Super Su-30 MKI as MRCA

[rockstarIN]

Why not F-35? if it is cost less than Rafale? instead of 126 only 100+ limited ToT?

 

[anant_s]

Why not F-35? if it is cost less than Rafale? instead of 126 only 100+ limited ToT?

But sir by same logic (reduced quantity) why not EFT? F 35 isn't matured as a product and assuming it is chosen today, it will arrive at the same time as FGFA. EFT will offer a better bargain with perhaps much higher ToT benefits. I don't think Uncle Sam would allow any significant ToT advantage.

 

[OrionHunter]

In other words, you have no idea what you are talking about.

You and @Abingdonboy are a real piece of art. Even @sancho looking at one other thread on Sukhoi's maintanence cost. Anyway, please carry on 'mighty experts'
hee hee hee

Then dude, do YOU know WTF you are talking about? It seems as though you're an authority on life cycle costs.

So the, lets have your calculations, never mind the calculations made by the US — originators of the life cycle cost-concept which has an entire training institution to train economists and accountants to learn the extremely complex accounting and costing schemata, which needless to say you consider all poppycock.

Before bashing others, you need to have your methodology for calculating the LCC up your sleeve and show it. Otherwise just pipe down. It makes you look silly.

 

[sancho]

Why not F-35? if it is cost less than Rafale? instead of 126 only 100+ limited ToT?

- no licence production possible
- no own maintenance possible
- no ToT or source codes
- no customisation possible
- F35A according to the latest budget around $136 million fly-away (Rafale C at current rates $81)
- F35 operational costs around $30000 dollar per hour (Rafale between $11 and 14000)
- would not pass IAF's flight performance requirements
...
...
...