Dassault Rafale, tender | News & Discussions

[sancho]

Hey soaringphnx, welcome to the PD forum!

In my opinion, the rafale is the best bet for India (remember, the IAF originally wanted Mirages)...

That's a good analysis and pretty much sums up what I think too. The Rafale simply offers the most balanced performance, as well as the most advantages in terms of ToT, sanction proofness, JV/co-developments and less risk of delays.
The only downside are the high costs, but imo they are worth it!

EADS has offered India to join the consortum as a fifth nation. The French have also indicated that they intend to go beyond a buyer-seller relationship. That means we will have a say in future upgrades of the Typhoon or Rafale. So isn't it better to choose one of them? Too bad they are the most expensive fighters in the competition.

The Eurofighter is not offered with an equal partnership as a fifth consortium member! That is a mistake that many people thinks, but in reality they offered only a partnership to produce avionics for the EF. That means all they do is outsourcing a part of the production to reduce costs, but it doesn't mean India will get any say for future developments of the EF.
Rafale did not openly specify what it means when they say, "beyond a buyer seller relationship". If we took the chance to be the first customer of the Rafale, with an order between 126 and 200, we surely would be an equal partner, not sure what they will, or can offer now when they already theam up with UAE and Brazil.

If we compare the bids with economical benefits, like JV, partnerships, of course EF, Rafale and Boeing will be the best choices, because they can offer the biggest offsets in return. EF and Rafale additionally also provides the most ToT, they clearly offer the most in return for the costs.

In my view, ToT is over hyped. We have enough on our plates with LCA and Su 30 MKI from a local manufacture perspective. With the economic and industrial base we have, sanctions will do pretty little if that ever happens. And with F 18 the only proven platform apart from F 16, my vote's still with the bug..

Hi Karan, ToT is an important point for the MoD, otherwise they wouldn't askes for it in such high ammounts. Also LCA MK1 and the SU 30 MKI use mainly older gen of techs, MMRCA instead offer us the chance of ToT from latest, maybe even next generation techs and that's a big chance for us. Supercruise, TVC, the surveillance capabilities of Spectra are important for later LCA upgrades, or AMCA, so ToT indeed can be important for us!
Besides the US fighters only the Rafale has proved it self during war time operations, at least in A2G operations. It will be fielded in Afghanistan by next year again btw, while neither any Gripen, nor EF version, did some thing similar. The Rafale can do that, because it is far in front of them in terms of operational capabilities and developments and is an advantage for India too.

 

[karan.1970]

Hey soaringphnx, welcome to the PD forum!




Hi Karan, ToT is an important point for the MoD, otherwise they wouldn't askes for it in such high ammounts. Also LCA MK1 and the SU 30 MKI use mainly older gen of techs, MMRCA instead offer us the chance of ToT from latest, maybe even next generation techs and that's a big chance for us. Supercruise, TVC, the surveillance capabilities of Spectra are important for later LCA upgrades, or AMCA, so ToT indeed can be important for us!
Besides the US fighters only the Rafale has proved it self during war time operations, at least in A2G operations. It will be fielded in Afghanistan by next year again btw, while neither any Gripen, nor EF version, did some thing similar. The Rafale can do that, because it is far in front of them in terms of operational capabilities and developments and is an advantage for India too.

ToT is certainly important and a factor, but should not be the deciding one. There are other ways to get the know how.. May be a separate deal itself for the same with the company best suited for our ToT needs. My view is that we have 2 distinct needs here. 126 cutting edge proven aircraft. Aircraft manufacturing know how for our own indigenous CA program. The 1st one is insurance and 2nd one is investment. Why mix the 2 and end up compromising on both. Buy the most kick *** aircraft with or without ToT. Buy the technical know how as a separate arrangement on the lines of Kaveri or Brahmos deals

The same reason why I never buy ULIPs as a combo product for Insurance and Investment

 

[anathema]

Cross posting from EF thread..

Saab can say much, but without the approval of Selsex Galileo, they can't offer ToT and the Italians are a member of the EF consortium. So wait and see what happens when Gripen NG and EF would be shortlisted.
Be it EWS, or data links, both is already under co-development with the Israelis and they are the number 1 in the world when it comes to avionics, so don't expect a change there.
Imo, the deal will only go to the US (F18SH), for political reasons.

Let's discuss this in the MMRCA thread please and not in all these EF threads.

That is hardly the point. The fact that CEO of SAAB is on record for stating so in front world media makes me think that SAAB must have thought or must have clarified this with SELEX. No other vendor has stated as such.
We can only make a educated guess on what will be or what wont be based on the public media reports. And based on those reports SAAB's ToT offer is better than rest with possible exception of Russian's.


EWS or data links -- co development with Israeli's -- can you kindly provide more info on this. I am not aware of this development. Gripen is known for its Data Link's and sensor fusion so it would be wirthwhile to have knowledge on those. With regards to Israeli's being number 1 , i personally consider Americans as numero uno but thats just a personal opinion.

I'd hate to see F18SH win....its just a bomb truck IMO....we already have one machine SU 30 which is quite capable , would want a plane which can complement Su 30 and not compete with it....Hope GoI gives some thoughts.

 

[anathema]

Hi Karan, ToT is an important point for the MoD, otherwise they wouldn't askes for it in such high ammounts.

What amounts ? Has MoD specified a set amount for ToT ? What will they compare against ? Can you please provide some info , sorry i didnt knew this ?

Also LCA MK1 and the SU 30 MKI use mainly older gen of techs, MMRCA instead offer us the chance of ToT from latest, maybe even next generation techs and that's a big chance for us. Supercruise, TVC, the surveillance capabilities of Spectra are important for later LCA upgrades, or AMCA, so ToT indeed can be important for us!
Besides the US fighters only the Rafale has proved it self during war time operations, at least in A2G operations. It will be fielded in Afghanistan by next year again btw, while neither any Gripen, nor EF version, did some thing similar. The Rafale can do that, because it is far in front of them in terms of operational capabilities and developments and is an advantage for India too.

As much as i love Rafale (its my fav plane and one i hope would win)...ToT on technologies such as Spectra - is simply not going to happen (IMO). Imagine a technology which has consumed more than half of fighter planes development costs -- This is spectra. France or Thales simply will not hand it over to us or any other people ...atleast not right away.
True Rafale was used in A2G operations in Afghanistan...a real operational experience which looks very good on its resume. But Gripen has equally well developed A2G mode , so has Mig 35. Gripen didnt get a chance to go to Afghanistan and hence no operational exp, Rafale was lucky enough to have one. I am pretty sure Gripen would have proved itself if it would have participated in AF. IAF has tested all these fighters for A2G modes and other modes during evaluation. So the point that Rafale is far ahead in terms operational capabilities doesnt add much weight. On other hand low unit cost , low operating costs , low maintenance , good sensor fusion , good side kick to MKI makes Gripen a good bargain. However the biggest disadvantage of Gripen is that there no political gains - unfortunately this has nothing to do with plane itself.

My opinion is,
Rafale is the best plane.
Gripen is the most practical choice. IAF's opinions on Gripen is also very well formed.
F16 or F18 would be the choice if US decides to vote US in favour of Security council seat.

 

[anathema]

The 1st one is insurance and 2nd one is investment. Why mix the 2 and end up compromising on both. Buy the most kick *** aircraft with or without ToT.

Karan Bhai, we are known to make the best possible deal around (after months and months of barganing.

I wouldnt be surprised if Antony says to Air Marshal -- Humain sab kuch chaiye ...ye doosra voosra deal firse possible nahi hain....doosra deal main opppsition corruption ka ilzaam lagyegi .....

Just kidding...

 

[sancho]

That is hardly the point. The fact that CEO of SAAB is on record for stating so in front world media makes me think that SAAB must have thought or must have clarified this with SELEX. No other vendor has stated as such.

That's not correct, be it Rafale, EF, or Mig 35, all are offered with full ToT and source codes, Rafale was even the first, that offered something like that.

We can only make a educated guess on what will be or what wont be based on the public media reports. And based on those reports SAAB's ToT offer is better than rest with possible exception of Russian's.

As I said before, Saab's offer can't be better than Rafales, Migs, or EFs, because they developed all important parts on their own, Saab didn't. LM even officially said that Saabs integrates 30% of US techs, of which they clearly can't provide ToT. The US are ready to provide useful ToT for their own fightes, let alone for foreign competitiors.

EWS or data links -- co development with Israeli's -- can you kindly provide more info on this. I am not aware of this development.
Gripen is known for its Data Link's and sensor fusion so it would be wirthwhile to have knowledge on those. With regards to Israeli's being number 1 , i personally consider Americans as numero uno but thats just a personal opinion.

LCAs Mayavi EWS was co-developed by Israels Elbit and Elta won a competition for data links for IAF:

domain-b.com : IAI bags contract for IAF's pilot operational data link project

Also BEL even made the data links for INs P8Is alone, so I doubt that we need more ToT of another source. What we need is radar, or engine techs, where LCA is still lacking behind and Saab can't offer that.
Btw, the fact that many US companies co-develop avionics with Israeli companies shows how good they really are, I even expect the European to be better than the US, they only have not enough fundings like the US.

I'd hate to see F18SH win....its just a bomb truck IMO....we already have one machine SU 30 which is quite capable , would want a plane which can complement Su 30 and not compete with it....Hope GoI gives some thoughts.

I don't think its a bad fighter in general, but I also don't want to see it winning, for a numbers of reasons.

What amounts ? Has MoD specified a set amount for ToT ? What will they compare against ? Can you please provide some info , sorry i didnt knew this ?

Can't give you an exact figure, but in many reports it was said to be unusually high, be it from Indian, German, or French sources that I read.


True Rafale was used in A2G operations in Afghanistan...a real operational experience which looks very good on its resume. But Gripen has equally well developed A2G mode , so has Mig 35. Gripen didnt get a chance to go to Afghanistan and hence no operational exp, Rafale was lucky enough to have one. I am pretty sure Gripen would have proved itself if it would have participated in AF. IAF has tested all these fighters for A2G modes and other modes during evaluation. So the point that Rafale is far ahead in terms operational capabilities doesnt add much weight. On other hand low unit cost , low operating costs , low maintenance , good sensor fusion , good side kick to MKI makes Gripen a good bargain. However the biggest disadvantage of Gripen is that there no political gains - unfortunately this has nothing to do with plane itself.

That's not correct mate, several countries have earlier versions of the Gripen, only Gripen NG is not available yet, but the problem is that they are less developed and capable in this field than the Rafale.

If we Rank A2G capabilities of the contendors, it would be like this:

1. F18SH
2. Rafale
3. F16IN

All ready and operational, with the highest payloads, range and variety of weapons.

4. Gripen NG
5. Mig 35
6. EF

The other 3 are not close to them yet, especially not in deep penetration missions. Imo A2G will be one of the most important points for the decision.

 

[sancho]

My view is that we have 2 distinct needs here. 126 cutting edge proven aircraft. Aircraft manufacturing know how for our own indigenous CA program. The 1st one is insurance and 2nd one is investment. Why mix the 2 and end up compromising on both. Buy the most kick *** aircraft with or without ToT.

Hi Karan, that's a real interesting point, but why do you think we can't have both? The most kick... fighter and know how for LCA program?

What does LCA need? A partner for Kaveri engine and for AESA radar right? And who has a ready developed AESA radar and offers us an engine co-development? The Rafale!


@ soaringphnx

Here is the source, that says what kind of partnership is offered with EF:

So you are differentiating between the partnership you have in India and the existing partnerships in Europe with other member countries?

Yes. It must be different because I would like to point out that India has the great opportunity to become our industrial partner. However, it cannot be that we say “Okay. India could become a fifth partner and then we divide everything through five instead of four.” Of course this is not possible, let us be clear among ourselves.

http://www.livemint.com/2009/08/10231950/8216We-will-shift-workload.html?h=B



Also here is the report about IAF officers that flown in Rafale simulators:

This Thursday, two Indian officers have flown in Rafale

Saturday, 20 March, 2010

This Thursday, March 18, two Indian officers were able to explore and test by themselves all the qualities of the Rafale.

After a morning briefing the Indian pilot -- very experienced pilot on board a plane just for him - Could take off in his Rafale, intercept and identify a fighterr with optical sighting of Rafale, engage multiple targets air-sourced located beyond the visual range of sight, firing a salvo of AASM -- the new GPS French bomb - Landed on the targets detected and recalls during the mission, before landing ... all in one hour of simulated flight.

The two Indian officers were able to see the realism of the Rafale simulator, using this two-seater flight tested what they had learned in less than a day.

They left the Fighter Squadron 1 / 7 amased by how easy our plane is and gave a smile

 

[anathema]

Thanks for the detailed reply.

That's not correct, be it Rafale, EF, or Mig 35, all are offered with full ToT and source codes, Rafale was even the first, that offered something like that.

Really !!! i dont believe anybody has offered to share source codes, i could find only Gripen's open offer on the public doman (exception MiG). Can you give further info.

As I said before, Saab's offer can't be better than Rafales, Migs, or EFs, because they developed all important parts on their own, Saab didn't. LM even officially said that Saabs integrates 30% of US techs, of which they clearly can't provide ToT. The US are ready to provide useful ToT for their own fightes, let alone for foreign competitiors.

And this is precisely the reason why SAAB might be willing to sell itself to India. They know they havent developed much , so give full knowledge with whatever they have developed - Make this as a selling point. Other coutries since they have developed systems on their own -- might be less willing to share considering the effort and the development costs involved. Technologies such as Spectra will be highly unlikely to be offered as part of ToT. Same with Engine - Otherwise MoD would never gone ahead with Snecma partnership for Kaveri.

LCAs Mayavi EWS was co-developed by Israels Elbit and Elta won a competition for data links for IAF:

domain-b.com : IAI bags contract for IAF's pilot operational data link project

Also BEL even made the data links for INs P8Is alone, so I doubt that we need more ToT of another source. What we need is radar, or engine techs, where LCA is still lacking behind and Saab can't offer that.
Btw, the fact that many US companies co-develop avionics with Israeli companies shows how good they really are, I even expect the European to be better than the US, they only have not enough fundings like the US.

Thanks ...but where is the co development or ToT for Mayavi ? AFAIK they have been bought off shelf with no inputs from our side. Similarly for data links ?

 

[soaringphnx]

The Eurofighter is not offered with an equal partnership as a fifth consortium member! That is a mistake that many people thinks, but in reality they offered only a partnership to produce avionics for the EF. That means all they do is outsourcing a part of the production to reduce costs, but it doesn't mean India will get any say for future developments of the EF.
Rafale did not openly specify what it means when they say, "beyond a buyer seller relationship". If we took the chance to be the first customer of the Rafale, with an order between 126 and 200, we surely would be an equal partner, not sure what they will, or can offer now when they already theam up with UAE and Brazil.

If we compare the bids with economical benefits, like JV, partnerships, of course EF, Rafale and Boeing will be the best choices, because they can offer the biggest offsets in return. EF and Rafale additionally also provides the most ToT, they clearly offer the most in return for the costs.

Thanks for clearing that sancho!!

What does LCA need? A partner for Kaveri engine and for AESA radar right? And who has a ready developed AESA radar and offers us an engine co-development? The Rafale!

My point exactly!

 

[soaringphnx]

Its costing Brazil more than $4 Billion dollars for 36 plane deal. I doubt if it includes ToT.

According to Wikipedia:

The Defence Ministry has allocated Rs 42,000 crore (US$ 8.95 billion) for the purchase of 126 Multi-Role Combat Aircraft.

How do EADS and Dassault plan to provide us with 126 fighters if it costs 4 billion dollars for just 36 Rafales? I'm not contradicting anyone, I was just wondering. After all, they wouldn't want this to be a financial liability, do they?

 

[anathema]

According to Wikipedia:



How do EADS and Dassault plan to provide us with 126 fighters if it costs 4 billion dollars for just 36 Rafales? I'm not contradicting anyone, I was just wondering. After all, they wouldn't want this to be a financial liability, do they?

Trust me -- Everybody has the same questions and no clear answers. However even if you take any contender - F16,Gripen , etc...10 Billion dollars for any contender is not possible in todays age ..considering that the deal will also includes spares , infra set up, cost of Tot , etc...10 billion dollars is a neanderthal figure...its no longer applicable.

Questions is what is the real budget ?

 

[anathema]

If we Rank A2G capabilities of the contendors, it would be like this:

1. F18SH
2. Rafale
3. F16IN

All ready and operational, with the highest payloads, range and variety of weapons.

4. Gripen NG
5. Mig 35
6. EF

The other 3 are not close to them yet, especially not in deep penetration missions. Imo A2G will be one of the most important points for the decision.

I would like to point again that Gripen is fully developed A2G role. Note that Gripen NG is further development to Gripen C/D. Gripen C/D is fully operational and thoroughly tested for A2 G role -- Similar to F16 In.

 

[jha]

^^^ BTW 124 F/A-18 are being bought by USN for $5.3 Bill..in FMS route which will be done most likely if it wins does not allow companies to make profit..so considering the fact that the sizes of tender are almost same ...can we expect them to offer a ~7 bil. deal..?
Now the true colour of US will be out..whether they really care about FMS route or,it is just another propaganda..

 

[soaringphnx]

After reading so many of anathema's posts, I can't help feeling that the Gripen might be a logical choice for the IAF as it has good performance, low cost, low maintainence and supercruse. My vote is still for the rafale though.

 

[anathema]

^^^ BTW 124 F/A-18 are being bought by USN for $5.3 Bill..in FMS route which will be done most likely if it wins does not allow companies to make profit..so considering the fact that the sizes of tender are almost same ...can we expect them to offer a ~7 bil. deal..?
Now the true colour of US will be out..whether they really care about FMS route or,it is just another propaganda..

Coool thats news .....but then it doesnt include spare parts , infrastructure set up , Tot sharing costs , weapon system costs...all will come to play.....So no they cant offer a ~7 Billion dollar deal. But still i am really surprised by $5.3 Billion dollar figure; F18 for 43 million a piece....Gripen itself costs almost 50 mill a piece (if i am not wrong)......seems like that reporting is incorrect.