What's new

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

@PARIKRAMA @surya kiran @Abingdonboy I haven't done serious reading, but from light browsing, it seems Gripen is being pushed and teens are being pitched, Rest assured neither the Gripen nor the Teens will have an iota of chance to get into the IAF.
This is not from any source but just my general understanding of rubbing shoulders with some people, albeit that was years ago, If either of these platform find a way in, I will be genuinely "Shocked".

I had remarked we haven't seen the last of shornet and there will be a last ditch, and by no means this is that last ditch. Big B can play dirty, and to the magnitude we common folks can barely comprehend, I will leave it to that. (And to clarify I am not referring to IN, I don't know much about the navy's working).

p.s Hint: Check the recipient of largest campaign donations of Big B.
 
.
Heavy - su 30 mki, FGFA
Medium - Rafale , AMCA
Light - LCA mk1, mk2

Let's restrict at that..
LCA should be made in 2 lines at HAL and private player..
(16 + 16) mk1/ year until mk2 is ready.

Let's increase the efforts in mk2 ..,buy Dassault help and expedite the development .
 
.
NO teens please, we should stick to minimum number of types for IAF.
eavy - su 30 mki, FGFA
Medium - Rafale , AMCA
Light - LCA mk1, mk2

You can change Rafale with EF
 
. .
@MilSpec @sathya @rockstarIN
In general what you all said is what many of us feel including myself and @Abingdonboy

@MilSpec
Are you referring to Jeb Bush or Bill Clinton? Whom do you refer as Big B

If its Jeb Bush then heres the data
upload_2016-2-18_12-43-51.png


Top Donors data for Jeb Bush, 2016 Cycle | OpenSecrets

upload_2016-2-18_12-44-51.png

Independent Expenditures for, Jeb Bush, 2016 Cycle | OpenSecrets


OTOH Hillary Clinton is like this

upload_2016-2-18_12-47-54.png

Top Donors data for Hillary Clinton, 2016 Cycle | OpenSecrets

Lol i remember how DE shaw came to my campus and offered me a position which i declined long long back..


upload_2016-2-18_12-49-25.png


Independent Expenditures for, Hillary Clinton, 2016 Cycle | OpenSecrets
 
.
Big B > Boeing.
largest Recipient> Barrack Obama.


@MilSpec @sathya @rockstarIN
In general what you all said is what many of us feel including myself and @Abingdonboy

@MilSpec
Are you referring to Jeb Bush or Bill Clinton? Whom do you refer as Big B

If its Jeb Bush then heres the data
View attachment 294386

Top Donors data for Jeb Bush, 2016 Cycle | OpenSecrets

View attachment 294387
Independent Expenditures for, Jeb Bush, 2016 Cycle | OpenSecrets


OTOH Hillary Clinton is like this

View attachment 294388
Top Donors data for Hillary Clinton, 2016 Cycle | OpenSecrets

Lol i remember how DE shaw came to my campus and offered me a position which i declined long long back..


View attachment 294389

Independent Expenditures for, Hillary Clinton, 2016 Cycle | OpenSecrets
 
. .
Big B > Boeing.
largest Recipient> Barrack Obama.
But POTUS is in the way out now...
Seems USA is slowly going for a policy paralysis level stuff..

You think before the exit Obama will ensure the dreams of Boeing are realised by hook or crook..

Or a carrot of UNSC support + hi tech access will be dangled and Indians will be asked to bite

Its true Boeings Ex Chief Jim Mcnerney was the PEC Chair of Presidents Export Council (PEC) but he retired and now Ursula M. Burns is PEC Chair and she is Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Xerox Corporation

In fact PEC now has no Boeing representation and is having Lockheed Martin chairman Marillyn A. Hewson
President's Export Council Members
 
.
I had remarked we haven't seen the last of shornet and there will be a last ditch, and by no means this is that last ditch. Big B can play dirty, and to the magnitude we common folks can barely comprehend, I will leave it to that

So if we cant comprehend then it simply means that there is no Boeing too along with F -solah and Gripen (I am not even talking about Typhoidoon) . That leaves out nothing on our side and we can all shut this all talk no show campaign.

But there is something I want your opinion on (offtopic though)
Can we de-link IAF from this and just talk about Beoing, LM, SAAB in terms of MII (like GE started the evolution in India in terms of outsourcing). Do you see some weight in it?
 
.
But POTUS is in the way out now...
Seems USA is slowly going for a policy paralysis level stuff..

You think before the exit Obama will ensure the dreams of Boeing are realised by hook or crook..

Or a carrot of UNSC support + hi tech access will be dangled and Indians will be asked to bite

Monsieur you misread the situation. There are no shortage of countries willing to fork our $$$ for Boeing equipment in both civilian and defence verticals. Indian contract while being desirable is by no means necessary.

The policy here - which shall be continued irrespective of who the White House tenant is - is to create dependencies and linkages with India while maintaining our relationship with our erstwhile allies.

As for Lobbying by Boeing that is primarily for Pentagon contracts which dwarves anything India can and will offer in far future.
 
.
But there is something I want your opinion on (offtopic though)
Can we de-link IAF from this and just talk about Beoing, LM, SAAB in terms of MII (like GE started the evolution in India in terms of outsourcing). Do you see some weight in it?
I am not good at speculating, being away from the Aerospace industry for close to a decade now, I am quite cut off from general development and industry mindset.

India has a price point advantage for general engineering product development, but knowing US engineering industry, critical component, even as trivial as a profile for a screw compressor is guarded with utmost priority to such extent that even quality and ops cannot get access to design engineering data within the same organisation in the same country. So this entire idea that International Aerospace industry will outsource components to Indian counter parts, which in turn will gain engineering know how and in turn will benefit local industry is beyond my comprehension. If I am wrong, great, but I have my apprehensions based on my experience.

I used to discuss this with sancho who was a great proponent of technology transfer driving local engineering development. Till date I maintain, there is no alternate to what we used to call "ragda",it roughly translates to sit down and relentlessly design. I pretty much owe everything to this philosophy, where engineer/s is/are given a system/design problem. Utilize 9 step to formulate strategy and 7 ways to for solution approach, and then sit down and design. No other task until you come up with the solution. This "ragda" strategy got us fuel increase in Mig21Bison, integration of jammer, integration for Mission computers, LCA aerofoil and aeroframe, pretty much all of the jigs and fixtures in HAL (albeit some of it was just by intuitive nature of engineering connect that the technicians had with the platform and production back then). I was programmed with this in formative days, so everytime I have to adapt a Tech Transfer i cringe at the G2. Purely from engineering standpoint, I will take an under-performing GTRX kaveri over a tech transfer GE 404, because I know more on my system that I have developed that I can ever know about a system I was donated by some other dude.

Apologize for the rant, I don't think this addresses your query. But apna hi thread hai.
 
Last edited:
.
Monsieur you misread the situation. There are no shortage of countries willing to fork our $$$ for Boeing equipment in both civilian and defence verticals. Indian contract while being desirable is by no means necessary.

The policy here - which shall be continued irrespective of who the White House tenant is - is to create dependencies and linkages with India while maintaining our relationship with our erstwhile allies.

As for Lobbying by Boeing that is primarily for Pentagon contracts which dwarves anything India can and will offer in far future.

What is there to misread ? Being continues to lobby in India. US govt. has pushed sale of arms too. So far India as said no. That is unlikely to change.
 
.
Time to ditch Rafale , scrape this deal and put money in F18 SH produced in India and concentrate on LCA
 
.
Monsieur you misread the situation. There are no shortage of countries willing to fork our $$$ for Boeing equipment in both civilian and defence verticals. Indian contract while being desirable is by no means necessary.

The policy here - which shall be continued irrespective of who the White House tenant is - is to create dependencies and linkages with India while maintaining our relationship with our erstwhile allies.

As for Lobbying by Boeing that is primarily for Pentagon contracts which dwarves anything India can and will offer in far future.

The reason why Boeing is pushing for Make in India is evident. And it is not just the Indian business carrot. In couple of years, they will have to shut down their American plant. But, they still have hope of selling the advanced versions of the Hornet to allies who need replacements today and not wait for the perfect F-35. Also, the African market will open up now. To all this add the dilemma of the F-35 getting delayed further. Who benefits most with delays in the F-35? Boeing. Now they need a plant to keep this dream running. A country, with an immediate demand of 200 fighters is like an icing on the cake. Nothing wrong, its plain business.

But, I would any day prefer Boeing set up a civilian MRO facility in Maharashtra, instead of the F-18 line. Or maybe, the Osprey or Apache.
 
.
Time to ditch Rafale , scrape this deal and put money in F18 SH produced in India and concentrate on LCA
Well Dassualt is offering a very comprehensive ToT package, the superior prodcut and won the MMRCA the first time around and on the other hand Boeing is asking to have complete control over the MII production (so no real industrial benefits to India) and their product lost in the MMRCA on technial grounds so is inferior to the Rafale. Not only that but with the US every high end deal is subject to internal US politics and the Congress has the fnal say on these matters- India can't afford, nor does it want to be, at the whim of them for its critical military kit nor has India signed up for the 3 fundamental agreements (LSA, BECA and CISMOA) which would be conditional with such a purchase.

What exactly makes the F-18 so appealing, am I missing something? Boeing are just trying to muscle their way back into the fray in a typically arrogant American fashion but are offering almost nothing in return other than the "Make in India" headline grabber.

The Rafale/Dassualt offer is the clear favourite if everyone (MoD/PM/DM/Dassualt/Hollande) can get on the same page which seems to be increasingly likely. Let's not forget an IGA on the Rafale sale to India was signed less than a month ago by the two heads of government.

But, I would any day prefer Boeing set up a civilian MRO facility in Maharashtra, instead of the F-18 line. Or maybe, the Osprey or Apache.
Not sure the demand for the V-22 (in India or abroad) is large enough to justify a new production line and that too in India- ditto with the Apache BUT I think the CH-47 could/should be offered to be made in India. Given the Indian military's and the civlian (see strategic infrastructure projects in the North and NE that have been reciving a MAJOR thrust recently) needs there should be sufficent demand in India to justify it and there is still a very healthy export market for the Chinook.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom