What's new

Dassault Rafale, tender | News & Discussions [Thread 2]

What India really needs is the engine and radar technology from Rafale - the rest it has proved it can develop in LCA. This is technology that the French will never transfer.

Personally I am not sure why India wants up to 200 Rafales as it would be better to buy half this number and invest the saved money in engine and radar( less requirement) development. Too much spending on foreign weapons will only harm indigenous developments.

We are stuck up ONLY on the engine which will take another decade

Even AESA radars are making progress ; our indigenous AWACS has indigenous AESA

We want to minaturise it for LCA MK 2 ; it will happen

Rafale expenditure will NOT affect funds domestic R and D

War fighting capability is the first requirement

And building indigienous capabilities take time
 
.
Many things will be there , electronics, spare partrs, equipment maintaince and regular check ups of the fighter plane.

MTBF-based reserves relate to items which are not lifted but will have to be replaced on failure. The MTBF provided by the vendor forms the basis for these reserves. Manufacturer recommended list of spares (MRLS) caters for scheduled and unscheduled servicing and maintenance for the first five years after induction. The vendor is bound by ‘adequacy of spares’ clause and a ‘buy back’ clause in case of under/over assessment of spares required.

MTBF only provides a theoretical calculation of part life. It is used for spares managment. No one waits to a part to fail before replacing it.

Since the IAF aircrafts are maintained by themselves in the inhouse team at their base repair depot. Modern practice is to replace parts and not repair it. IAF unfortunately do not maintain adequate spare parts due to poor spare parts management and planing. This is primarily why their Aircrafts have low serviceability rates.

IAF expects the vendor to maintain spare parts at their own cost and do not purchase adequate stock. Its just poor planing. This peculates to 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th line spares and LRU's.

To the best of my knowledge IAF does not even have adequate software / ERP that wll help them manage Aerospace stock and increase AC serviceability.

I believe the current MOD has identified this as an problem area and will be allocating adequate budget to address this critical area. Till that happens, IAF will continue to blame Russia and HAL.
 
.
To the best of my knowledge IAF does not even have adequate software / ERP that wll help them manage Aerospace stock and increase AC serviceability.

This issue is being addressed

Read this interview The Week | We can move troops from Myanmar to China border

We have improved the availability of aircraft by 10 per cent in the past six months. If you improve the availability, 75 per cent of your problem is solved. Sukhoi availability is also improving. Low availability is due to servicing issues and spares.
 
.
This issue is being addressed

Read this interview The Week | We can move troops from Myanmar to China border

We have improved the availability of aircraft by 10 per cent in the past six months. If you improve the availability, 75 per cent of your problem is solved. Sukhoi availability is also improving. Low availability is due to servicing issues and spares.

Yes, its being partially addressed. I just wanted to remove some misconceptions. Changes are required in the Air Force Manual that will reflect modern spare part inventory and logistics methodology. Budget allocation is really the key issue.
 
.
We are stuck up ONLY on the engine which will take another decade

Even AESA radars are making progress ; our indigenous AWACS has indigenous AESA

We want to minaturise it for LCA MK 2 ; it will happen

Rafale expenditure will NOT affect funds domestic R and D

War fighting capability is the first requirement

And building indigienous capabilities take time

I don't see how 200 Rafales would make India any safer than 100.

Pakistan is not really a threat and all that 200 Rafales will do is make China increase production of J-10B
fighters to even the playing field.

The saved money can be used to develop parallel programs for engines and fighter radars - and yes India is still not yet confident enough to solely try developing radar for LCA Mark 2. At the least some extra time will have been saved. India is not rich enough yet to spend huge amounts of money both on arms imports and lavishly fund indigenous developments.
 
.
Pakistan is not really a threat and all that 200 Rafales will do is make China increase production of J-10B
fighters to even the playing field.
The Indian military has reiterated again and again they are not modernising/expanding with specific nations in mind but modernising/expanding based on a pre-established capability target. There are specific capabilities the Indian military would like to have and they are working to that. So the IAF has a sanctioned strength (42 SQDs) that they are trying to achieve by 2030 and by then their target will likely be expanded to 50 SQDs and so on and so forth.


The saved money can be used to develop parallel programs for engines and fighter radars - and yes India is still not yet confident enough to solely try developing radar for LCA Mark 2.
The areas where India is lacking right now are not going to be addressed by throwing money at them , money is not really th issue but that it takes a long time to build up capabilities and knowledge. R&D cycles are long and thus India is still developing its capabilities, thinking that x amount of money will solve the problems is nonsensical. These issues will be addressed in time by themselves, they don't require additional funding from elsewhere (i.e. scrapping a certain number of Rafales).
 
.
That is true but still buying like Saudi Arabia is also a bad idea

SO you get whatever technology you can and then move forward from there

Every programme has its own spin off benefits
So you pay for screw driver technology that you can do in house yourself.
Good way to make Ch****a out of Indian tax payers ha.
 
.
Rafale proposal “effectively dead” as Dassault bid not cheapest


By Ajai Shukla
Business Standard, 16th Feb 15

Even as three Rafale fighters line up in Bengaluru for eye-popping aerobatics displays at the Aero India 2015 exhibition this week, senior ministry of defence (MoD) sources say the proposal to buy the French fighter is “effectively dead”.
The reason: During three years of negotiations between Dassault and MoD officials in the so-called “contract negotiation committee” (CNC), it has emerged that Dassault’s bid was actually higher than that of the Eurofighter Typhoon, not lower as the MoD had announced on January 31, 2012.
Dassault had submitted a sketchy commercial bid, and when the CNC obtained details from the French company to arrive at the actual cost of the Rafale, the figures added up to significantly more than had originally been estimated.
This confusion is due partly to MoD inexperience with “life cycle costing” (LCC). The global tender for 126 medium multi-role combat aircraft (MMRCA) was the first time the MoD was awarding a contract based on LCC. This meant the winner would not be the fighter with the cheapest purchase price; instead the chosen fighter would be the one that was cheaper to buy, fly, maintain and overhaul over its 30-40 year service life.
“An inexperienced MoD, working off incomplete and sketchy details provided by Dassault, had incorrectly adjudged the Rafale cheaper. Now, after three years of obtaining clear figures from the French, we find India would be paying significantly more than had been initially calculated,” says an official in the CNC.
Contacted for comments, the MoD has not responded.
The MoD has been backing away from the Rafale for two months now. On December 30, 2014, Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar admitted for the first time there were “complications” in the negotiations with Dassault, and outlined the IAF’s alternatives.
“The Sukhoi-30MKI is an adequate aircraft for meeting the air force’s needs”, said Parrikar.
Last week the prime minister was pointedly distanced from the Rafale. On Saturday, an unusual MoD press release denied a newspaper report that the PM would fly in the Rafale during the Aero India 2015 air show at Bangalore this week.
“It is clarified that there is no plan for the Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi to fly in any fighter jet. The news item is incorrect, misconceived and is not based on facts”, stated the MoD.
This is the second time the MoD has gone wrong in LCC evaluations. As Business Standard reported on Saturday (“Defence ministry official questions whether Pilatus was cheapest trainer”, February 14) an internal MoD noting last month sharply questioned the award of a contract for 75 PC-7 Mark II basic trainer aircraft to Swiss company, Pilatus. There too, the LCC was calculated incorrectly.
Significantly, that noting, signed by AR Sule, the MoD’s “Finance Manager (Air)”, who handles financial aspects of military aircraft purchases, alerts the defence minister to issues with LCC evaluation in the MMRCA tender.
Sule writes: “The issue (with LCC calculations) may be brought to the notice of the RM (Raksha Mantri) as two high value cases of IAF based on LCC model are at CFA (competent financial authority) approval stage.”
Dassault’s impending loss, however, will not be the Eurofighter Typhoon’s gain. Eurofighter GmbH has maintained an expensive presence in Delhi for the last three years, just in case Dassault’s bid encounters trouble. But Parrikar has made it clear that procurement procedures do not permit the second-placed vendor, i.e. Eurofighter GmbH, to be awarded the contract in place of the “preferred vendor”, i.e. Dassault.
Dassault was adjudged winner of the MMRCA tender through a two-stage process. In the first stage the IAF ruled out on April 27, 2011 four of the six competing fighters. Boeing’s F/A-18E/F Super Hornet; Lockheed Martin’s F-16IN Super Viper; Saab’s Gripen NG, and the Russian MiG-35 were adjudged not to have met the IAF’s performance requirements.
In the second stage, the commercial bids of the remaining two vendors --- Dassault’s Rafale, and the Eurofighter Typhoon --- were compared on a “life cycle basis” to select the lower bidder. On January 31, 2012, the Rafale was chosen as the cheaper of the two options, a decision that the MoD is now walking away from.
A senior official familiar with the Rafale contract negotiations says, “Given the value of this contract, it was always going to be scrutinised in detail. No MoD official is willing to endorse a Rs 100,000 crore contract with Dassault when it seems as if Rafale is not even the cheapest option”.
This means the IAF would have to look elsewhere for fighters to increase its depleted squadrons from the current 35 to the authorized 45 (with 18 fighters in each squadron).
Besides enlarging its Sukhoi-30MKI fleet from the 272 fighters HAL will build by 2018, the IAF could order more indigenous Tejas Mark I fighters, over and above the 40 now on order from HAL. The IAF could also intensify its co-development of the Indo-Russian Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft (FGFA) with Sukhoi.
For Dassault, an Indian cancellation would be a serious blow. The French air force and navy, dogged by budget cutbacks, have reduced their planned Rafale numbers from 310 to just 180. On Friday, Egypt announced it would buy 24 Rafale fighters, becoming the first and only overseas buyer for Dassault.
"India will take longer than Egypt," said Eric Trappier, the CEO of Dassault on Friday.

Broadsword: Rafale proposal “effectively dead” as Dassault bid not cheapest
 
.
If these reports are true,
only solution without hurting IAFs operational needs is to decrease the number to an extend to which enough ToT and industrial experience can be absorbed.
my bet would be minus two sqd. 126 - 36 =90
@sancho @Abingdonboy
 
.
If these reports are true,
only solution without hurting IAFs operational needs is to decrease the number to an extend to which enough ToT and industrial experience can be absorbed.
my bet would be minus two sqd. 126 - 36 =90

If there is a problems with the figures, that wouldn't achieve anything. Neither Parrikar or Modi want to be roasted by the CAG. This was the weirdest way of calculating L1, allowing a declared lowest bidder to then increase the price. How the heck does he become the L1 then without comparing with L2 ?
 
.
If there is a problems with the figures, that wouldn't achieve anything. Neither Parrikar or Modi want to be roasted by the CAG. This was the weirdest way of calculating L1, allowing a declared lowest bidder to then increase the price. How the heck does he become the L1 then without comparing with L2 ?
Who knows what DPP2006 makers thinking !
since L2 is not an option,ordering more MKI is not the best of interest.
IMO , only thing left is reduce order of Rafale,order more LCA mk2 and speed up FGFA.
 
.
Who knows what DPP2006 makers thinking !
since L2 is not an option,ordering more MKI is not the best of interest.
IMO , only thing left is reduce order of Rafale,order more LCA mk2 and speed up FGFA.

If the article is correct, that won't be an option because Rafale is not true L1. Pretty much guaranteed to be dealt with very harshly by the CAG if they do.
 
.
L1 and L2 will fall once Rafale deal is cancelled.

Russian option in medium is Mig-35 which is of same league as our Mig-29s.
Operational cost effectiveness and technology transfer option is Gripen.
The new found partner US offering is F-18 which has a future and amazing after sales history as evident with Aussies.
A sure no buy is F-16.
The costly other one is EFT though offsets look better.

Other options:

More Su-30s ( but aint no medium)
More LCAs ( but aint no medium)
More AMCAs ( whats that?)
More second hand Mirages( Used ones, seriously?)

Whats ideal to spend the money upon??
 
.
L1 and L2 will fall once Rafale deal is cancelled.

Russian option in medium is Mig-35 which is of same league as our Mig-29s.
Operational cost effectiveness and technology transfer option is Gripen.
The new found partner US offering is F-18 which has a future and amazing after sales history as evident with Aussies.
A sure no buy is F-16.
The costly other one is EFT though offsets look better.

Other options:

More Su-30s ( but aint no medium)
More LCAs ( but aint no medium)
More AMCAs ( whats that?)
More second hand Mirages( Used ones, seriously?)

Whats ideal to spend the money upon??

You can be CERTAIN the money is NOT going to be spent abroad.

ONLY Indigenous manufacturing will be considered. That leaves only Su 30 MKI and LCA in the picture.

The IAF now has to decide how many of each they want. Its as simple as that.

If the article is correct, that won't be an option because Rafale is not true L1. Pretty much guaranteed to be dealt with very harshly by the CAG if they do.

I think both the IAF and Dassault has been too clever by half. ............ now that was fine when the UPA ws in power. But with Modi is power, Dassault is about to discover they have made a major blunder in understanding Modi.

Dassault left the Proposal with some gray areas which could be open for interpretation and price creep. Only now they will find that a price creep will effectively destroy any chance they had for closing a deal.

They thought they could blackmail their way out with IAF giving them covert support by issuing "warnings" of how IAF is dangerously low on aircrafts. But it seems like the MoD has called their bluff leaving IAF with eggs on its face and Dassault with a hole in its pocket.
 
.
If the article is correct, that won't be an option because Rafale is not true L1. Pretty much guaranteed to be dealt with very harshly by the CAG if they do.
Eurofighter is also not true L1 ! because the LCC assessment method was all wrong in the first place.
To make it right EF LCC should be evaluated like we did for last 3 years with Rafale,which isn't happening.
Both fighters are perfect for IAF needs and there is a visible gap in capability.And a fighter of this class is necessity.
So,Rafale is still only the viable option.
 
.

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom