India-France Rafale Deal Stalled

[UKBengali]

There are already a number of ways to defeat stealth technology and the Europeans who dont put much emphasis on stealth are working hard to find more methods to overcome stealth features, including France.

Concerning BD, there is so much more to do to have an effective AF rather than having 2 dozen stealth aircraft (which will be downgraded export models anyways, or do you think that the Chinese will happily hand over their secret codes etc to the BAF for 200 million ??)! Infrastructure, AWACS support, training, doctrines, network centric warfare, cyberwarfare are at least as important as having more stealth.

We will see just how much progress can be made on anti-stealth technology. If it can be made to work then the US and Chinese would have spent billions for nothing.

You make valid points as regards the other aspects of supporting a 5th generation fleet.

It will be expensive to fully maintain a fleet like this but if you look at the fact that BD is currently spending around half a billion dollars a year on importing arms then you know that this is a country that is prepared to spend money to build a credible military into the future.

And of course the technology will be downgraded from what China has but it would still be superior to any 4th generation fighter out there.

 

[Abingdonboy]

And of course the technology will be downgraded from what China has but it would still be superior to any 4th generation fighter out there.

When it is still unclear, at this stage, that the "full-spec" J-20/31 will match the likes of the Rafale F3+ or Silent Hornet how can you possibly make such an audacious claim? I'll give you the J-20 and -31 are nice looking shells but, right now that's all they are. You need the "guts" to back it up ie sensors,ECM, engine,weapons suite etc.

And are you really trying to claim the BAF will be a serious threat to the IAF?

 

[janon]

We will see just how much progress can be made on anti-stealth technology. If it can be made to work then the US and Chinese would have spent billions for nothing.

You make valid points as regards the other aspects of supporting a 5th generation fleet.

It will be expensive to fully maintain a fleet like this but if you look at the fact that BD is currently spending around half a billion dollars a year on importing arms then you know that this is a country that is prepared to spend money to build a credible military into the future.

And of course the technology will be downgraded from what China has but it would still be superior to any 4th generation fighter out there.

I don't really think BAF will go for 5th gen fighters any time soon, because of what its priorities are. The only other countries nearby that will operate 5th gen fighters are China and India, and to go to war against these countries is simply not possible for Bangladesh. Nor does it need to, because it has friendly relations with both. In the unlikely scenario of a war with either of these two, a couple of squadrons of 5th gen fighters is not going to make much difference. India will probably destroy any air base from which these fighters can take off, rendering them useless. For the money that it takes to buy, maintain and operate a squadron of 5th gen fighters, Bangladesh can develop a lot of other capabilities for its army or navy or even AF. Buying a couple of AEWACs would give a lot more meaningful capability.

In a war with its other neighbors, BAF's job would be to defend the airspace and to give support to troops on the ground - both of which can be done effectively by 4th gen aircrafts. And you can buy a lot more 4th gen aircrafts for the same money. Having 60 Su-30s or 100 mig 29s or their Chinese equivalents will be a lot more useful than having 20 5th gen fighters for the same money. An air force's needs depends on it's role and intentions. It makes no logical sense for BAF to go for 5th gen fighters in the next decade or so. Having a credible navy would be a good start. Even France has no plans for a 5th gen fighter in the near future. Having 100 (relatively) cheap 4th gen fighters with a couple of AEWACs can defend Bangladesh's airspace effectively, but 20 5th gen fighters cant. The former can also attack the enemy on the ground in a lot more places than the latter. If Bangladesh wants to build up a credible war machine, 5th gen fighters will be the last of its priority.

(I'm just thinking logically from Bangladesh's POV. Of course I don't know what they will actually do. Maybe they will buy J-31s in 2025. It would be highly illogical, IMO.)

 

[UKBengali]

When it is still unclear, at this stage, that the "full-spec" J-20/31 will match the likes of the Rafale F3+ or Silent Hornet how can you possibly make such an audacious claim? I'll give you the J-20 and -31 are nice looking shells but, right now that's all they are. You need the "guts" to back it up ie sensors,ECM, engine,weapons suite etc.

China already has demonstrated world-class standards in missiles and radar technology but not engines.

Look at examples of HQ-9 SAM which was even tendered against S-400 SAM in Turkey, KJ-2000 AWAC which made China reject Russian AWACS, SD-10 BVRAAM and there is currently the follow up in development, indigenous radars in J-10 and JF-17, AESA radar arrays in Type-052C and the Type-052D destroyer with a 2nd generation AESA radar.

Engines are the sticking point but that is a matter of time. There is no "magic" that US, Europe and Russia has that China will not eventually be able to develop.

 

[Koovie]

China already has demonstrated world-class standards in missiles and radar technology but not engines.

Look at examples of HQ-9 SAM which was even tendered against S-400 SAM in Turkey, KJ-2000 AWAC which made China reject Russian AWACS, SD-10 BVRAAM and there is currently the follow up in development, indigenous radars in J-10 and JF-17, AESA radar arrays in Type-052C and the Type-052D destroyer with a 2nd generation AESA radar.

Engines are the sticking point but that is a matter of time. There is no "magic" that US, Europe and Russia has that China will not eventually be able to develop.

The main question is, who defines world class standards?
How many of these systems, but especially aircraft have seen active combat?

 

[JayAtl]

China already has demonstrated world-class standards in missiles and radar technology but not engines.

Look at examples of HQ-9 SAM which was even tendered against S-400 SAM in Turkey, KJ-2000 AWAC which made China reject Russian AWACS, SD-10 BVRAAM and there is currently the follow up in development, indigenous radars in J-10 and JF-17, AESA radar arrays in Type-052C and the Type-052D destroyer with a 2nd generation AESA radar.

Engines are the sticking point but that is a matter of time. There is no "magic" that US, Europe and Russia has that China will not eventually be able to develop.

This would have been an awesome facebook post , BUT laughed out if made in any " real military professional " forums. Even the head of China's military said China was 20 years behind the US in technology. but I get it- you are a china fan for obvious reasons, although not sure why you did not chose to migrate over there--- shorter flight times too

 

[UKBengali]

The main question is, who defines world class standards?
How many of these systems, but especially aircraft have seen active combat?

Well China felt confident enough to tender HQ-9 SAM against S-400 in Turkey.

The Chinese also rejected the Russian A-50 AWACs and produced their own KJ-2000.

Fair enough, there is no absolute proof of the capabilities of China's weapons but there is enough evidence around to say that they have at least made major progress in all areas, with the exception of engines.

This would have been an awesome facebook post , BUT laughed out if made in any " real military professional " forums. Even the head of China's military said China was 20 years behind the US in technology. but I get it- you are a china fan for obvious reasons, although not sure why you did not chose to migrate over there--- shorter flight times too

Am I saying that China is not 20 years behind the US in military technology overall?

Areas like engines and nuclear submarines they may be around 30 years, but in radar and missiles maybe only 10 years. The US leads the whole world, including Europe in military technology.

You need to thing logically before you post. Thanks.

 

[Cheetah786]

=Abingdonboy;4128090]Lol -you are wrong.

The MMRCA deal in its current form was only initiated in 2008. 5 years later the deal is weeks away from being signed, for a competion with the complexity and scale of the MMRCA 5 years is a record most would fail to match and this achievement has not gone unnoticed and has been praised by many commentators,bidders and officials.

Try 2001 instead of 2008

India’s planned multi-billion dollar, 126+ plane jet fighter buy became a contest between Dassault, Saab, MiG, American competitors and EADS’ Eurofighter.

What began as a lightweight fighter competition to replace India’s shrinking MiG-21 interceptor fleet soon bifurcated into 2 categories now, and 2 expense tiers. What changed? In a word, lots. The participants changed, India’s view of its own needs is changing, and the nature of the order may change as well. With the long-delayed release of the official $10 billion RFP, the competition began at last – and like all Indian decisions, it takes a very long time. DID offers an in-depth look at the Medium Multi-Role Combat Aircraft (MMRCA) competition’s changes, the RFP, and the competitors;

India’s defense procurement process is definitely a game for the patient, and this competition has been no exception. The Medium Multi-Role Combat Aircraft (MMRCA) RFP caps a process that began in 2001, when the IAF sent out its request for information (RFI) for 126 jets. After delays lasting almost 2 years beyond the planned December 2005 issue date, India’s Ministry of Defence finally announced a formal Request for Proposal on Aug 28/07.

This is not a speedy process. The selection process alone is likely to take at least 2 1/2 years, to be followed by lengthy price negotiations, and probably including delays along the way. Most observers believe that delivery of any aircraft is unlikely before 2013.

No matter what nosense you and your friends chose to spew it won't detract from the established facts and opinions. You are hardly conducting yourself in a fair and balanced manner and it is clear what your agenda is.

L O L yeah clearly you have clear and balance approach. or the fact that you cant handle the truth and resort to name calling and mud slaying to hide the reality.

 

[Abingdonboy]

Try 2001 instead of 2008

India’s planned multi-billion dollar, 126+ plane jet fighter buy became a contest between Dassault, Saab, MiG, American competitors and EADS’ Eurofighter.

What began as a lightweight fighter competition to replace India’s shrinking MiG-21 interceptor fleet soon bifurcated into 2 categories now, and 2 expense tiers. What changed? In a word, lots. The participants changed, India’s view of its own needs is changing, and the nature of the order may change as well. With the long-delayed release of the official $10 billion RFP, the competition began at last – and like all Indian decisions, it takes a very long time. DID offers an in-depth look at the Medium Multi-Role Combat Aircraft (MMRCA) competition’s changes, the RFP, and the competitors;

India’s defense procurement process is definitely a game for the patient, and this competition has been no exception. The Medium Multi-Role Combat Aircraft (MMRCA) RFP caps a process that began in 2001, when the IAF sent out its request for information (RFI) for 126 jets. After delays lasting almost 2 years beyond the planned December 2005 issue date, India’s Ministry of Defence finally announced a formal Request for Proposal on Aug 28/07.

This is not a speedy process. The selection process alone is likely to take at least 2 1/2 years, to be followed by lengthy price negotiations, and probably including delays along the way. Most observers believe that delivery of any aircraft is unlikely before 2013.



L O L yeah clearly you have clear and balance approach. or the fact that you cant handle the truth and resort to name calling and mud slaying to hide the reality.

I'm saying the MMRCA IN ITS CURRENT FORM has only been going on since 2008. The 2001 procurement started out as the MRCA (multi-role combat aircraft) was really the IAF looking to get 126 extra Mirage 2000s however it came to nothing by ~2005/6 as the IAF was struggling to come up with a proper set of ASQRs and by the fact there were big guns like Boeing and EADS knocking on the door asking to be let into the fray. So after all the delays the orginal MRCA deal fell through as Dassualt closed the M2k production line. Then after a period of talks and assements the procurement was restarted this time it was labelled the MMRCA with the second "M" standing for MEDIUM which opened the door to larger twin engines fighters like the Mig-35,Super Hornet, Rafale and EFT. This procurement started in earnest in 2008.

The 2001 date is inaccurate entirely as orginally no trails or evaluation were done so all the intensive evaluations,calculations,analysis and trails for the MMRCA have happened since 2008. The period of 2001-08 did contributed almost NOTHING to the current MMRCA procurement.


Get your facts straight pal.

 

[sancho]

There is no "magic" that US, Europe and Russia has that China will not eventually be able to develop.

If that would be the case, they wouldn't need Russian and western design input for nearly all their aircrafts, wouldn't need Russian engines for fighters and aircrafts..., wouldn't need support from the Ukraine for the carrier and carrier fighters... ... ...
China will eventually catch up for sure, because they are the once that are spending the most (besides the US of course) currently, but that is still to get the basics done yet, which includes design, engines and radars.

Btw, KJ 2000 was the only compromise for China between the Russian system that they don't wanted and the Israeli Phalcon radar that was denied to them! So claiming it to be world class or as capable as others is a bit far fetched, same goes for a missile that is a copy of Aim 120, because even if they look the same, they don't have to have the same quality or capability (AIM 120 C5 has more range but less weight than SD10A, that by looks is similar).

 

[shuttler]

India will never buy an American fighter jet even if they give it us for free.

Really? you wont buy fighters? usa wont sell F-35 or any fighters to you. Sour grapes or other concerns?

How about c-17? Apaches? All US made! why didnt you reject all of them?

 

[Azazel]

you wont buy fighters? usa wont sell F-35 or any fighters to you. Sour grapes of other concerns?

How about c-17? Apaches? All US made! why didnt you reject all of them?

We were offered F-35,but we rejected it.C-17 and Apaches were consolation prize for their loss in MMRCA.

 

[shuttler]

We were offered F-35,but we rejected it.C-17 and Apaches were consolation prize for their loss in MMRCA.

even if they offer F35 to you you cant afford it!

If you have determined to reject US made military products that fly, why dont you do it thoroughly? You are saying one thing but doing another against your words - hypocrisy at its best!

 

[arp2041]

even if they offer F35 to you you cant afford it!

If you have determined to reject US made military products that fly, why dont you do it thoroughly? You are saying one thing but doing another against your words - hypocrisy at its best!

There is a DIFFERENCE b/w a LETHAL weapon & a NON-LETHAL weapon.

US weaponry comes with too much STRINGS attached, like the case being INS Jalashwa LPD, as per the reports, it cannot be used in a war, but than US was offering it for free & just demanding the money for refits, it serves excellently during Peacetime to the IN's Eastern command, there was no way we could have rejected such a price ship.

Again, US is the world leader in both Fighter jets (lethal weaponry) as well as Transport Jets (non lethal weaponry), but both are prone to sanctions during war, IAF can though, do away with sanctions on it's Transport fleet but can't take sanctions on it's fighters, so it was obvious that we go for Transport Jets made in US but reject every Fighter jets on offer, even if it is fifth gen. fighters called F-35 & instead buy fighters from more trust-able partners like Russia or France.

It's just IAF Brain at work (Smart work) which you are otherwise calling as HYPOCRISY.

 

[shuttler]

Is it really so hard to DIGEST for you???

The $12 billion tag was only the initial ESTIMATES by the GOI/MOD when the Tender of the MMRCA was issued around 2008, this price tag was based on the average price offered by the contenders. But that IAF has now gone for the second most priced ac in the MMRCA contenders (after ET). Just the fly away cost of F3 standards of Rafale which will be inducted into IAF will be more than 100 million dollars a PIECE. So for 126, it roughly comes out to be upwards of $12.6 billions in just ac. Than IAF has sure plans of inducting 60+ more, again $ 6+ billion in just ac cost, than there are plans for a naval MMRCA, in which Rafale-M will be the lead contender (b'coz it will already be inducted in IAF), if selected, IN will go for 60-70 of these, again $6+ billion JUST for ac itself.

The 126 contract is going to be split between production in France: 18 jetfighters; HAL 108 jetfighters

The crux of the point is the French does not trust HAL - AS SIMPLE AS THAT!

The Indian Express newspaper, citing anonymous sources in its report, said that Dassault had refused to take responsibility for the 108 jets to be manufactured by HAL, sparking a row with New Delhi. The French firm reportedly told Indian officials that New Delhi would have to negotiate two contracts, one with Dassault for 18 fighters and the other with HAL for the remaining 108 aircraft.

Than there comes training cost, logistics, armament, TOT, MLU, 35+ years of attachment with one of the fastest growing economy, etc., etc., etc.........

We are Seriously talking about CLOSE to $30 billions at stake here (if we include the IN order as well).

You are right, French will be called the BIGGEST FOOLS if they don't welcome this deal with open arms.

I think only $12 billion for 126 jets are going to be stated in the prime conditions in the yet to be signed contract. Remaining part of you drivel about the balloon of $30 billion windfall are talks only. Are they substantiated by any form of MOUs?

Afterall, the French has their reputation and responsibility to worry about. Their concerns are beyond money.

I think HAL will not wait until this moment on PDF to present themselves to the French about HAL's experience like the co-operation with Russia, a very experienced plane doors maker, the new co-operation with France on making radars and avionics, and further monetary lures .. blah blah blah.. As explained through the above quote again - Dessault Rafale does not trust HAL so the stalling in the finalization of the contract.