weapons, spares/maintenance etc.

 

[Picdelamirand-oil]

5th gen is related to supercruiser and stealth. (and maybe sensor fusion)
I see no link between sensor fusion and stealth.

For "active cancellation" you need to locate the emitter.

 

[randomradio]

5th gen is related to supercruiser and stealth. (and maybe sensor fusion)
I see no link between sensor fusion and stealth.

Bro, stealth is entirely related to sensor fusion. Why do you think the only two other aircraft apart from Rafale that claim stealth are the F-22 and F-35?

Today, only Rafale, F-22 and F-35 have sensor fusion from what we know. And Gripen's coming up next.

Anyone know where do Tejas and F-16 stand on the graph posted by @randomradio ?

And he said Tejas is between F16 and SU35.

LCA Mk1: Sustained = 17-18 deg/s
Instantaneous = 28-30 deg/s

Mk1A, I don't know yet.

 

[Ankit Kumar]

About price, you can find all kind of datas :
"Dry" price : plane alone, without spare, training, weapon, support... Same price as when you buy a new car : The tank is even not filled and there's just some oïl in the motor. No tires in spare....
"complete" price : with support (how many year of support???), spares, test bench, training, airfield base adaptation .... some weapon? ALL DEPEND HOW DEEPER YOU WANT THIS SUPPORT.


F16 is on the slide.
And he said Tejas is between F16 and SU35.

The 3.5 billion USD includes 22 airframes, training of personnel , setting up of necessary infra at swiss bases and armaments.

Those don't include service and upkeep contracts and other lifetime costs.

Nobody knows the unit cost of a Gripen E, but the actual contract costs are significantly lower than Rafale's. At least by half.

If you want proof, just look at the Brazil deal. The Gripens are coming in for about $150M with customization, ToT, 170% offsets, industrial production, weapons, co-development etc. Notice 170% offsets.

If you buy the Gripen without all the above, then it could easily come below $120M, with training, base infrastructure, weapons, spares/maintenance etc.

I am quoting 3.1 Billion francs for 22 airframes of Gripen C/D as quoted in the swiss during the referendum.

That's not some vague figures.

As for the Brazilian contract , the cost did escalate when SAAB accommodates Brazilian demands. Now you know the demands and the increase in price too.

And again , 150 million USD , I get Gripen E/F with Israel AESA ( or any other , but not Italian ) , with all its desired armaments in Indian service , with full production rights ( means right to build everything in India), it covers the training and setting up of bases costs , I am ok.

 

[randomradio]

As for the Brazilian contract , the cost did escalate when SAAB accommodates Brazilian demands. Now you know the demands and the increase in price too.

The increase in price was about $1B for customization.

http://www.defensenews.com/story/de...eper-cooperation-47b-gripen-ng-deal/74415116/

The deal included a maintenance contract until 2050. Has $9B in offsets.

And again , 150 million USD , I get Gripen E/F with Israel AESA ( or any other , but not Italian ) , with all its desired armaments in Indian service , with full production rights ( means right to build everything in India), it covers the training and setting up of bases costs , I am ok.

Bro, have you even bothered to read the last few posts? I have already explained that Saab can replace all the Italian systems. They have their own GaN radar.

150 million will cover all of the above and more. Brazil got a better deal, including joint development of a two seater.

Plus, Brazil contract is a loan, ours will be direct cash.

 

[Ankit Kumar]

The increase in price was about $1B for customization.

http://www.defensenews.com/story/de...eper-cooperation-47b-gripen-ng-deal/74415116/

The deal included a maintenance contract until 2050. Has $9B in offsets.



Bro, have you even bothered to read the last few posts? I have already explained that Saab can replace all the Italian systems. They have their own GaN radar.

150 million will cover all of the above and more. Brazil got a better deal, including joint development of a two seater.

Plus, Brazil contract is a loan, ours will be direct cash.

As I say, if its even below 180 million USD, I am for all Gripen ....

And if single engine is what IAF wants, Gripen is better than the American options .. but if its due to cash... there is a other silent source too.

Personally , if Rafale does happen, the way we see or think it will, there will not be a 3rd kind of aircraft. Maybe follow on Flankers ....

 

[randomradio]

As I say, if its even below 180 million USD, I am for all Gripen ....

Guaranteed to be less than that. The Swiss deal was for $150M each. The Brazilian deal came at $130M and a huge compensation package.

And if single engine is what IAF wants, Gripen is better than the American options .. but if its due to cash... there is a other silent source too.

The American fighters are quite backward. Very old airframes, old avionics... At best we can order the SH because it has other advantages like payload and bigger concentration of avionics. The F-16 is entirely pointless. IMHO, they shouldn't buy either.

Parrikar is planning to buy 90 jets each for MII. That's actually easily manageable. The expectation is the other will be considerably cheaper than Rafale, like 30-40% less.

I actually believe we will only build Rafale and Gripen in India if only capability is a concern. An American fighter over these two will be a purely political decision. But the uncertainty is Parrikar may opt for the F-16. That way he can take care of IAF's requirement for a single engine fighter and an American fighter. That's why nothing can be ruled out.

 

[W@rwolf]

I still don't understand why you're fighting for a fighter that's never coming to IAF, there's no indication whatsoever about any kinds of talks or deals with SAAB for Gripen other than their desperate attempts at lauding Gripen at every corner to sway the Indian public.
As i've already explained before, Gripens are NOT coming under MMRCA requirements nor as light fighter requirements as its already reserved for Tejas and its iterations.

At least one of them is 100% guaranteed.

Guaranteed? On whose authority?

They need to keep lobbying because nothing is a done deal. In fact everything depends on the costs and ToT.

That goes against the whole logic of lobbying! DM's statement clearly states that the line is 'more or less' confirmed. Then why does SAAB keep on vying for public appreciation? If they were indeed in talks with MoD, all they would have to do is convince the negotiation committee, not the public.

The issue is it is possible that AMCA will be made around the same time as the Mk2. ADA is willing to finish development, but it seems an accelerated development of AMCA will kill LCA Mk2.

TDs should take off in 2019 and 2020. First prototype in 2021 and at least 4 would be flying by 2023. So AMCA should hit production by 2027. So the IAF and IN may decide to invest in the AMCA by then.

You do realize both are different classes don't you? Why would AMCA kill MK2 when both of them have different roles to fullfil in the force? Its Gripen that will kill MK2 is inducted. And if you mean funds, the Mk2 is going to cost just a fraction of Gripen for its entire lifetime.

No chance.

LCA is between the F-16 and Su-35.

That's BS. Completely inaccurate and doesn't give any indications on what parameters these figures were calculated as pointed out by other members too. Gripen is good, but not at the top of the chain.

Only with TVC.

No. Rafale has a higher TWR and low speed handling to out maneuver Gripens at low speed and altitude. And you're contradicting yourselves. If TVC was all that was needed why is Su-35 and Raptor behind Gripen in the chart you provided above?

We are not. GaN is coming in only for Spectra, not for the radar. The GaN program for the Rafale is post 2021. And it's unclear if we are going to get that in our production versions. Maybe as options in the future.

We're negotiating for the F3R version which will have the upgrades under DEDIRA and INCAS progrms slate to be operational by 2018. GaN will be integrated into SPECTA and RBE2 as well.

Saab has its own electronics company. They are offering a Saab designed and made GaN radar. THey can offer IRST and all other electronics as well. Plus, they will all be similar to what's going on LCA Mk2 and N-LCA.

As of today, IAF has confirmed that they won't be buying the Mk2. They will go for new upgrades on Mk1A itself.

SAAB may have its own project, but i dont think it'll be at par with RBE2 or even the new Raven. Why do you want similar when you can get the same thing saving money on inventory and spares. Hence my comments earlier that it wont bring anything new to the table that MK2 wont already have.
Also IAF never said it will never buy Mk2. IAF said and i quote "FOR NOW".

The subcontractors will be Indian, not Swedish.

Uhh..no. The assembly might be done by Indian sub contractors. But for tech transfers and contracts, MoD will have to negotiate with each sub contractor of Gripen separately and SAAB isnt the sole owner of the tech on it.

And before anybody jumps at this, I will get this out of the way too. Gripen will not interfere with the LCA program.

Would you mind elaborating? Im sure everyone will be interested to know why procuring another fighter in they same class as Tejas wont kill off its subsequent development.

 

[randomradio]

Guaranteed? On whose authority?

Parrikar.

That goes against the whole logic of lobbying! DM's statement clearly states that the line is 'more or less' confirmed. Then why does SAAB keep on vying for public appreciation? If they were indeed in talks with MoD, all they would have to do is convince the negotiation committee, not the public.

The lobbying will continue until contract negotiations start. Each company has its own method.

They recently lost a deal because of public opinion.

You do realize both are different classes don't you? Why would AMCA kill MK2 when both of them have different roles to fullfil in the force?

The problem is not role, it is priority. ADA is prioritizing the AMCA.

Its Gripen that will kill MK2 is inducted. And if you mean funds, the Mk2 is going to cost just a fraction of Gripen for its entire lifetime.

Mk2 won't be inducted. We are yet to see if the navy will also induct N-LCA Mk2. At least, for now, the IAF has said no.

No. Rafale has a higher TWR and low speed handling to out maneuver Gripens at low speed and altitude. And you're contradicting yourselves. If TVC was all that was needed why is Su-35 and Raptor behind Gripen in the chart you provided above?

Those numbers are without TVC.

We're negotiating for the F3R version which will have the upgrades under DEDIRA and INCAS progrms slate to be operational by 2018. GaN will be integrated into SPECTA and RBE2 as well.

GaN for RBE-2 is post-2021. It will be a conformal array, they are going to take the radar out of the noise and apply it to the fuselage.

SAAB may have its own project, but i dont think it'll be at par with RBE2 or even the new Raven.

GaN will push it past the other radars.

Uhh..no. The assembly might be done by Indian sub contractors. But for tech transfers and contracts, MoD will have to negotiate with each sub contractor of Gripen separately and SAAB isnt the sole owner of the tech on it.

What? Where did you get that? No. Saab, as do other companies, come as a group for negotiations. All stakeholders are present during negotiations.

Would you mind elaborating? Im sure everyone will be interested to know why procuring another fighter in they same class as Tejas wont kill off its subsequent development.

It is impossible to kill Tejas's development because IAF has already made commitments to buy 120. In comparison, all other contracts are still vapourware today, even Rafale.

The navy has shown interest in 45, for now. And Saab is being roped in to complete the development of AF Mk2 and N-Mk2. The AF Mk2 is to be exported. And the tech being developed in the Mk2 program will see its cousins on the AMCA. So it's a tech roadmap for the ADA.

The IAF will absorb the tech being developed in the Mk2 program in the Mk1A also. So the Mk1A will see faster absorption of tech compared to other older imported aircraft.

 

[W@rwolf]

Parrikar.

Show me quote where he declares the name of any of those three jets as the finalist for the 2nd production line.

The lobbying will continue until contract negotiations start. Each company has its own method.

They recently lost a deal because of public opinion.

Exactly! the lobbying will stop IF they are invited for negotiations. Parrikar has already said the jet has been 'more or less' finalized (i feel like i'm going in circles here!) that means talks have already begun. Put two and two together.

The problem is not role, it is priority. ADA is prioritizing the AMCA.

Are you saying that ADA is incapable of pursuing two or more programs at once? Do you know how many they have going on right now? And again if its funds that you're talking about im sure the Govt knows whats best.

Mk2 won't be inducted. We are yet to see if the navy will also induct N-LCA Mk2. At least, for now, the IAF has said no.

Are you just being stubborn? Navy has already expressed commitment to induct N-LCA and is solely funding the project without IAF. The reason why IAF said that is because the cannot wait any longer due to SQN shortfall. Hence decided to go for Mk-1A with compromises to stop the slide in aircraft numbers. They themselves have said that there's a need for 300+ light fighter once the MiG-21 are completely retired. Mk-2 is coming buddy, whether you like it or not.

Those numbers are without TVC.

How stupid must the person have been to make such a comparison without even considering the aircraft's true potential.
In an earlier comment to someone you said the chart represented the aircraft's maximum capability w.r.t. turns, and yet they never considered Su-35 most critical feature for maneuverability?

GaN for RBE-2 is post-2021. It will be a conformal array, they are going to take the radar out of the noise and apply it to the fuselage.

Sorry, but the testbed is already flying with GaN modules. Aim is 2018 and not 2021. (dunno where your're getting these numbers from) Im sure @Picdelamirand-oil or @BON PLAN can share more info on the subject.
Conformal array is part of 'smart-skin' programs to improve the SPECTRA's situational awareness. The radar array is a completely different system. (Take the radar out of the nose and apply it to the fuselage?? Really?)

GaN will push it past the other radars.

And the other's will be sitting idle. Im sure the Thales and Selex (in this situation) with much more experience in radar designing can do a better job than the newcomer.

What? Where did you get that? No. Saab, as do other companies, come as a group for negotiations. All stakeholders are present during negotiations.

SAAB is nothing but an integrator, doesn't own complete rights to the subsystems. Hence separate contracts must be drawn up for each stakeholder in the Gripen program.

It is impossible to kill Tejas's development because IAF has already made commitments to buy 120. In comparison, all other contracts are still vapourware today, even Rafale.

The navy has shown interest in 45, for now. And Saab is being roped in to complete the development of AF Mk2 and N-Mk2. The AF Mk2 is to be exported. And the tech being developed in the Mk2 program will see its cousins on the AMCA. So it's a tech roadmap for the ADA.

The IAF will absorb the tech being developed in the Mk2 program in the Mk1A also. So the Mk1A will see faster absorption of tech compared to other older imported aircraft.

And yet you said AMCA will kill Mk-2 (you're self-contradicting a lot of statements)
Rafale negotiations are complete buddy, not "vapour" anymore.
HAL had issued an RFI to SAAB for assistance in Mk-1A program recently. All they will provide is expertise. Dassault is being considered for NLCA development especially landing gear issue. Mk-2 will be exported once IAF has inducted sufficient number of them. I can see Mk-1As being offered for export also even before Mk-2 production begins.
Ofcourse the tech designed for Tejas will find its way to AMCA, no surprises there.
Mk-1A has limited scope for upgradation due to the limited space availability. That's why IAF will be looking at Mk-2s to meet its requirements (but they get some breathing space with the induction of Mk-1As for the time-being).

 

[randomradio]

Show me quote where he declares the name of any of those three jets as the finalist for the 2nd production line.

I don't think you understand what's happening.

Are you saying that ADA is incapable of pursuing two or more programs at once? Do you know how many they have going on right now? And again if its funds that you're talking about im sure the Govt knows whats best.

It depends on what they are prioritizing first.

Are you just being stubborn? Navy has already expressed commitment to induct N-LCA and is solely funding the project without IAF. The reason why IAF said that is because the cannot wait any longer due to SQN shortfall. Hence decided to go for Mk-1A with compromises to stop the slide of aircraft number. They themselves have said that there's a need for 300+ light fighter once the MiG-21 are completely retired. Mk-2 is coming buddy, whether you like it or not.

I don't think you understood what I've said.

Mk2 is coming, IAF is not buying it. I'll go by what AM Raha said. Not what you are saying.

In an earlier comment to someone you said the chart represented the aircraft's maximum capability w.r.t. turns, and yet they never considered Su-35 most critical feature for maneuverability?

Why should the max capability with TVC be considered in the first place? That's classified, far more than regular aerodynamics which can actually be calculated with the right data.

Sorry, but the testbed is already flying with GaN modules. Aim is 2018 and not 2021. (dunno where your're getting these numbers from) Im sure @Picdelamirand-oil or @BON PLAN can share more info on the subject.
Conformal array is part of 'smart-skin' programs to improve the SPECTRA's situational awareness. The radar array is a completely different system. (Take the radar out of the nose and apply it to the fuselage?? Really?)

I discuss this stuff every day with the gentlemen you mentioned, just not here, on a different forum.

And the other's will be sitting idle. Im sure the Thales and Selex (in this situation) with much more experience in radar designing can do a better job that the newcomer.

GaN is simply superior hardware. Selex and Thales won't keep up with Saab's new radar without GaN.

SAAB is nothing but an integrator, doesn't own complete rights to the subsystems. Hence separate contracts must be drawn up for each stakeholder in the Gripen program.

Another instance where you show ignorance.

Rafale negotiations are complete buddy, not "vapour" anymore.

Really? You're telling me that.

Dassault is being considered for NLCA development especially landing gear issue.

Yes, landing gear tech is part of offsets.

Mk-2 will be exported once IAF has inducted sufficient number of them.

Why don't you tell that to AM Raha then? Even he doesn't know that.

Do you know that there is another single engine 5th gen aircraft planned? Stealth, supercruise, internal bays, Israeli avionics, MKI equivalent range etc. Squadron service expected in the 4th year after go ahead. Know about this?

Go back to Page 123 on this thread and start reading. You will learn about the actual requirements of the IAF and how much time they have for induction. I have provided all the numbers long before the media.

 

[W@rwolf]

I don't think you understand what's happening.

I don't think you understood what I've said.

Another instance where you show ignorance.

Well, we're just going in circles because of your inexplicable obsession with Gripen!

I ask you for a quote or proof of your claims and you renege. Then you contradict your own statements. I think you're the one who doesn't understand.

It depends on what they are prioritizing first.

Priority? Yes. But outright cancellation of a program? No.

Mk2 is coming, IAF is not buying it. I'll go by what AM Raha said. Not what you are saying.

IAF is not committing to Mk-2, AS OF NOW. I get it.
Please quote ACM Raha where he say's that IAF will 'never' go for further development of Mk-1A (ie Mk-2) in the future.

Why should the max capability with TVC be considered in the first place? That's classified, far more than regular aerodynamics which can actually be calculated with the right data.

Data from TVC (the vector limits?) is classified? So they just used whatever available aerodynamic data to calculate the aircraft's performance to submit a report to (a) Govt. where you said the max capability was considered and did not require data that includes TVC! Seems legit.

I discuss this stuff every day with the gentlemen you mentioned, just not here, on a different forum.

Maybe, I'm also sure @Picdelamirand-oil had mentioned the 2018 time frame in one of his comments (you should pay attention more i guess)

GaN is simply superior hardware. Selex and Thales won't keep up with Saab's new radar without GaN.

GaN is indeed superior to GaAs, no denying that. But to say Thales and Selex don't have a GaN program of their own....

Really? You're telling me that.

You seem surprised!

Why don't you tell that to AM Raha then? Even he doesn't know that.

Do you know that there is another single engine 5th gen aircraft planned? Stealth, supercruise, internal bays, Israeli avionics, MKI equivalent range etc. Squadron service expected in the 4th year after go ahead. Know about this?

Go back to Page 123 on this thread and start reading. You will learn about the actual requirements of the IAF and how much time they have for induction. I have provided all the numbers long before the media.

And I'm sure he share every one of his views with you.

Ofcourse i know about the 'planned' LSA. It'll be the next iteration of Tejas after the Mk-2. Although your comment about MKI equivalent range is pushing it.

In an ideal situation i'd have sided with the opinion that the current Mk-2 design be changed to make it a completely new 5th gen airframe and induct it after the Mk-1A. But unfortunate a lack of foresight into sqn strength and other unfortunate events does not permit it. Hence the IAF cannot wait for the redesign of LCA into a 5th gen aircraft and hence must induct them in their 4th gen format to make up for the shortfall, in the form of MK-2 (which are also unfortunately late)

I did go through the pages you mentioned to make sure i haven't missed anything. Your figures about IAF requirements are fine, but its the actual 'jets' where you went wrong. The Tejas (which is an MRCA in its own right) is sufficient to fill the void left by the retiring MiG-21s. There's no requirement for Gripen in IAFs fleet. IAF has never hinted at it nor they ever will. Gripens might come faster than the Mk-2, but at what expense? IAF is trying to reduce the type of aircrafts in its inventory by inducting multi-role aircrafts and you suggest they'll go for another jet that already is intended for the same role as Tejas?

The main idea behind the second MRCA is cheap costs.

So, Gripen will be cheaper than Mk-2?

 

[C130]

The IAF has no use for the E-2D but the Indian navy is interested in it however they aren't interested in the F-18.


I still fail to see why the unfunded "advanced super hornet" is a better option than than the Rafale. It would cost fluky the same (if not more so), have less outright performance, be limited by the restrictive end user agreements the US would impose and would not be able to be used as nuclear delivery platforms.

36 Rafale for 8.9 billion euros
36 ASH for $2.5 billion

don't see how that's even remotely close in cost.

 

[randomradio]

Well, we're just going in circles because of your inexplicable obsession with Gripen!

I ask you for a quote or proof of your claims and you renege. Then you contradict your own statements. I think you're the one who doesn't understand.

Parrikar plans to have 1 twin and 1 single engine fighter made in India. This is apart from Rafale. Just google it, it's all over the place.

Priority? Yes. But outright cancellation of a program? No.

Dude, you aren't understanding. Mk2 program will continue, but IAF isn't buying any.

IAF is not committing to Mk-2, AS OF NOW. I get it.
Please quote ACM Raha where he say's that IAF will 'never' go for further development of Mk-1A (ie Mk-2) in the future.

Yes, he's confirmed that. You won't get it in a newspaper quote. He's confirmed that any LCAs to be bought will no longer be divided into Mk1 Mk2 etc. IAF will buy the Tejas. And that jet will be upgraded as and when new tech is available.

Maybe, I'm also sure @Picdelamirand-oil had mentioned the 2018 time frame in one of his comments (you should pay attention more i guess)

Even Picdel doesn't know. The data came from a French pilot.

GaN is there, but it's part of the conformal array program that will come after 2021. Right now, GaN is only for Spectra.

GaN is indeed superior to GaAs, no denying that. But to say Thales and Selex don't have a GaN program of their own....

Can you say where I said that? Don't talk when you don't know how the Rafale program is proceeding. I have been following it for years now.

GaN for radar is 5 years away. It's targeted for service entry after 2021.

Follow this thread. I hope information is there.
https://defence.pk/threads/the-rafale-hidden-beauties-and-its-future.422896/

You seem surprised!

Dude, go back previous pages, I've said the same long ago. I've known since last month when negotiations completed. That's why I was sarcastic in my reply. I've also said FGFA will end up being signed first, it's already being looked at by the minstry.

Ofcourse i know about the 'planned' LSA. It'll be the next iteration of Tejas after the Mk-2. Although your comment about MKI equivalent range is pushing it.

Oh, God! No. Stop responding to my posts. It's clear you are just babbling now. The designer of the LSA is on another forum where we discuss these things. His jet has nothing to do with LCA. He is not affiliated with ADA or DRDO or HAL. In fact, he won't even touch HAL with a barge pole.

He plans to have the Israelis make the cockpit initially and have the jet made and assembled by the IAF at their BRDs.

In an ideal situation i'd have sided with the opinion that the current Mk-2 design be changed to make it a completely new 5th gen airframe and induct it after the Mk-1A.

That's impossible.

There's no requirement for Gripen in IAFs fleet.

If we are not buying Gripen then we are buying F-16. That's the choice for a single engine fighter, Gripen or F-16. Out of those, I support Gripen for obvious reasons. And I know that India has signed some sort of agreement with Saab in Singapore.

So, Gripen will be cheaper than Mk-2?

Gripen will be far more advanced than the Mk2. Its cost will reflect that. Gripen's IOC is in 2021 while Mk2's IOC is in 2023. AMCA is expected to get its IOC in 2024. You get it now?

Do you see why Mk2 is impossible for the IAF? AMCA is a very very high priority project. It has only a 5-6 year TD to serial production stage, unlike LCA which has taken 15 years.

After 2027 IAF will only be inducting FGFA and AMCA.

 

[Picdelamirand-oil]

36 Rafale for 8.9 billion euros
36 ASH for $2.5 billion

don't see how that's even remotely close in cost.

Honestly $2.5 billions for 36 ASH is a price for a fly away aircraft. Can you agree?
And 8.9 billion is not for a fly away aircraft.
The fly away price of a rafale is around $ 73 millions depending of the version (C,B,or M) and then 36 Rafale price is $ 2.628 billions

Le coût unitaire (hors coût de développement) de 74 M€2013 pour le Rafale B (pour 110 avions) de 68,8 M€2013 pour le Rafale C (pour 118 avions) et de 79 M€2011pour le Rafale M (pour 58 avions).

http://www.senat.fr/rap/a13-158-8/a13-158-814.html
This is an official report from the French "SENAT"
Translation:
Unit cost (excluding development costs) of 74 M € 2013 for the Rafale B (110 aircraft) of 68.8 M € 2013 for the Rafale C (to 118 aircraft) and € 79 million 2011pour Rafale M (for 58 aircraft).

It is important to note that the program costs and acquisition are all set by the state with the value added tax included: that means that the cost are the following:
Rafale B two-seat Air Force: 74 M € with VAT and 61.87 without taxe ====>$ 68.68 Million
Rafale C single-seat Air Force: 68.8 M € with VAT and 57.52 without taxe ====>$ 63.85 Million
Rafale M, single-seat Navy : 79 M € with VAT and 66.05 without taxe ====>$ 73.31Million