bananarepublic
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jan 15, 2015
- Messages
- 2,424
- Reaction score
- 5
- Country
- Location
The Indian Air Force’s decision to acquire the French Dassault Rafale, despite a reduction in the size of the order from an initial 126 fighters to just 36, has been a source of considerable controversy for the South Asian state. The fighter’s far inferior capabilities to the Su-30MKI, a heavier but far less costly platform which currently comprises the mainstay of the India’s aerial warfare capabilities, has made India’s need for the expensive European fighter highly questionable. With the Rafale failing to provide the Air Force with any considerable capabilities that it lacked beforehand, and being sold to the country at a staggering $244 million per fighter including the costs of training and logistics, India’s opposition party has referred to the deal as ‘exorbitant’ and alleged that the government’s refusal to release details of the contract were likely linked to corruption within the Modi government. Comparing the Rafale deal to neighbouring China's deal to acquire Russian Su-35 heavy air superiority fighters, platforms which eclipse the French fighter’s capabilities in all fields without exception including range, radar, climb rate, avionics, payload, manoeuvrability and missile strike range, the cost per fighter of the Sukhoi was approximately one third that of the Rafale.
While corruption has been one speculated cause of India’s purchase of the Rafale, another has been that Delhi purchased the French platform despite its poor cost effectiveness to improve relations with Paris - also widely speculated as the cause for Egypt and Qatar’s acquisitions of the fighter at times when the two other Rafale partners were also in need of French also widely speculated as the cause for Egypt and Qatar’s acquisitions of the costly fighter at times when the two other Rafale operators were also in need of French diplomatic support. Renowned Indian Air Force veteran Vijainder K Thakur noted that this was likely a major factor in his country’s decision to acquire the Rafale, noting that such political considerations were seriously undermining efforts to modernise and expand the country’s Air Force. Noting that such measures were making the Indian Air Force far too diverse, and therefore making the fleet far more difficult to operate and maintain, the expert stated: “The United States Air Force operates 4 fighter types: F-16, F-15, A-10, and F-22. It is in the process of replacing its A-10 and F-16 fighters with the F-35A. In other words, the USAF aims to reduce the types of fighters in its inventory from four to three. The U.S. Navy operates with a single fighter type - F-18. It is in the process of replacing the older F/A-18 variants with the F-35C. In other words, the USN inventory fighter types are set to increase from 1 to 2. The Russian Air Force operates 4 fighter types - Su-27/30/34/35, MiG-29, MiG-31 and Su-25. The Indian Air Force currently operates seven fighter types: MiG-21 variants, MiG-27 variants, MiG-29 variants, Jaguar, Mirage 2000, Su-30MKI, and Tejas LCA. It's set to introduce 8th type - Rafale. Clearly, there is a need for the IAF to reduce the types of fighters in its inventory, not the other way around.”
Thakur stated that the most effective way for the Air Force to operate and enlarge its numbers would be to acquire further Su-27 variants, either the Su-30 or Su-35, as well as lighter MiG-35 fighters, a platform derived from the MiG-29. India’s Air Force is already highly familiar with these fighters, and though they come at a fraction of the cost of the French Rafale their combat capabilities are overall far superior. The expert further elaborated: “The IAF should be considering additional upgraded Su-30MKIs/Su-35 or MiG-35 to limit and optimise its inventory. The imperatives for not considering additional Su-30MKIs/Su-35/MiG-35 are likely geopolitical, not operational.” With France forced to offer extensive economic concessions to potential buyers in Europe to market its fighter against far more price competitive and cost effective American made platforms, Vijainder Thakur’s claims may well be substantiated. Had India acquired more Su-30 fighters, chosen the lighter MiG-35, or even sought to acquire a fifth generation stealth variant of the Su-35offered by Russia, the country could have made a considerably greater addition to its defence instead of purchasing the small and somewhat underwhelming Rafale contingent. With the aerial warfare capabilities of neighbouring China fast growing, and the country's People's Liberation Army Air Force inducting a number of world leading next generation fighters into service, India's armed forces can ill afford such blunders for the sake of currying political favour with Paris or other European arms producers. Much the same can be said for the Navy, which is set to choose between the Rafale M and the far more capable American made F-18E Block 3for its next aircraft carrier. Should the Navy opt for the French platform as the Air Force did, this would seriously undermine the capabilities of the country's' new warship.
http://militarywatchmagazine.com/read.php?my_data=70548
While corruption has been one speculated cause of India’s purchase of the Rafale, another has been that Delhi purchased the French platform despite its poor cost effectiveness to improve relations with Paris - also widely speculated as the cause for Egypt and Qatar’s acquisitions of the fighter at times when the two other Rafale partners were also in need of French also widely speculated as the cause for Egypt and Qatar’s acquisitions of the costly fighter at times when the two other Rafale operators were also in need of French diplomatic support. Renowned Indian Air Force veteran Vijainder K Thakur noted that this was likely a major factor in his country’s decision to acquire the Rafale, noting that such political considerations were seriously undermining efforts to modernise and expand the country’s Air Force. Noting that such measures were making the Indian Air Force far too diverse, and therefore making the fleet far more difficult to operate and maintain, the expert stated: “The United States Air Force operates 4 fighter types: F-16, F-15, A-10, and F-22. It is in the process of replacing its A-10 and F-16 fighters with the F-35A. In other words, the USAF aims to reduce the types of fighters in its inventory from four to three. The U.S. Navy operates with a single fighter type - F-18. It is in the process of replacing the older F/A-18 variants with the F-35C. In other words, the USN inventory fighter types are set to increase from 1 to 2. The Russian Air Force operates 4 fighter types - Su-27/30/34/35, MiG-29, MiG-31 and Su-25. The Indian Air Force currently operates seven fighter types: MiG-21 variants, MiG-27 variants, MiG-29 variants, Jaguar, Mirage 2000, Su-30MKI, and Tejas LCA. It's set to introduce 8th type - Rafale. Clearly, there is a need for the IAF to reduce the types of fighters in its inventory, not the other way around.”
Thakur stated that the most effective way for the Air Force to operate and enlarge its numbers would be to acquire further Su-27 variants, either the Su-30 or Su-35, as well as lighter MiG-35 fighters, a platform derived from the MiG-29. India’s Air Force is already highly familiar with these fighters, and though they come at a fraction of the cost of the French Rafale their combat capabilities are overall far superior. The expert further elaborated: “The IAF should be considering additional upgraded Su-30MKIs/Su-35 or MiG-35 to limit and optimise its inventory. The imperatives for not considering additional Su-30MKIs/Su-35/MiG-35 are likely geopolitical, not operational.” With France forced to offer extensive economic concessions to potential buyers in Europe to market its fighter against far more price competitive and cost effective American made platforms, Vijainder Thakur’s claims may well be substantiated. Had India acquired more Su-30 fighters, chosen the lighter MiG-35, or even sought to acquire a fifth generation stealth variant of the Su-35offered by Russia, the country could have made a considerably greater addition to its defence instead of purchasing the small and somewhat underwhelming Rafale contingent. With the aerial warfare capabilities of neighbouring China fast growing, and the country's People's Liberation Army Air Force inducting a number of world leading next generation fighters into service, India's armed forces can ill afford such blunders for the sake of currying political favour with Paris or other European arms producers. Much the same can be said for the Navy, which is set to choose between the Rafale M and the far more capable American made F-18E Block 3for its next aircraft carrier. Should the Navy opt for the French platform as the Air Force did, this would seriously undermine the capabilities of the country's' new warship.
http://militarywatchmagazine.com/read.php?my_data=70548
