Rebound To Russia: Amid Rafale Impasse, IAF To Buy 40 More Sukhois

[Scavenger]

Noob question : If they are produced in India do we have to pay them(Russians) extra for these 40 jets for licences ?

Yes. Royalty has to be paid. Apart from that we still import some items from Russia for our Sukhois.

 

[cerberus]

The Rafale's higher upfront costs are MORE than cancelled out over the course of its life span vis a vis the MKIs. The MKIs are going to have truly horrific LCCs and this is elephant in the room that no one seems to want to talk about. Looking at upfront costs alone is rather naive and there is a reason why the Indian Mil has moved towards LCC analysis as the basis of all future procurements and incidentally why no Russian products have been succesful as a result (Mi-26T2, Mi-28, IL-78 etc).

True LCC of MKI Huge it Was Estimated Around Rs 4.68 billion in 2005 Any Idea What is LCC of MKI currently

 

[SUDIP]

What was the MKI doing on your rooftop? )

Damm !!!!! sometimes ur typo put u in a miserable condition..

 

[drunken-monke]

Noob question : If they are produced in India do we have to pay them(Russians) extra for these 40 jets for licences ?

Yes we have to..

 

[ayesha.a]

The Rafale's higher upfront costs are MORE than cancelled out over the course of its life span vis a vis the MKIs. The MKIs are going to have truly horrific LCCs and this is elephant in the room that no one seems to want to talk about.

Are you sure about that? Do you have the numbers and relevant statistics to support that statement? Are such figures available in public domain? If not, are there any statements to that effect from an authoritative person in the IAF? In the absence of either of those, I don't see how any of us are in a position to make such an assertion.

Looking at upfront costs alone is rather naive and there is a reason why the Indian Mil has moved towards LCC analysis as the basis of all future procurements and incidentally why no Russian products have been succesful as a result (Mi-26T2, Mi-28, IL-78 etc).

Actually, in the MMRCA deal, the LCC calculation entered the picture only after the initial shortlisting. ie, only the Eurofighter and Rafale were compared for LCC. The other jets were left out.

Fuel is one of the biggest costs for heavy fighter jets. The price of oil has plummetted from 110 dollars a barrel during the MRCA testing period, to about 30 dollars now. How do you think that affects the alleged life cycle cost of the MKI and Rafale? The advantage os fuel sipping engines on the Rafale is cut sharp.

Now, for LCC, have you considered the costs of mid-life upgrade? Remember what the cost of upgrading a 25 year old mirage is? 2/3rd the cost of a brand new MKI. Add that to life cycle cost, and tell me if Rafales will still be cheaper than the MKI over their lifetime. That was simply to overhaul the avionics, with no upgragdation of airframe or engines. Compare that to the cost of upgrading the mig-29s with new engines and airframe upgrade.

Now consider the price of French munitions. About 5-8 times pricier than American or Russian ones.

I really cannot see the lifetime cost of Rafale turning out cheaper, when we consider the billions spent in additional logistics and infrastructure, not to mention the upfront cost and the updragation cost.

Looking at upfront costs alone is rather naive and there is a reason why the Indian Mil has moved towards LCC analysis as the basis of all future procurements and incidentally why no Russian products have been succesful as a result (Mi-26T2, Mi-28, IL-78 etc).

Would you like to compare that with how successful French products have been? Were French products even in contention for any of those?

You know that Russians lost out to Americans in all those deals. Using that to make a point in favor for the French is ridiculous, when French products couldn't even compete for any of those deals. American stuff is cost efffetcive, even when technologically superior, and that is why they won over Russian ones.

And look worldwide at how succesfull these overpriced French stuff are. Nobody buys them, except oil rich Arab countries who just need a tiny, token military, and calls in Americans for any real war.

 

[PARIKRAMA]

I've been saying since 2012 (the height of the MMRCA saga) that the IAF would be getting >300 MKIs eventually, this has no bearing on the Rafale/MMRCA whatsoever though.

Another 40 MKIs changes nothing- it doesn't address the urgent needs of the IAF as these 40 will only be made AFTER this existing MKI orders at Nasik are completed so the earliest the first MKI of this 40 order will land with the IAF is in 2020/21- 4-5 years away. And secondly it still doesn't address the reason the IAF intiated the MMRCA process in the first place- it wants a strike fighter, the MKI is its air dominace fighter, if there was no need for the Rafale or a Rafale-like fighter the IAF would have just ordered 126-189 more MKIs years ago but the fact remains the MKI is not a substitute for the Rafale. It is far more expensive to run, it cannot do the same low level strike missions as the Rafale and it offers signficantly less availability.

IMO, this order is a carrot to the Russians and designed to keep the Nasik plant running as the FGFA (that is meant to be made there) encounters delay after delay. Without this order the plant would be shutting down by 2018/19 and the FGFA will only be in production by 2025- at the earliest- HAL/GoI/MoD are trying to prevent this.


As for the F-18, if you want to throw another 5-7 years away (talks+ setting up plant in India) before the first jet is delivered that is the way to go and that too with a product the IAF found to fail some of their ciritical tests the first time around.


@PARIKRAMA

As I said appeasement..

And for F18 Line talks, here is what is the latest being offered under MII based on source.. (Dont blame me as its a person from Boeing India, whether MOD says yes or no to the proposal, dont know.. )

A 3D image

The strategy of ops

Its for both STOBAR and CATOBAR carrier...

The NTRO based requirement is 6 + 6
The INS Vikaramaditya has 10 rotary wings of Ka 31 AEW and Ka28 ASW. Boeing felt 6-10 V22 with an option of ability to fire harpoon can take over this role completely

The same for each individual IAC1 and IAC1 follow on 6-10 each

And finally another such numbers for INS Vishal and her follow on

So the Boeing strategy sees over next 2 decades the need for
NTRO - 12
IN - 30-50
IAF - 12-24
IA - 10-20
--------------------
Lower minimum ------------- 50
Upper maximum ------------ 100+

The Boeing USP is this
V22 cam carry four sidewinder missiles and four larger missiles, such as Harpoon missiles, or torpedoes.
Thus with AEWC role, it can act as ASW platform all in one itself...
India could ask for customizations as per their needs..

Now Boeing India desires kit based assembly for this...

This is the main agenda...

F18s line is being offered as a caveat for more strategic tech transfer post the strategic agreements (read CISMOA, BECA, LSA). The 18s outcome will purely depend upon the fact that IAF+IN wants dual benefit from MII so unless 18s get IAF approval, its a non starter. (For IAF its difficult owing to MMRCA results of 18s evaluation)

 

[SUDIP]

I've been saying since 2012 (the height of the MMRCA saga) that the IAF would be getting >300 MKIs eventually, this has no bearing on the Rafale/MMRCA whatsoever though.

Another 40 MKIs changes nothing- it doesn't address the urgent needs of the IAF as these 40 will only be made AFTER this existing MKI orders at Nasik are completed so the earliest the first MKI of this 40 order will land with the IAF is in 2020/21- 4-5 years away. And secondly it still doesn't address the reason the IAF intiated the MMRCA process in the first place- it wants a strike fighter, the MKI is its air dominace fighter, if there was no need for the Rafale or a Rafale-like fighter the IAF would have just ordered 126-189 more MKIs years ago but the fact remains the MKI is not a substitute for the Rafale. It is far more expensive to run, it cannot do the same low level strike missions as the Rafale and it offers signficantly less availability.

IMO, this order is a carrot to the Russians and designed to keep the Nasik plant running as the FGFA (that is meant to be made there) encounters delay after delay. Without this order the plant would be shutting down by 2018/19 and the FGFA will only be in production by 2025- at the earliest- HAL/GoI/MoD are trying to prevent this.


As for the F-18, if you want to throw another 5-7 years away (talks+ setting up plant in India) before the first jet is delivered that is the way to go and that too with a product the IAF found to fail some of their ciritical tests the first time around.


@PARIKRAMA

I am in accord with the above. IAF shows no interest in an aircraft if it doesn't fit into their future plan, same case with the gripen, mig35 , f16 or be it the f18s, these never fit into the plan of IAF irrespective of their capabilities. When i am saying plan, it constitute everything from diplomatic ties or strategic interest to product final cost.

But the way DA is going, it is going to be very difficult for them to be another mig or sukhoi for India. So IMO indigenous product (continuous dev of LCA to an proper AMCA) should be given the utter most preference, its the only way out in the future and for a two front conflict. FGFA shud be our last foreign combat aircraft .

 

[Ankit Kumar]

Noob question : If they are produced inIrkutIndia do we have to pay them(Russians) extra for these 40 jets for licences ?

Some parts of the jet is not manufactured here, its assembled here from kits delivered by Irkut. We pay Russians for them too.

 

[Abingdonboy]

Are you sure about that? Do you have the numbers and relevant statistics to support that statement? Are such figures available in public domain? If not, are there any statements to that effect from an authoritative person in the IAF? In the absence of either of those, I don't see how any of us are in a position to make such an assertion.




Actually, in the MMRCA deal, the LCC calculation entered the picture only after the initial shortlisting. ie, only the Eurofighter and Rafale were compared for LCC. The other jets were left out.

Fuel is one of the biggest costs for heavy fighter jets. The price of oil has plummetted from 110 dollars a barrel during the MRCA testing period, to about 30 dollars now. How do you think that affects the alleged life cycle cost of the MKI and Rafale? The advantage os fuel sipping engines on the Rafale is cut sharp.

Now, for LCC, have you considered the costs of mid-life upgrade? Remember what the cost of upgrading a 25 year old mirage is? 2/3rd the cost of a brand new MKI. Add that to life cycle cost, and tell me if Rafales will still be cheaper than the MKI over their lifetime. That was simply to overhaul the avionics, with no upgragdation of airframe or engines. Compare that to the cost of upgrading the mig-29s with new engines and airframe upgrade.

Now consider the price of French munitions. About 5-8 times pricier than American or Russian ones.

I really cannot see the lifetime cost of Rafale turning out cheaper, when we consider the billions spent in additional logistics and infrastructure, not to mention the upfront cost and the updragation cost.

Of course I don't have the empircal evidence to back it up- that rests with the IAF and a few OEMs alone. But it is not really a huge revelation that Russian products are far more expensive over the course of their lives than Western products. A general rule of thumb is that a Western product will cost 2-3 its upfront cost over its life time, a Russian product will cost 4-5+.

Simply comparing the MKI's $20,000+/flight hour to the Rafale's $13-14,000/flight hour is a indicator of the long term efficencies incurred with Western products. The current low in oil prices is, at best, a short term benefit but in the long term there will be a reversion to the mean and the costs will balance out. That said, fuel costs are a rather minimal expense when it comes to LCCs, the cost of spares is a major expense and the MKI goes through spares like crazy. Just compare the AL-31P to the M-88, the latter has a 50-60% longer life span and can go longer between major maintainence work. The MKI also has a far higher AOG rate than the Rafale and the best availability Sukhoi is able to offer the IAF- with fully localised production- is 75%, Dassualt is able to offer as high as 85-90%.

This is simply not a case of the Rafale being overpriced but value for your money. There is a reason the IAF, who is in possesion of all of the facts, is pushing for an MMRCA and has been for over a decade now over and above more MKIs which would seem like an easy choice if it really was a substitute for the Rafale and cheaper, right?

Would you like to compare that with how successful French products have been? Were French products even in contention for any of those?

You know that Russians lost out to Americans in all those deals. Using that to make a point in favor for the French is ridiculous, when French products couldn't even compete for any of those deals. American stuff is cost efffetcive, even when technologically superior, and that is why they won over Russian ones.

Seriously? The A330 MRTT (that the Il-78 lost out to) and the Fennec (that the Ka-226T intially lost out to) are both FRENCH.

Some parts of the jet is not manufactured here, its assembled here from kits delivered by Irkut. We pay Russians for them too.

Like what? HAL have not been using knock down kits to make the MKIs for years, now even the raw materials are Indian.

 

[Ankit Kumar]

Like what? HAL have not been using knock down kits to make the MKIs for years, now even the raw materials are Indian.

Those parts include the kits for engine. Some include the titanium alloys we don't make.

However I stand to be corrected if we have started to make them too.

 

[PoKeMon]

The Rafale's higher upfront costs are MORE than cancelled out over the course of its life span vis a vis the MKIs. The MKIs are going to have truly horrific LCCs and this is elephant in the room that no one seems to want to talk about. Looking at upfront costs alone is rather naive and there is a reason why the Indian Mil has moved towards LCC analysis as the basis of all future procurements and incidentally why no Russian products have been succesful as a result (Mi-26T2, Mi-28, IL-78 etc).


FGFA won't be coming before 2025- at the earliest my friend.

So what is the reason IAF continuing to increase the number of elephants in the room?

LCC seems not that worrying as you may be looking at.

 

[salarsikander]

Like what? HAL have not been using knock down kits to make the MKIs for years, now even the raw materials are Indian.

Hi,

The titanium plate plus the engine parts

 

[PARIKRAMA]

Remember what the cost of upgrading a 25 year old mirage i

From History of the rupee - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

1980-85 = Between 7.85-12.38
1985 USD/INR - 12.38
2011 July - ~46

We bought those mirages for approx 60 Crs per jet flyaway with weapons extra in 1980s or USD 6 Mn at USD/INR = 10 (for easier computation)

In July 2011 the Indian government has finally cleared the upgrade deal worth $ 2.4 billion (Rs 10,947 Crs) for 51 Mirage 2000 H/TH fighter planes of the Indian Air Force (IAF).+ Weapons extra

MLU cost per jet Rs 10947/51 = 214.64 Crs

Based on Indexed Cost of acquistion
Cost Inflation Index for 2014, 2015 and last 30 years

CII (cost index of inflation) figure for 1983-84 - 116
CII for 2011 - 711

So an asset acquired for Rs 100 in 1983-84 would mean

So index cost of acquistion = 100 x (711/116) = Rs 612.93 or Rs 613 approx

If i use this concept on Mirages deal, The Rs 60 Crs becomes Rs 367 Crs as on 2011

Thus if we compare the ratio of 214.64/367 ~ 58%

So its not that MLU was costly.. Its the multitude of factors like currency devaluation and inflation based effect...



@Abingdonboy @MilSpec @AUSTERLITZ @SpArK @anant_s @Taygibay @Vauban
Pls correct me if i am wrong

 

[Srinivas]

Rafale deal will go through, these sukhois are for anti shipping role I think.

 

[cerberus]

Rafale deal will go through, these sukhois are for anti shipping role I think.

After IGA is Signed Btw two Govt there is No turning Back 36+18 Will come In Every Circumstances.IN will also Prefer Rafale M over Mig-29 K For IAC 1,2