Rafale deal in Limbo, Eurofighter, Saab hopeful.

[sancho]

A
Although he is correct in pointing out the change in DRDO's stance when Avinash Chander stepped in...
...Tejas MK-II's design should have been optimized with SAAB's help imo. But such smart decision under UPA was impossible.

First of all, we don't know if it is even true, that there was such a stance in DRDO.
Secondly, on what bases do you think Saab could had helped? Why not EADS, which already is a consultant? Why not demanding Dassault to help fixing problems as part of the MMRCA deal?
Thirdly, hehe although I'm used to the simple government bashing, I want to remind that IAF as the customer might be the reason why such a team up might not be possible. They have rejected the Kaveri / Snecma co-development too and insisted on own development of Kaveri to fix problems because of more gain in experience and technical terms. The same could be a reason too or?

 

[SrNair]

How much he earned from these companies for this BS article?
Our bureaucrats painstakingly completed all the negotiations and Dassault is looking for the sign in this financial year.Reliance already prepared for their own parts in this deal .
Now he we got a retard with BS article.

 

[jha]

First of all, we don't know if it is even true, that there was such a stance in DRDO.
Secondly, on what bases do you think Saab could had helped? Why not EADS, which already is a consultant? Why not demanding Dassault to help fixing problems as part of the MMRCA deal?
Thirdly, hehe although I'm used to the simple government bashing, I want to remind that IAF as the customer might be the reason why such a team up might not be possible. They have rejected the Kaveri / Snecma co-development too and insisted on own development of Kaveri to fix problems because of more gain in experience and technical terms. The same could be a reason too or?

Yes.. There were some talks in DRDO but never discussed openly. ADA and DRDO are aware of the shortcomings of the design.

SAAB was being considered because they are finetuning a similar platform themselves while Dassault and EF are making heavier planes.

EADS for NLCA was most unfortunate tieup anyway. Even Dassault would have been much better partner for the purpose.

IAF's stance on Snecma deal came around the time when French were showing tantrums for Shakti engine . Plus their stance on the Core of Kaveri was a deal breaker. However I dont think IAF is ever in position to change the decision taken in Sena bhavan or, PMO. If MOD had decided that Sncma deal will happen, IAF would have never made its stance public.

 

[sancho]

Yes.. There were some talks in DRDO but never discussed openly. ADA and DRDO are aware of the shortcomings of the design.

Being aware of shortcomings doesn't mean they approached Saab for a partnership, let alone that anything was decided which could had been changed by the new CEO. So that remains a myth.

SAAB was being considered because they are finetuning a similar platform themselves while Dassault and EF are making heavier planes.

Fixing design problems of LCA has nothing to do with Gripen being a single engine fighter or Rafale and EF being twin engine fighters, in fact all of them are similar delta canard designs unlike LCA. There is no relation between Gripen and LCA, that would make it easier for Saab to fix the problems.

Plus their stance on the Core of Kaveri was a deal breaker. Exactly and for the same reasons they rejected the joint development of Kaveri engine, they must have rejected the joint development of the MK2 as well, since their argument was, that our industry gains more, when they fix the problem on their own.

However I dont think IAF is ever in position to change the decision taken in Sena bhavan or, PMO. If MOD had decided that Sncma deal will happen, IAF would have never made its stance public.

Of course they can, since they are the final customer and they set up the requirements of the project and the fighter, just as they do it for FGFA and MoD would never go against their stand for sure.