What's new

Dassault Rafale, tender | News & Discussions

Status
Not open for further replies.
. .
The Telegraph - Calcutta (Kolkata) | Nation | US pushes deal, secrecy hitch on IAF screen

New Delhi, Feb. 21: The US’s strong pitch to sell its fighter aircraft to India for an estimated $12 billion has run into a hurdle with the Indian Air Force telling the government that it does not favour the signing of agreements that risk compromising its operational secrecy.

Air Chief Marshal Pradeep Vasant Naik said in Yelahanka earlier this month that price negotiations for the medium multi-role combat aircraft (MMRCA) deal could start as early as next month and a contract would be signed by September. The setting of a deadline by the IAF chief has led to intensified lobbying by competitors and the governments backing them.

The Boeing-made F/A-18 Super Hornet and Lockheed Martin’s F-16 IN Super Viper (a variant of the F-16 Fighting Falcon) are two of the six competitors for the order. The others are Rafale (Dassault Aviation, France), Eurofighter Typhoon (a consortium of the UK, Italy, Germany and Spain), the Saab Gripen (Sweden) and the Russian MiG 35.

The IAF has indicated to the government that US-imposed conditionalities could lead to denial of even such crucial components in their aircraft such as the Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) radar. An AESA radar allows the pilot in a fighter jet to track more targets faster than older radars.

The tender issued by the Indian government when it invited the companies to participate in the competition had laid down that an AESA radar must be integrated with the aircraft that would seek to bag the order.

The IAF is particularly concerned about the Communications Interoperability and Security Memorandum of Agreement (CISMOA) that the US is pushing India to sign.

“The CISMOA is a communication agreement. We don’t necessarily have to sign that,” Air Chief Marshal Naik said.

But US ambassador Timothy Roemer, who was also at the air show in Yelahanka, said that the US “offers such agreements only to its closest allies and Nato partners”.

Another senior IAF officer said: “The CISMOA is necessary for airforces to communicate with the US easily. Why do we need to communicate with the US all the time?”

The AESA radar that the two US companies have offered in the Super Hornet and the Super Viper are made by Raytheon. Raytheon Asia president Admiral (retired) Walter Doran insists that the CISMOA would not be a hurdle.

He cites the initial Indian reservation over the signing of the End-User Monitoring Agreement, a pact that allows the US government to inspect the use of military equipment it has allowed to be sold.

“Two years ago that was such an issue. But now nobody even talks about it,” Doran said, emphasising that “as the US-India relationship grows these will cease to matter”.

US officials also cite the transfer last fortnight of the first of six C-130J-30 Super Hercules tactical airlifter to the IAF. But the US competitors for the IAF fighter aircraft order — such as the European firms — give the same example a different twist because the Super Hercules was delivered without some of the equipment that would have been available if the CISMOA was sealed.

Even if the government chooses one of the two competing US aircraft — after the IAF completed the flight evaluation trials for the six fighter aircraft last July — there would be questions on whether it is a payback for the clinching of the civilian nuclear pact. The US has been aggressively looking for billion-dollar orders from India to create jobs in its traditional industries, such as military aviation companies.

Raytheon, of all the US companies, has huge stakes in the Indian military orders. The company has more than 8,000 products. It practically opened the door for large-scale US military transfers to India when 12 artillery Firefinder An-TPQ/37 radars made by it were contracted by New Delhi in 2002.

For the F/A-18 Super Hornet and F-16 Super Viper, Raytheon has offered to make and integrate not only the AESA radar but also electronic warfare (EW) suites including radar warning systems, a towed decoy system and electro-optical targeting flares.

The European and Russian competitors of the US companies are, in turn, trying to convince the Indian government that their weapons and systems will be delivered with “no strings attached”.

The IAF’s reservation on signing the CISMOA have particularly raised the hopes for the Eurofighter Typhoon and Dassault Aviation’s Rafale in particular that have the least US content in their platforms after the Russians. (The US forbids exports of military hardware to Russia). The Saab Gripen is powered by a US-made engine (the GE 414) and has some avionics from the US that the Swedish company is telling the IAF will not be an issue because they would buy the equipment from the Americans off-the-shelf. The Russian MiG-35 has no US-made component but its absence at the airshow in Yelahanka this week reflects a loss of confidence in Moscow to bag the $12 billion MMRCA deal.
 
.
defence.professionals | defpro.com

f2035516304debfe1a81bd8e51b7e3b5c0921986_big.jpg


16:21 GMT, February 21, 2011 At Aero India 2011 Eurofighter and partner company BAE Systems unveiled for the first time more details about the studies carried out for the initial definition of the navalised version of the Typhoon.

These studies have included the assessment of required design changes, piloted simulations to refine the aircraft’s handling qualities and discussions with key suppliers. The studies indicate that these changes are feasible, and would lead to the development of a world-beating, carrier-based fighter aircraft.

The most important element of the navalised Typhoon is that its exceptional thrust-to-weight ratio allows the aircraft to take off from a carrier without using a catapult but with a simple and much cheaper “ski-jump”. Detailed simulations have shown that the aircraft will be able to take off and land in this way with a full weapon and fuel load – providing a truly potent and flexible naval aviation capability.

The basic design of Typhoon helps to minimise the modifications needed to allow a Typhoon to conduct naval operations from a carrier. The aircraft’s structure is exceptionally strong, having been designed from the outset for the high dynamic loads associated with extreme air combat manoeuvring. The modifications required are limited and include a new, stronger landing gear, a modified arrestor hook and localised strengthening on some fuselage sections near the landing gear, as well as updates the EJ200 engines.

To reduce the aircraft’s approach speed and the resulting landing loads the study envisages the introduction of a thrust-vectored variant of the Eurojet EJ200 engine. Thrust vectoring (Engines with TVN have already undergone factory testing in the Eurojet facility) could be fully integrated into Typhoon’s advanced Flight Control System (FCS), allowing the pilot to focus on flying the approach path while the FCS manages the engine nozzle position. The ability to change the angle of the engines’ thrust will allow for a further enhancement in Typhoon’s already outstanding manoeuvrability, supercruise performance, fuel consumption and the handling of asymmetric weapon configurations.

A key design driver for navalised Typhoon is the commonality at 95 per cent with the land variant. Design changes are minimised, allowing for most of the spare parts and test equipment to be shared across a customer’s air force and navy fleets. The sensors, systems and weapons available to both variants will be common, allowing for a reduction in the aircrew training requirements. And in addition, the two variants will benefit from a common upgrade path – new capabilities will be available to both the air force and navy in similar timescales.

A navalised Typhoon can deliver this commonality, without compromising on capability.

ty3.jpg
 
. . .
From a political point of view, which choice is risker for the Indian Government?

The F-16? because Pakistan has it?

Or, the Gripen and the ghost of scandals past?

Rafale? Will India risk buying a fighter no other country has purchased?

F/A-18 E/F and accusations of succumbing to US political pressure?

Typhoon's sticker shock?

Politically isn't Mig-35 the safest choice for the Indian government?

Mig-35, the safest choice? The CAG would probably murder the government for buying an aircraft that doesn't exist. F-16 - no real chance & not only because the Pakistanis have it. MoD & IAF would have to explain why they bought an aircraft that is is being phased out. A very good bet that they don't want to go down that route.

There are only four serious contenders:
Typhoon
Rafale
SH
Gripen

I have read reports that the typhoon came out best in the evaluation but was it so much better than the the SH that paying double the price would be considered worth it? I have my doubts. The Rafale is neither here or there, expensive & didn't even come out on top! The fact that it has never been sold elsewhere must be held against it. It would mean that the IAF would be funding most of the development on that platform. Again with the french messing up the M-2000 upgrade in terms of the price quoted, I think that the IAF & the MoD would be very wary of giving them another handle to twist. The fact that the french have received huge orders for submarines as well as a massive order for nuclear plants makes them less attractive as a political consideration. The EF would be a better choice among the two. The SH has the advantage of being favoured on political considerations but not coming out on top of the evaluation means that there is a possibility of criticism about succumbing to American pressure. It defnitely has a cost advantage but it needs a boost from the American government to push it over the line. That boost would have to be offer of technology not previously released. I believe that this contract is U.S.'s to lose. They need to come across as strong partner more willing to share technology and harping about how they deal with their other allies is unlikely to cut it. They will have to deal with India on a different plane to any of their other allies. The Gripen, unlike your reading comes with almost no political cost, The Bofors issue is company related, not country related. The corollary is that there is no political gain either. Probably the plane that most fits IAF specifications, the downside is that it is simply not comparable to the other three because of its weight class. The Gripen is likely to be a default choice if the SH cannot cut it & the EF is deemed too expensive. It is also possible that the gripen will be used to even out the cost by splitting the deal. I have always favoured a split between the gripen & the SH for the contract.

P.S.: Best to remember that this is India, anything that is deemed to be true; the opposite is also probably true!
 
. .
From a political point of view, which choice is risker for the Indian Government?

The F-16? because Pakistan has it?

Or, the Gripen and the ghost of scandals past?

Rafale? Will India risk buying a fighter no other country has purchased?

F/A-18 E/F and accusations of succumbing to US political pressure?

Typhoon's sticker shock?

Politically isn't Mig-35 the safest choice for the Indian government?

Shortlisting of the fighters is the key here.
Only those fighters will be shortlisted that full fill the requirements of IAF(technical parameters) & MOD (offset etc). That means all shortlisted candidates are fit for consumption. After that it will be the L1 bidder who has the major advantage.

Remember the GE F414 vs EJ2000 competition. Inspite of all the noise created by the EURO consortium about TOT and all in the end L1 bidder GE took the cake. In case of MMRCA probably the life cycle cost will be taken into account but in the end L1 will most likely win. The Indian Govt at this time can't risk a grey area in the award of the deal. The descision will be black and white in the sense that Lowest cost plane wins.

Regarding shortlisting, the following most likely won't be shortlisted.
MIG 35 . A paperplane won't be ready in the 2013-2014 time frame. And even the Russians seem to have given on it (absent in Aero India)
F-16- Pakistan has it.

All other planes have a chance of getting shortlisted. The once under risk are Grippen (NG version is another paper plane. Will it be ready on time?) and SH (will the US impose on CISMOA and what about the AESA? IAF won't accept a degraded radar.)


One thing to remeber is that CAG does evaluation not just on the cost factors but also technology and time parameters. It will definately raise an objection if the govt buys a a plane (EF) which is 10% better (but missing AESA- a key requirement) than another plane (SH) paying 2 times the amount of money or a plane (Mig 35) that will only be ready by 2015-2016. The Govt can't afford that :D.

In the end as Bang Galore said I also think "This competition is for the US to loose".
 
  • Like
Reactions: dbc
.
So what if it wasn't shown at Aero India?

Yeah sure, who cares about the latest weapon package, that the EF partners are officially proposing to India, when you have 10 year old brochures. :lol:

And when we talk about lies, are talking about things like EPE engine funded by USN, a super maneuverable F18SH, conformal AESA arrays on DRDO AWACS...and all those other stuff you made up? :disagree:


Data link of course , why did i mention F22 IFDL ,link22 in first place .

I don't think France has any intra flight data link apart from MIDS/Link16.
And one thing for sure MIDS is neither Passive/silent and nor it works in LPI mode .

Rafale updating a MICA via data link can easily be intercepted by the loop-hole in datalink . Until and unless France has developed some space tech to communicate and update missile without emitting.

You didn't explained how they intercept the data link signals, but you just proved what I said. Rafale is hard to detect because it don't emit signals, neither it's IRST, nor the MICA seekers, or SPECTRA does and that's all it needs to detect, identify, locate and guide weapons. If you are right, the opponent will detect the data link signals only after the missile is already launched, which means, when it's too late anyway!
 
.
Well if EuroFighter is selected at $115 Million a piece then one thing I can assure you is that the CAG is going to have a field day tearing apart MOD/IAF. Buying a plane twice as expensive compared to SH with no AESA. No wonder IAF took an year explaining the different evaluation parameters to MOD. But who is going to explain it to CAG.
All ingredients of this becoming another major scandal which the Govt can't afford. Image the News channel headlines :woot:

Bottom line is that price will be a major factor among the shortlisted planes and SH has a major advantage here (if it gets shorlisted).

CAG does not compare the price with different aircraft.. if they raise this as an audit issue IAF can be quick enough to respond saying that the selected aircraft only suits there requirement... secondly CAG scams only how the money is spent...

Secondly American planes looks promising but they are good only for NATO.. with the pressing of CISMO and EUMA we can assume how they are dealing with us.. they have to be a just business men while selling to INDIA with certain agreements not contolling the product they are selling to us... First of all it is so stupid of them to join this Indian Tender ...
 
.
CAG does not compare the price with different aircraft.. if they raise this as an audit issue IAF can be quick enough to respond saying that the selected aircraft only suits there requirement... secondly CAG scams only how the money is spent...
Not True. Remember the Derby for India's Sea Harrier. They questioned the capability of the missile wrt to Navy's requirements. Infact they questioned the whole upgrade itself. In short they are not just limited to money spent. They will go into the MMRCA requirements given by IAF what aircraft has been purchased and at what cost.

Also as I already mentioned in my previous post aircraft that don't meet IAF requirement will not be short listed. And CAG will come into picture only for short listed aircrafts since thats where the price bidding will happen.

Secondly American planes looks promising but they are good only for NATO.. with the pressing of CISMO and EUMA we can assume how they are dealing with us.. they have to be a just business men while selling to INDIA with certain agreements not contolling the product they are selling to us... First of all it is so stupid of them to join this Indian Tender ...

If CISMO and EUMA is a problem then US planes won't be shortlisted. But if they are shortlisted they have a very good chance because of price.
They are not stupid. They are selling their product. They see potential in Indian market and so they are marketing their product. They will make money out of the deal. But we will surely be stupid to shortlist them inspite of CISMOA and EUMA (considering they are an issue for IAF).
 
.
You didn't explained how they intercept the data link signals, but you just proved what I said. Rafale is hard to detect because it don't emit signals, neither it's IRST, nor the MICA seekers, or SPECTRA does and that's all it needs to detect, identify, locate and guide weapons. If you are right, the opponent will detect the data link signals only after the missile is already launched, which means, when it's too late anyway!

Sancho i have reservations here.. can you give show me the paper or explan with your knowledge the working modules how it communicates without emitting signals.. .. I will give you a simple knowlege... you need a singal and medium for communication between a transmitter and reciver.. if EW is able to communicate with weapons without emitting signal then it has to be a alien technolgy because the medium here is the air which needs singals to be transmitted..
 
.
Not True. Remember the Derby for India's Sea Harrier. They questioned the capability of the missile wrt to Navy's requirements. Infact they questioned the whole upgrade itself. In short they are not just limited to money spent. They will go into the MMRCA requirements given by IAF what aircraft has been purchased and at what cost.

Also as I already mentioned in my previous post aircraft that don't meet IAF requirement will not be short listed. And CAG will come into picture only for short listed aircrafts since thats where the price bidding will happen.

hmmmm yeah i accept that.. but IAF has given a rank to MoD already giving their choice.. which means CAG will validate there Rank with the test point.. If you want to find a mistake you can find that even in the best process also.. even six zigma allows mistake..


If CISMO and EUMA is a problem then US planes won't be shortlisted. But if they are shortlisted they have a very good chance because of price.
They are not stupid. They are selling their product. They see potential in Indian market and so they are marketing their product. They will make money out of the deal. But we will surely be stupid to shortlist them inspite of CISMOA and EUMA (considering they are an issue for IAF).

I dont think even if they get shortilisted it will be the lowest that will win ... we have to see the other offers also.. which we wont get with US products... Further as i said they are subject to end user monitoring which is the biggest bull dung of all agreement.. it is not like monitoring C17 or P8i or Hercules whoese quanity are less.. here they are going to monitor 7 squad dude.. do you think EUMA is good thing on our 7 Squad fleet?.. They are ofcourse stupid in participating in this deal because they knew they have so many hurdles just for the money...
 
.
am waiting for the media bombardment going to happen after the govt decision on MMRCA... what ever we choose there will be lot of blame on govt for sure...
 
.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom