Dassault Rafale, tender | News & Discussions

[rockstarIN]

Actually even the gun kill was pretty fast and easy, coupled with MICA and if we add HMS it would be even superior.

even in this video, the the radar is not locking to F-16 like the F-22 video when it first appear in the screen?

 

[Abingdonboy]

 

[sancho]

@Taygibay

An interesting post, but too one / French sided and therefore wrong on several points, especially since you completelly leave out the French / Dassaults current situation with the Rafale, which is important as well.

1995 for example would have made no sense for a fighter competition, from IAFs point of view. We just got all the M2Ks and mig 29s delivered in the late 80s early 90s and the LCA made it's first flight, not to mention that by then first Flankers were on the radar too. So besides the fact that it wasn't clear how good or bad the LCA development would go by then, we either could have gone for follow orders of M2K or Mig 29s, while the Su 30s were on the list too. In fact IAF wanted additional M2Ks pretty early, but they simply were too costly and why Russian fighters were procured instead.
In the 2000s on the other hand, after Kargil, sanctions and the problems of LCA getting evident, it was not only time but also the right decision to split the total requirement into LCA and a foreign jet.
The switch to M-MRCA later has way different reasons and by the huge changes in all areas for India (financial, economical, political, technical and wrt the threat perception), it was the best choice for sure, but the competition could have been done faster.

Admitting as much would make Dassault's stand on the responsibility much easier to understand...
...Then if Dassault thought they could merge their expertise with that ability to insure a quality procurement, they should be trusted on it and not insulted over it as I read in Indian fora?
I do understand the problem raised by RIL being private but again, was it their fault that HAL is complacent ( possibly because public sector )?

Not really, since Dassaults stand doesn't hold it's own when they didn't complained about the upgrade of Mirage 2000 in India, where they didn't insisted on similar 2 contracts, which takes them out of the responsibility of the upgrades that HAL does!
Also if Dassault would have a point with concerns over HAL, they logically should have asked to divert a higher share of the production to Tata for example, which is way more experienced and capable in the privat aero sector today than Reliance, with major contracts from Boeing, LM, Sikorsky and Agosta Westland. No Indian forumer would complain about it, since most of them would happily support increased involvement of privat companies, but in this case Dassault only tries to get more benefits for their JV partner Reliance, which means they are looking at their own interest only! That obviously is not acceptable for MoD / IAF, since it was clearly given in the RFP how the final assembly will be done, so on the one hand we have the economical interest of a privat foreign company, on the other side the national interest of India and Indian forces!

Wrt the M-MRCA:

If one re-reads the first line of the RFP Abingdonboy gave us anew in post 8510 up there, the "M-MRCA on offer has to be a fully functional and mature system, with all its listed capabilities already in operational service and not requiring any further fine-tuning or R & D work."

The RFP didn't said that the fighters must be technically ready and available in 2007, but when the MMRCA winner should arrive in Indian service, which was planned around 2015. That's why AESA radars for example were required, although only the US fighters had them back then and that's not special, but common practice in any fighter competition. The Gripen E/F Switzerland procures will be available only by 2018 but was evaluated in the last years, Brazil evaluated fighters for 2017 and even the UAE wants new fighters only from 2017 onwards.

even in this video, the the radar is not locking to F-16 like the F-22 video when it first appear in the screen?

Because it's a dogfight with guns only, in the F22 video it simulated missiles first and then switched to guns.

 

[Taygibay]

Hey Sancho!

Thanks for that comprehensive answer, mate!

You are right on the too French sided part but it just had to be as it was the premise of the "exercise". Abingdonboy had asked me for my "view on M_MMRca according to my Flag!!" in the ATLC video thread? So that yes, I was answering mostly from that perspective.
In the same light, I did not feel compelled to address the situation in France, A- because that is not related to India's MMRCA but strictly an internal French problem and that would indeed have been too one sided? ( Don't blame me for one thing and its contrary in the same sentence, now, please? ) and B- because I posted on that very subject on my blog which some here are familiar with and have read in a piece that is called : Jet fighters : Why France should thank India. | Definitive Lapse of Reason so that it was not needed to repeat.

You are totally right on the 1995 part. I did not mean 1995 as necessarily a competition but went to re-read my post and darn, I did write it so' duh! So I'll correct that but really meant to say addressing the Sq numbers and yes, extra orders such as you mentioned would have done the job fine for IAF ( had they been placed, of course ).

Your following point however, I did include. Yes, the LCA & MRCA were to co-exist and yes, it is the morphing into M_MRCA that changed the game. I am glad that you still agree on the importance of the delay in that/those competition(s).

Your point on Dassault's stand is in my honest opinion wrong however but mostly because you separated the idea and added to it. Let me explain. On the M2K upgrade, you disregard the fact that Dassault has no production line for that plane anymore. Which implies that it does the integration example and kits only? In the Rafale case however, the line in France could provide all 20/y Indian planes + the French present 11. That line is calibrated for 33 AC/Year. ( And besides the French order will go down as export ramps up ). The MMRCA conditions do not allow that but I'm just saying it could be done.
As for the planes built by HAL, the dual contract did make some sense considering the differences it implied. It seems the negotiators cleared that up however and that there will be only one which is fine.

On the Tata thing however, you forgot two things.
One is that I mentioned : "while I am not enough of an expert on India to properly debate the value of Reliance Industries per say...". On that basis, I accept your explanation of course but...
Two is that what you suggest is NOT acceptable in industry, period. Just as the Indian govt has every right to force Dassault to comply to the MMRCA deal by partnering with the PUBLIC outfit that is HAL, it has no right to force a private deal with a given company over another. Trust me please when I say that I have two good close friends in top positions in two different companies/fields of industry, both firms in the top 3 worldwide and they confirmed this to be unacceptable. The implications for the corporation would have wide ranging effects that could endanger their whole business plan for years. Indian forumers may have opinions regarding Tata or other vs RIL but these are just opinions. Your call that Dassault chose Reliance only for the money is laden with gall and presumption. My understanding as explained in my post was that Dassault wanted to partner with Reliance for trust issues. Even not being Indian, my knowledge of industrial markets/matters is more than enough to state that RIL has shown the ability to develop expertise in fields it was previously unqualified in and obtain excellent results in time and mostly on dime! THAT is the reason why Dassault would pick them. BTW, do check that the partnership for a JV was announced in 2012 :
Dassault Aviation Partners with Reliance Industries » Indian Defence Review
and this is the latest which states HAL as main OVER that JV ( Feb 2013 ) :
HAL will be `main partner` in Rafale aircraft deal: Dassault

Dassault by the way also has other JVs in India including Catia design work and integration. I hope you know that CATIA is the aviation industry's ( and many others ) most respected and used tool worldwide?
3D CAD design software CATIA - Dassault Systèmes
Airbus , Kelsey-Hayes , Boeing, Lear Jet , BMW, Volvo, Black and Decker, Fiat Peugeot, Northrop Grumman Corp, Ferrari, Lockheed Martin , Porsche , Daimler Chrysler, Goodyear, Freightliner Truck , Allied Signal , Sauber Formula,Volkswagen, Pratt Whitney, United Airlines, Toyota, Hyundai , Ford, Mercedes-Benz , Honda ...

So if Indian fanboys think they know better than the corps listed above, heck let them think so?
But please, don't tell the avia corps ( underlined ) about your point on Bad Dassault going for buck only since they apparently trust them and would likely disagree?
Once again, Sancho, I do understand the emotional points of view but they just cannot be mixed with industrial reality and I do want the best for the IAF but straight to it and not bypassed by preference or corruption? That is all that I said in that post!
Heck, if Dassault had trusted and chosen Tata... all would be fine but it was not so? I do not have the infos to judge their reasons and neither do you!

As for your last point, the revised MMRCA delivery specifications were not termed by year anymore but as months following contract signature. As such, your claim of 2015 as an expected delivery date means nothing. So that if you use it in opposition to mine on the initial RFP's basis, we are both wrong.
Press Information Bureau English Releases on 28 Aug 2007, the RFP was issued. If the trials had been held within 2 years, the decision taken within one and the contract signed in one also then it would have been 2011?
The first of the 18 import batch is to get to India 36 months after signature at the latest and the last 48 months at the latest.
What that implies is that if the contract is signed say on January first 2014, the first Rafale could get to the IAF in late December 2016 ( effectively 2017 )??? By Jove, under such rules, if the contract breaks down in 2014 and goes to the second vendor ( EF ) and takes but a single year to be signed, the new date would fall to 2018-9? Of course all planes would be fully developed by then, God forbid the contrary even outside the MMRCA's scope?
I'd rather see it as implied that the fighters were to be ready for induction 36 months after the trials at minima if only for the IAF's sake and that comes to 2013 instead. And the Rafale line is now churning out AESA fighters, QED!
That is only an opinion but again to favor the IAF itself? The fighters BTW were supposed to be fully tried in India and special derogation was awarded for the said AESA ( as an example ) on the Gripen, remember, which saw Indian experts go to Sweden? I have no qualms against that at all as it seems again to be in the IAF's best interests? It still shows my last presumption that the trials ( already delayed by the lengthy process ) were the best date in the whole affair to judge availability by?

So there you go, mate. I hope these counter points to be clear and wish you and all a good day, Tay.

 

[sancho]

Your point on Dassault's stand is in my honest opinion wrong however but mostly because you separated the idea and added to it. Let me explain. On the M2K upgrade, you disregard the fact that Dassault has no production line for that plane anymore. Which implies that it does the integration Example and kits only?

The lack of a production line of M2Ks doesn't matter, since the "reported" issue of Dassault was, that HAL might have delays in their assembly and Dassault don't wanted to be responsible for it. The same logic would apply to the M2K upgrade and the part that HAL would do, since just like in M-MRCA, HAL mainly assemblies the parts that will be provided by French or Indian companies (Dassault, Thales, Sagem, BEL, Samtel, DARE...). So no matter if it's delays of Rafale or the M2K, Dassault actually must complain about HAL in both cases and must ask for different contracts which seperates their responsibility from HAL's!
The fact however is, they don't and started complaining about it only this year and not in 2010 when the M2K upgraded was fixed, nor before the MMRCA trials, or even after the selection of Rafale.

Two is that what you suggest is NOT acceptable in industry, period. Just as the Indian govt has every right to force Dassault to comply to the MMRCA deal by partnering with the PUBLIC outfit that is HAL, it has no right to force a private deal with a given company over another.

Who said the government would force Dassault? In fact, during Aero India 2013 the defence minister and the IAF chief publically stated that Dassault is free to choose Indian partners to divert the offsets, but the final assembly must remain with HAL, since that was a requirement of the RFP. So from the Indian side there is no general restriction, just about the final assembly part and that is something that Dassault can't demand.
The point however was, that if Dassault has an issue with HAL based on technical reasons and they only would want another Indian supplier, Dassault logically should have asked for one that already is in the aero field and is more capable than HAL. But that doesn't fit to Reliance, so Dassault is not complaining about technical reasons, but simply out of personal preference / benefits!

Btw, I don't blame you for having a French viewpoint, nor do I blame Dassault for trying to get the best deal for them, which is a normal procedure in business, but it's silly to delay the deal further for dubious reasons and bring it closer to the election times, instead of fixing all things as soon as possible.
One should think Dassault has learned from the disaster in Brazil, where the elections changed everything, or that they would look beyond their success in the civil aviation and would understand how important the Indian order is for them and the Rafale today!

Even not being Indian, my knowledge of industrial markets/matter is more than enough to state that RIL has shown the ability to develop expertise in fields it was previously unqualified in and obtain excellent results in time and on dime!

You don't have to be Indian to understand simple logic , because nobody denies that RIL has the potential and can develop expertise in time and there is no doubt that Indian aero industry will benefit from another major player in future. However, Dassaults claim was that HAL can not do it today, but neither can RIL and that is the crucial point where their argumentation simply doesn't fit!
If Dassault feels that RIL has potential and wants to produce parts for the Falcon with them, no problem! It brings more jobs to India and creates more know how, but demanding to replace HAL only with a currently less capable company is not going to happen.

As for your last point, the revised MMRCA delivery specifications were not termed by year anymore but as months following contract signature. As such, your claim of 2015 as an expected delivery date means nothing.

That wasn't a claim, but based on the fact that the MMRCA was expected to be signed by 2012, with delivery of the first squadron 3 years later => 2015 and the requested capabilities were required to be ready by then!
Now the deal is delayed of course and the delivery is expected in 2016/17, but that has nothing to do with the technical demands in the RFP and logically not with the capabilities that was shown in the trials.

The fighters BTW were supposed to be fully tried in India and special derogation was awarded for the said AESA ( as an example ) on the Gripen, remember, which saw Indian experts go to Sweden?

That's not correct, neither was it demanded to be fully developed for the trials, not to show all capabilities in India. The Gripen NG came to India with AESA, but did only a small part of the trials, the rest was done by Gripen C/Ds, the EF were German Luftwaffe once, with Captor M, limited EW and no PIRATE, the Russians send modified Mig 29Ks, while the AESA was later integrated on one of them and shown during the trials in Russia...
The competition demanded certain trials to be done in India, which was mainly important to evaluate the engine and flight performance in different climate conditions in India. The technical or weapon trials could have been done in the manufacturer countries too (btw there was an Indian team in France to evaluate the Rafale too), but as I said they never should had allowed all 6 contenders to the trials, to reduce the time.


Thanks for the link to your blog, will check it.

 

[Taygibay]

Sorry Sancho, I had an answer but there seems to be a problem with my posting it.
I'll answer as soon as it's fixed!
Tay.

Hi again Sancho!

I'm going to try to answer you again but I may sound harsh. I take part of the blame if I sound flippant at times because as I have said, I am not into the volley type of posting that is customary on fora in mili affairs anymore as I see it as a lost of time mostly. Just know before hand that when you stick to providing infos as I have read in your posts most often, I think the best of you. But in all truth, when you ( or I BTW' reason enough not to do so IMHoO ) descend into "wifey logic" of answering with halfbaked off-topic disregarding facts to favor opinion, you ( or I ) are no better than the rest. ( See, I already went south with the sexist comment, SIGH. Sorry! )

YES the line of production makes all the difference between M2K upgrade and Rafale for MMRCA, mate. Simply because there is no choice for the vendor in case one and no pure production for the acquirer? If you want to compare MMRCA deal, you have to do so with the SU_30 MKI HAL saga. You know full well that HAL had problems there. More SKDs than planned. More CKDs also. The first Full Indigenous is now in production admittedly but look here :

“As per the original compressed programme, they (HAL) will have to complete the deliveries by 2014-15. It is unlikely that this deadline will be met now and we expect a delay of three years,” IAF sources said. Express has learnt that the delay in design and development phase of Sukhoi in Russia impacted the receipt of technology and tooling in India. In addition, HAL too had issues in absorbing new technologies and setting up of capital infrastructure.
Tarmak007 -- A bold blog on Indian defence: Desi Sukhoi performs supersonic ballet on debut | Aircraft built from complete raw material phase makes a silent entry

or here :

Not only has the supply of the top-of-the-line Sukhoi-30 MKIs run into production and maintenance bottlenecks, the Ministry of Defence (MoD) has pushed back the 2017 deadline for the Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft (FGFA) that India and Russia are collaborating to develop by two years.

The Russian aircraft are being produced under licence. HAL should have absorbed the technology in Phase IV and enhanced the local content in manufacturing to about 50 or 55 per cent, which it hasn't.


IAF Sukhoi fleet production runs into bottleneck cloud : North, News - India Today

or here :

Delivery of Sukhoi Su-30MKI fighters to the Indian air force (IAF) is likely to be delayed due to development issues.

State-run Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd. (HAL) is currently undertaking the production of 222 Su-30 aircraft. HAL was supposed to start delivery of the all-weather air-dominance fighters to the country’s defense forces by 2015.

But now this may not happen “as per schedule,” according to India’s junior defense minister, Jitendra Singh.

Besides the production of SU-30 MKI fighter aircraft, HAL is juggling production of the Light Combat Aircraft (LCA), Advanced Jet Trainer (Hawk), Intermediate Jet Trainer (IJT), Advance Light Helicopter (ALH), Light Combat Helicopter, Light Utility Helicopter and Dornier-228. Some of these other programs are also experiencing delays, according to the ministry.
Su-30MKI Delivery To Indian Air Force Slips

In order of publishing dates?
If you do not understand that to be PROOF and reason enough for Dassault to have trust issues with HAL's capacities, I can'T help you, mate! IJT, Tejas, LCH, et al.? HAL does not deliver as per promises, period! So that I state bluntly that : Dassault has a track record twentyfold better and should be trusted as per that ratio! No nitpicking about what this or that cousin said, French, Desi or Martian, just the truth! Do understand that if your nationalistic pride gets in the way of admitting as much, you'll get shitty products for years to come? And I assure you that I have been very critical of my personal or national performances as it is the only way to better one self!

And please understand that Dassault started complaining earlier than you think as evidence by the JV signing with RIL date ?
You became aware of it when it became public, man. That's all. What is discussed in CNC and the likes is not public and that is both normal and a good thing.
Case closed.

You go on to say :
"The point however was, that if Dassault has an issue with HAL based on technical reasons and they only would want another Indian supplier, Dassault logically should have asked for one that already is in the aero field and is more capable than HAL. But that doesn't fit to Reliance, so Dassault is not complaining about technical reasons, but simply out of personal preference / benefits!"

Again, wrong! Your use of logically is incorrect. Dassault chose RIL as I already explained because they showed the ability to enter NEW fields in short time with proper performance, period! The expertise for airplane production comes from DASSAULT, NOT RIL, durn it? I trained men in the Army and other endeavours. If all have similar potential, I'll take one that has shown the capacity to learn quickly over the one with some experience but a bad track record ANYTIME!
[ As a matter of fact, I remember this exchange with a colleague. He said angrily : -"I'm 31, 13 years served and have been a Staff-Sergeant for 7 years!" to show his superiority.
To which I answered softly : -"I'm 20, 11 months served and have been a Staff-Sergeant for 6 months? And scheduled for promotion in a year? And the reason why the whole squad is now laughing is because in all this time, you haven't learned to have such exchanges behind our office's closed doors? ]
Just to show my points on learning abilities and discreet discussions?

And in the same part of your post, you mention Brazil & elections without realizing that this was not Dassault but the French govt's fault? Apples and oranges really?
That is also why in this case, India and Anthony and IAF are to be commended for the way the process was handled. Very detailed and clear from 2007 on, very pro in the evals, etc? So that now, it is but a matter of contract the latest news being rather encouraging as I posted in my previous answer to you?

You then come back to RIL's selection by Dassault which I already answered.

Your next point is about dates and schedule which you locate as 2015 for reception and I gave as wrong. Let me just say this and provide a link : you pick your starting point thus "That wasn't a claim, but based on the fact that the MMRCA was expected to be signed by 2012..."
I disagree ( but that does not make me right per say as I also stated in my last post ).
Here is why :
"Given the elaborate and complex procurement procedures, stringent and multi-layered financial scrutiny, painfully slow decision-making process, the lead time for manufacture and time for training, it may take over a decade for the proposed MRCA to be fully operational in the IAF."
As written by Air Marshal B K Pandey in first quarter 2005, showing that he initially wanted the planes before 2015.
ht tp: //www. forbidden indian forum .com/SRR/Volume13/pandey.html
Confirmed below in 2008 :
MMRCA - In Progress - SP's Aviation
Even if you check Wikipedia, ( yes, not a great source, I admit as much ) you will find initial dates for the deal to be signed to be 2009-2010 which is coherent with my expectation of 2013 deliveries that slipped to 2014 in Air Marshall Pandey's estimate above. Had the RFI been turned into RFP faster, had not the DDP delayed things and the MRCA re-written as MMRCA,
2010 being the initial date 2013 would have been right and of the two short-listed ACs, Rafale the only one ready as I said.

Last was your pick up of my recall of the Gripen/Sweden mention. You are right that there was a provision for IAF teams to visit abroad ( mostly for weapons trials ). That, though, is not what I was implying at all. The real plane in the RFI/RFP did not visit India. Those sent to Bharat were JAS 39. An exception was made to fly the real thing NG Demo in Sweden. I am sorry buddy but that was a special case, period, whether you acknowledge it or not. Fact! But you should not nitpick at my comment as I just mentioned it to show that I was in truth not complaining for my side on what IMHoO amounts to details.

"Last heard, the Swedish JAS-39 Gripen was not able to take part as the company had brought a different (older?) model for trials supposedly because the new Next Generation model proposed for India was undergoing some trials in Sweden."
MMRCA: A difficult choice for the IAF | Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses

So there you have it! I hope you understand my views even if you don't accept them fully but I have done my best to give you links, most of them Hindi to show good faith.
I do want also to point out of courtesy that I will likely not be able to answer you if you post again until what should be around 22h00+ Pakistani time Friday eve at the soonest for IRL job reasons and then not next week-end either as I'm going on a bike trip with my son. So just in case, we miss each other, keep safe, all the best to you & yours and the same to all around Pakistani Defence, Tay.

 

[Taygibay]

AH Got it but had to split a link. It seems that it may be forbidden to link to a given Indian Forum.
If at all possible, I'd like to know why, where the explanation can be found etc.
Sorry to have bent the rules if so, Tay.

 

[sancho]

YES the line of production makes all the difference between M2K upgrade and Rafale for MMRCA, mate. Simply because there is no choice for the vendor in case one and no pure production for the acquirer?

I am not comparing MMRCA, I am comparing Dassaults claims which is one for HAL in MMRCA and another for HAL during M2K upgrade. And again, in both cases, HAL is contracted to do the major assembly part in India, so it's only about how they see things differently although HAL does the basically same in both cases!
That why it has nothing to do with a production line of Dassault in France, since that is not the matter of Dassaults claims about HAL and wrt to the Su 30 production or HALs production in general you should take a look at this:

http://www.defence.pk/forums/indian-defence/4347-mrca-news-discussions-556.html#post4133487


You obviously have some biased opionions about HAL, but you clearly lack the necessary knowledge too. Tejas for example is not developed by HAL, but by ADA and DRDO. HAL is only the contractor and responsible for the production, which not even has started fully so far, but the delays are caused by developent problems, which is why MoD is blaming ADA and DRDO currently even publically! Just one example and some more were in the link, but since that is not the matter, here, we should stick to Dassaults claims only.

Do understand that if your nationalistic pride gets in the way of admitting as much

Now you getting totally unreal! Where did I stated anything because of nationalistic reasons? Again, the matter is that Dassault claims that HAL can't do the assembly, but

A) suggested a less capable company instead

B) that they didn't stated the same trust issues about HAL doing the M2K upgrades


You might not like my arguments, but that doesn't mean you have to come with such a silly attitude! If this is a discussion, you have to get arguments! Arguments why Dassault complains one time and not the other time and not half backed opinions only, which as I shown are often based on your outside belive but not on facts.

And please understand that Dassault started complaining earlier than you think as evidence by the JV signing with RIL date ?

How is that suppose to be an evidence? The Rafale was selected in Jan 2012, as part of the offset negotiations Dassault, Thales and co started building JVs with Indian counterparts, RIL was just one of them and that is not a problem, since Dassault is free to do it and to divert certain parts to Indian privat partners of their choice. But hat had nothing to do with HAL at all ! ! !
Btw Snecma has JVs with HAL for the production of M88 engines and Sagem for navigation and Flight control systems, so what does this tell you? News from recent Paris Air Show:

Sagem and HAL to create Indian manufacturing and service centre - IHS Jane's 360

The expertise for airplane production comes from DASSAULT, NOT RIL

If so, why not provide the same expertise to the company that already has know how, that already knows about licence production, maintenance and overhaul routines of Dassault through Mirage or Jaguar fighters, why provide it to a completely new company that has to learn all these things from scratch?

When you answer this honestly to yourself, you will understand the truth!

And in the same part of your post, you mention Brazil & elections without realizing that this was not Dassault but the French govt's fault? Apples and oranges really?

Not really, the point was, that elections changed everything in Brazil and the same can happen in India too, which is why it's not very smart of Dassault to delay things in India now, by stalling negotiation, unless they want to loose the deal at the end too.

I disagree ( but that does not make me right per say).

Exactly and it's good that you can acknowledge that, especially when you take the initial MRCA competition as the base and not the M-MRCA competition! The RFP for the M-MRCA was sent out in 2007/08, with the trials only begining in 2010 and the shortlisting and contract signature estimated 1-2 years after the trials. So you have mixed up the competition dates and came to wrong conclusions.

I am sorry buddy but that was a special case, period, whether you acknowledge it or not. Fact! But you should not nitpick at my comment

LOL are we distracting now? Your claim was that the capabilities had to be shown in India, but that the Gripen couldn't and that a team was sent to Sweden instead. That remains wrong, since the capabilities didn't needed to be shown in India, but where the manufacturer wanted to show it. That's why I even gave you the examples of EF and the Mig, which also showed the radars only in their countries only. So who really can't admit to the facts here?

 

[Taygibay]

Hello man, I have time for a short answer before work so :
A- M2K upgrade is components+refurb not new built from scratch as Rafale by the end of MMRCA procurement
-do persist on not understanding the difference, I'm done trying to explain.

B- You do not open links which is your problem. Those I gave were Desi and concur with my views on HAL
-do ignore even your own, it sure makes blinding one self easier, done here too.

C- You said : "If so, why not provide the same expertise to the company that already has know how, that already knows about licence production, maintenance and overhaul routines of Dassault through Mirage or Jaguar fighters, why provide it to a completely new company that has to learn all these things from scratch?

When you answer this honestly to yourself, you will understand the truth!"

- I answered that clearly but you won't accept it which is your right. Having expertise at semi-failure means little. That answer about honestly answering ( meaning answer the way you do no matter if true ) and understanding truth ( meaning the only valid one : yours ) reeks of condescension and fanboyism at best, trolling, sectarianism or religious-like illumination at worst. Not worth any more answer.

D- I hope for BOTH Dassault's sake and India/IAF that politics ARE NOT the reasons for any change in the contract negotiations. That would be a derailment of process and contrary to the best interests of the taxpayers and the Efforts of Anthony and the DPP.

- The very fact that you compare a contract under negotiation MMRCA / IN to an unfinished tender FX-2 / Br is a clear indication of the level of wishy washy discussion you want to pursue IMHoO. Sadly, I don't as explained before, thus done here.

E- Of course I ALWAYS use initial need and intent to evaluate how a program goes. Rafale and Typhoon or LCA or F-35 all had such lengthening for instance. Four different causes : Govt planning / cash availability / technical development problems / too complex a program marred by systemic industrial unkept promises and face saving. Still all delayed. Just facts?

- Had you read the links and gone to check the sources, you would have found 2014 ( right in between your date and mine ) to be the opinion of Ex IAF Air Marshal Pandey! He works there :
Air Marshal BK Pandey » Indian Defence Review ...why don't you get over your dislike for opening links and go try to swap he said she said with him asking him to understand the truth? Cause I'm done!

And F-inally, the JAS 39s went to all 3 air bases for testing but were NOT the aircraft proposed in MMRCA. The NG came to India 2 months later in one unit ( since there was only one Gripen Demo built ? ) and NOT the RFP suggested 2 that the others fielded and ONLY did the LEH HA trials which by the way delayed the competition. It allowed IAF better eval, granted but was a different rule than applied. And yes, apart from weapons and radar, the rest of the aircraft was to be tested by IAF in India for which there are clear reasons if you know anything about the use of these machines.

MMRCA delayed as Indian procurement continues | Aviation International News
- Again, read the link above or the one below to find those facts to which I supposedly can't admit and please write to them instead to question their understanding. Which by the way is just another example of your nitpicking as I already stated twice, that I only gave it initially to show that the process had been void of dissent on the IAF's performance. So come again, but don't expect an answer, there's really no need.

Good luck to you and good day all, Tay.

 

[Major Shaitan Singh]

Paris Air Show 2013

 

[Abingdonboy]

 

[Abingdonboy]

 

[Abingdonboy]

 

[sancho]

A- M2K upgrade is components+refurb not new built from scratch as Rafale by the end of MMRCA procurement

And still you claimed about a relation to an M2K production line isn't it? But there isn't and HAL is not building the Rafale from scratch, but mainly from components delivered to them, just as they upgrade M2K from components too. Also in both cases Dassault provides their expertise to do the assembly of these components, so it's hardly deniable that HAL's part is the same in both case and that Dassault can't be ok with one case and complain about the other...

...unless you have a too French point of view of course!

Those I gave were Desi and concur with my views on HAL

That's the problem! You have a biased point of view about HAL and just searched for reports that suits it. But as you acknowledged yourself, that doesn't mean you are right!
The quotes in my older post, are based on a official statement in the parliament, which confirms that the delays in the early MKI production stages, came from late delivery of plans and drawings from Russia, just like the delays in the Hawk production was caused by BAE and to avoid such things, so do you really want to say that you know more about HAL's production problems than the government?
Not to mention the fact that more and more western companies diverts productions to HAL in JVs as I showed too, so do you say you know more about HAL than Sagem, Snecma, EADS, RR, Boeing...?

HAL is definitely not perfect and has a long way to go, but your point of view is just based on bias and hearsay, not on what they are really able to do or not!

Having expertise at semi-failure means little... Not worth any more answer.

Again a clear show of bias, denial and lack of arguments.


Here is a good recap that you should read, to understand what the Dassault/RIL vs HAL issue is really about:

...The French giant, Dassault, was of the opinion that the fiduciary clause, which made it mandatory for them to pay penalties in case of problems of quality with the kits they are supposed to supply to the HAL, resulting in any time delays, should be removed. The Indian team was adamant that it cannot be as it was in the RFP also, and if Dassault had problems with that clause they could have avoided any response to the tender...

...These contradictions had earlier given rise to a speculation that whether Dassault was objecting to the ‘HAL clause’ because it wanted its preferred Indian peer, Reliance Industries, to be given the task of setting up an aerospace production company and undertake the task of making Rafale.

However, Millennium Post could not elicit any response on this question either from Dassault or from Reliance Industries. The RIL respresentative in the newly formed aerospace business...was unavailable for comment on the questionnaire of this correspondent. The questions were:

- Is Reliance Industries advising Dassault on the ongoing contract negotiations?

- If it is, what is the nature of this advice? If no, why is it not lending its obvious expertise in dealing with the Indian government to Dassault?

- In the recent reports about how the negotiations have got bogged down on the issue of who was liable for HAL's probable mistakes during the licence production of the 108 Rafales under the contract, there were speculations that Dassault had taken a hard line because it wanted its partner, Reliance, to produce the aircrafts. Is this a correct supposition?


Dassault too did not respond to a query on the issue. Meanwhile, the world watches.

Will IAF get to fly Rafale | Millennium Post


Dassault is ill advised by their Indian partner and risking delays of the contract signature, based on personal benefits for them and RIL is simply not a smart way so close before the elections!

 

[Major Shaitan Singh]

Exercise Tactical La Fayette Week dans le sud de la France

This exercise aims to train in a realistic environment crews to different tactics phases of a complex air mission. At program, phases of in-flight refueling, bass penetration and average altitudes, and air combat in flight in the most strict of aviation safety rules peacetime respect.

The planes have evolved in the most aerial extent training area France, that covers everything maritime spatial between Perpignan and Solenzara, in Corsica. This zone, one of largest in Europe, offers very beautiful training possibilities (supersonic speed, very low altitude flight ...). The use of modern means of such conduct Stradivarius (vizualisation tool in real time of the air situation) has favored optimization aerial means dedicated to TLW.

On balance, the year totaled 137 attractions in nine raids consisting of 15 to 25 hunters. The number of actors also reveals the success of TLW: Mirage 2000N, Rafale, Mirage 2000-5, Mirage 2000D, Mirage F1, Alphajet, tanker aircraft C135 and a E3-F radar airplane. TLW is also characterized by its joint dimension with the participation of Gust 11F fleet of the Navy, but also an Allied dimension with the presence of Spanish and Italian Eurofighter, Spanish F18 and British Tornado. Finally, by its action, the center of detection and control de Lyon Mont-Verdun has allowed to give its full dimension to this exercise.