Dassault Rafale, tender | News & Discussions

[sancho]

Who cares what Dassault's arguments are.

Who says they are arguing at all? Again, that was a made up story, not a single official statement from the IAF or the MoD to suggest otherwise. In fact official statements confirmed that the ToT bid is complying to RFP requirements.

 

[Donatello]

Who cares what Dassault's arguments are. This is about the deal and the ToT thereof . The deal is for the whole platform, not for individual parts. The point is not who is responsible for what part but whether we are able, in negotiations, to get what we think we would have. If some part of the "Rafale consortium" won't play ball, that should be a problem for the consortium, not for the buyer. If we are not able to get all the ToT we thought we would, then the deal should be seen as non-compliant & not proceeeded with. Not our place to tie the knots here.

Don't bother with the media, there are enough who have been acting as if the Rafale is the greatest gift to India. They get their say, only fair others do to. Not the business of the media to take sides.

Sancho does have a valid point here. Critical systems like Radars/Engines are always developed by some other party that specializes in that particular field. In would be interesting to see what ToT is given, since the term 'ToT' is very ambiguous at best. Simply importing and assembling is not ToT. ToT would be, that they transfer all the technical research and development so that if needed, the buyer could make something new, next gen on their own. Not merely assemble them. Since research is a natural and long process, that is why you see only a select few companies can build jet engines that good and they have been doing it for decades.Companies like Snecma/Safran/Thales spend billions on researching these products, it would be interesting to see if they are willing to give all their trade secrets and at what cost. Of course they'll teach you how put the engine blades etc in place, but hey in order to manufacture those blades you need access to their manufacturing process plus the equipment needed would have to be imported from some third party.

Projects like these are extremely complex, west does it well because they have sorted out the supply and chain issues over a long period of time.

 

[Donatello]

Who says they are arguing at all? Again, that was a made up story, not a single official statement from the IAF or the MoD to suggest otherwise. In fact official statements confirmed that the ToT bid is complying to RFP requirements.

Yea but what are the exact RFP requirements?

Secondly, IAF is getting the F3 version i assume, is it the RBE2 PESA or AESA?

 

[sancho]

Yea but what are the exact RFP requirements?

Secondly, IAF is getting the F3 version i assume, is it the RBE2 PESA or AESA?

That's up to the MoD to decide and they surely won't make it public. The MMRCA includes the F3+ with AESA, which is operational in French forces.

 

[Donatello]

That's up to the MoD to decide and they surely won't make it public. The MMRCA includes the F3+ with AESA, which is operational in French forces.

Yea but the newer one doesn't become fully available till 2018, so would the initial aircraft be shipped using the old system and then retrofitted with the new one? (assuming India signs the deal this year, so deliveries to start in the next 2 years) BTW, i am assuming there are production partners for MMRCA beyond HAL, like TATA etc, have they prepped up their expected factories/installations?

 

[Bang Galore]

Sancho does have a valid point here. Critical systems like Radars/Engines are always developed by some other party that specializes in that particular field. In would be interesting to see what ToT is given, since the term 'ToT' is very ambiguous at best. .

That is exactly my point. The argument for Rafale has been that it will allow for Indian entities to obtain ToT. If that is got around by with the argument that it is a 3rd party's intellectual property & therefore not available (assuming 3rd party refuses or Dassault says they are doing so), then essentially what is it exactly we are paying this extraordinary amount of money for ? Regardless of the merit of the case being made (no one knows exactly), it is still a valid question to ask.

Projects like these are extremely complex, west does it well because they have sorted out the supply and chain issues over a long period of time.

Exactly, which is why you have to wonder whether we are being served a dummy with all this ToT bit (not just Rafale, any of the choices here).

 

[Bang Galore]

Who says they are arguing at all? Again, that was a made up story, not a single official statement from the IAF or the MoD to suggest otherwise. In fact official statements confirmed that the ToT bid is complying to RFP requirements.

In which case, there is nothing to bother about. Is there? We are not discussing only "official" statements, that would get very boring, very fast. We are discussing what articles are being posted etc. as of now, we have no idea of where the truth lies & until a deal gets signed, we will indulge ourselves with these titbits.

 

[sancho]

Yea but the newer one doesn't become fully available till 2018, so would the initial aircraft be shipped using the old system and then retrofitted with the new one?

You mean the F3R upgrade that comes in 2018, the F3+ with AESA is already in production today.

BTW, i am assuming there are production partners for MMRCA beyond HAL, like TATA etc, have they prepped up their expected factories/installations?

Some of them already mentioned here and team ups are done:

Dassault Rafale, tender | News & Discussions | Page 600

 

[sancho]

In which case, there is nothing to bother about. Is there? We are not discussing only "official" statements, that would get very boring, very fast. We are discussing what articles are being posted etc. as of now, we have no idea of where the truth lies & until a deal gets signed, we will indulge ourselves with these titbits.

Not for me, but I only take reliable articles and sources seriously and MoD stating that the ToT offer is complying vs an LCA fanboy with a blog, that happens to have a Prof title. Well, pretty simple to me.

 

[Agent_47]

Brazil has signed a SEK39.3 billion (USD5.4 billion) contract for 36 Gripen E/F fighters,
That means for a far capable fighter with 50% offset and full ToT for critical components, the $18 billion is not a bad price.(if we have gone for 128 gripens then the cost would have been ~$18.9billion)
Brazil signs for 36 Gripen E/F fighters - IHS Jane's 360

 

[DarkElf]

Brazil has signed a SEK39.3 billion (USD5.4 billion) contract for 36 Gripen E/F fighters,
That means for a far capable fighter with 50% offset and full ToT for critical components, the $18 billion is not a bod price.(if w have gone for 128 gripens the cost would have been $18.9billion)
Brazil signs for 36 Gripen E/F fighters - IHS Jane's 360

At the same time, Brazil also sell some of their plane to Sweden + they can sell the Gripen to neighboring country. Also Brazil can gain additional monetary advantage from any future sales of Gripen (part production).

 

[Agent_47]

At the same time, Brazil also sell some of their plane to Sweden + they can sell the Gripen to neighboring country. Also Brazil can gain additional monetary advantage from any future sales of Gripen (part production).

Brazil can do these because their aerospace industry is far more advanced than us.
If you think about it ,we also get similar kind of benefits from Russia.(FGFA+MTA)

 

[sancho]

At the same time, Brazil also sell some of their plane to Sweden + they can sell the Gripen to neighboring country. Also Brazil can gain additional monetary advantage from any future sales of Gripen (part production).

Getting benefits from part production is part of the MMRCA offer too, the French proposed Swiss a reduced offer, just after we selected it, just because of the expected lower production costs by diverting parts of the production to India. What's different though is, that Brazil most likely funds and partially develops the twin seat and naval Gripen, therefor will benefit from exports of thise fighters more, than from basic part production. They basically have partner status there and that's what can get their industry the most in the long run, just as we would get from designing the twin seat FGFA and naval FGFA as a partner.

 

[DarkElf]

Brazil can do these because their aerospace industry is far more advanced than us.
If you think about it ,we also get similar kind of benefits from Russia.(FGFA+MTA)

I'm still confused about FGFA/PAK-FA.

1. Is both the same project with different name, or FGFA is derivative from PAK-FA based on India requirement?

2. If Indonesia buy PAK-FA from Russia, will India get monetary benefit (from part manufacture, IP right, etc)? If not, can India independently sold FGFA to foreign buyer, competing with PAK-FA sales?

 

[sancho]

I'm still confused about FGFA/PAK-FA.

Replied here:

Sukhoi PAK-FA / FGFA: Updates,News & Discussions | Page 144