India Considers Buying 126 Eurofighters From Germany

[Bang Galore]

Tactics to reduce rafale cost.
But as i said if price diff is more than 2-3 billion then we can opt for EF................i concede that

Good tactics. I don't care which of the two gets selected as long as the price gets reduced

Nope just better than others which were evaluated,,,,still rafale is better than it.

No one disputes that,,,no one

Wrong. That is not the way the IAF shortlisted. Look it up. They deemed that both aircrafts are compliant on technical parameters. For the IAF, either was acceptable. It was MOD that shortlisted the Rafale on financial grounds alone. That is how L1 is decided .

 

[Anony]

hahaha..poor bhartis.

We are talking about buying 126 fighters for one of our armed services(IAF) at close to $20bn which is 3 times the entire defence budget for your all three services

 

[he-man]

Good tactics. I don't care which of the two gets selected as long as the price gets reduced





Wrong. That is not the way the IAF shortlisted. Look it up. They deemed that both aircrafts are compliant in the technical parameters. For the IAF, either was acceptable. It was MOD that shortlisted the Rafale on financial grounds alone. That is how L1 is decided .

U are making the same useless assumption again and again.
There is a swiss evaluation report on ef vs rafale.

Its downloadable in pdf format,go through it.
http://www.google.co.in/url?sa=t&rc...INWZe1wxgA4ST-4J49cwjpw&bvm=bv.74649129,d.c2E

If cost was the only criterion then we would have got mig-35.
Hell why not more mki??

And please make a more reasonable argument,,,money alone is not everything,if it was mig-35 would have been selected.
But as i said earlier if price diff is more than 3 billion or so then ef is a good option as its a lot of money

 

[janon]

@he-man : @Bang Galore is right that both the EF and Rafale were found suitable for the IAF's needs. At that time, the Rafale did not have a working AESA either. In fact, none of the non American contenders did. What the rest of them showed was a proper plan that they could come up with an AESA by the time the first jet is manufactured. Of these roadmaps, the IAF found the Gripen-NG's hard to believe, which is why it was rejected. All the rest were found credible.

Now remember that Captor is probably the finest mechanical radar put on a fighter. And that Captor-AESA will be based on the same radar, except that the mechanical array will be replaced by an electronic one. All the backend systems will be the same. In other words, it will be one helluva radar system. The IAF is convinced that the Euro consortium can develop such a radar in time, so I don't see why we should doubt them. The French too developed the AESA version of their radr only after India selected the Rafale.

Same goes for all the A2G capabilities as well. They were not fully developed at the time because the Europeans had no need for them. But there is no such capability that cannot be added to the EF.

If it is true that we can get 126 jets for 10 billion dollars, I say grab the offer with both hands. ToT and such shams be screwed. All the past ToT we got on MKI and migs and jags did not help us build even an LCA. If necessary, pay for the ToT of the most important components, like the radar. Then utilize our meager resources to build LCAs and FGFAs and AMCAs. The LCA and AMCA experience will give us a lot more capability than any ToT ever could.

 

[he-man]

@he-man : @Bang Galore is right that both the EF and Rafale were found suitable for the IAF's needs. At that time, the Rafale did not have a working AESA either. In fact, none of the non American contenders did. What the rest of them showed was a proper plan that they could come up with an AESA by the time the first jet is manufactured. Of these roadmaps, the IAF found the Gripen-NG's hard to believe, which is why it was rejected. All the rest were found credible.

Now remember that Captor is probably the finest mechanical radar put on a fighter. And that Captor-AESA will be based on the same radar, except that the mechanical array will be replaced by an electronic one. All the backend systems will be the same. In other words, it will be one helluva radar system. The IAF is convinced that the Euro consortium can develop such a radar in time, so I don't see why we should doubt them. The French too developed the AESA version of their radr only after India selected the Rafale.

If it is true that we can get 126 jets for 10 billion dollars, I say grab the offer with both hands. ToT and such shams be screwed. All the past ToT we got on MKI and migs and jags did not help us build even an LCA. If necessary, pay for the ToT of the most important components, like the radar. Then utilize our meager resources to build LCAs and FGFAs and AMCAs. The LCA and AMCA experience will give us a lot more capability than any ToT ever could.

I have enclosed the swiss evaluation report,,,read it.
And on price how many times will i say


if difference is more than 3 billion....................**** the rafale

 

[C130]

We are so "poor" that we are celebrating the aquisition of 13 third hand jets from Jordan.

Oh wait, that's not us.

 

[he-man]

Hell even 2 billion is too much of difference imho....................

Careful now or u may get banned,,,pakistanis love their f-16's and hate usa at the same time

 

[janon]

I have enclosed the swiss evaluation report,,,read it.
And on price how many times will i say

if difference is more than 3 billion....................**** the rafale

I have seen the Swiss report before. What you fail to realize is that that report was about the jets at the time of evaluation. In future the EF can add a lot more A2G capabilities - in fact they have already added some, since that report was leaked. As for your last sentence, that's what everybody else thinks as well. This report says that the EF are avaiable for under 10 billion, while the Rafale saga with ToT is 20 billion, at least. If this report is to be believed, (I don't know about that), THEN it makes no sense to go for Rafale. I'm sure the IAF and def min would also not scuttle a plane that has been selected, unless it was worth it to do so.

 

[IND151]

Laughable statement.
Rafale is multirole...............Ef IS SIMPLY NOT.

That aside not having an aesa is deal breaker on the spot

I am suporting rafale.

Rafale is multirole but more suited for A2G role.

Ask @Capt.Popeye

 

[DrSomnath999]

Lollz
damn the Russians are trolling with the French ,taking out their frustrations on French over mistraldeal by posting such b.s articles
cheers

 

[he-man]

I am suporting rafale.

Rafale is multirole but more suited for A2G role.

Ask @Capt.Popeye

Yes maybe,,,but with mki and then pakfa in future who needs a sole air superiority fighter anyways.

Lollz
damn the Russians are trolling with the French ,taking out their frustrations on French over mistraldeal by posting such b.s articles
cheers

Yup,,,u maybe right.
Many gullible people are falling for the trap though,,,just look at the comments here

I have seen the Swiss report before. What you fail to realize is that that report was about the jets at the time of evaluation. In future the EF can add a lot more A2G capabilities - in fact they have already added some, since that report was leaked. As for your last sentence, that's what everybody else thinks as well. This report says that the EF are avaiable for under 10 billion, while the Rafale saga with ToT is 20 billion, at least. If this report is to be believed, (I don't know about that), THEN it makes no sense to go for Rafale. I'm sure the IAF and def min would also not scuttle a plane that has been selected, unless it was worth it to do so.

No,even today rafale is better in sensor fusion and that will remain.
Even spectra is a huge plus point.

But such mammoth price difference cannot be overlooked when in future ef will almost be equal to rafale anyway.
Even a 2-3 billion$ diff is not justifiable.....forget 10 billion$.

But i think the article is bullshit,,,,there cannot be such huge price difference

 

[janon]

But i think the article is bullshit,,,,there cannot be such huge price difference

That's my feeling too. I'll wait for a few more sources to report this.

 

[C130]

BAE agrees pricing on Typhoon deal with Saudi Arabia - Telegraph

if you go by the deal with Saudi Arabia for 72 Typhoon for 4.5 billion pounds then 144 typhoon would be 9 billion pounds then 126 typhoon would probably be around 8 billion pounds convert that to euros and you are looking at €10 billion euros or $13 billion USD

that doesn't come with ToT or India building a single one and I doubt thats' with a weapons package so add another 4 billion.

 

[he-man]

That's my feeling too. I'll wait for a few more sources to report this.

Deal cannot be less than 15 billion now in any case looking at our currency and adjusting for inflation.
Even in 2012 it was pegged at 12 billion

BAE agrees pricing on Typhoon deal with Saudi Arabia - Telegraph

if you go by the deal with Saudi Arabia for 72 Typhoon for 4.5 billion pounds then 144 typhoon would be 9 billion pounds then 126 typhoon would probably be around 8 billion pounds convert that euros and you are looking at €10 billion euros or $13 billion USD

U are discounting the tot aspect here.
Thats the most important purpose of this deal.

Are saudis getting extensive tot??

The best resort was to buy phase 1 pakfa which will enter production in 2016 with older 117 engine generating 147 kn thrust and with new fadec control.

Then post 2020 we could have got phase 2 engines with 180 kn each.
Rest of the money could have been diverted to lca mk1 and 2.

But at the time we were growing at 9% and never thought we would be cash strapped so soon

 

[Ragnar]

Unwieldy Eurofighter consortium, each of whose constituent countries can politically pressurize India in the future. Too much risk. Eurofighter is fit only for NATO countries fighting NATO's wars.