What's new

Dassault Rafale, tender | News & Discussions

Status
Not open for further replies.
IAF has to remember that MRCA is mostly a fill-gap measure. the aircraft we get should be the most cost-effective one. and this cost includes monetary costs like fly-away cost per plane, cost of support structure, logistic networks, maintenance, operational costs, training of pilots etc) and non-monetary ones (like logistic problems, low operational readiness, low sortie rate, threat of sanctions etc).

after considering all the above, to me Rafale seems best, with gripen coming in second.
 
.
IAF has to remember that MRCA is mostly a fill-gap measure. the aircraft we get should be the most cost-effective one. and this cost includes monetary costs like fly-away cost per plane, cost of support structure, logistic networks, maintenance, operational costs, training of pilots etc) and non-monetary ones (like logistic problems, low operational readiness, low sortie rate, threat of sanctions etc).

after considering all the above, to me Rafale seems best, with gripen coming in second.

Sorry Su, i disagree. I dont think of it as a fill gap measure. I think it is a long term measure that will cruicially enhance or cripple our AF in the future. The best mix of technology in an airforce should be ATLEAST 30:30:30, that is 30% cutting edge, 30% standard levels, 30% obsolete that is being replaced.

As of now, we are facing the problems of block obsolescence of a good percentage of our fleet ie from MiG 21's to MiG 27's. If we think of the MRCA as an interim measure and buy say MiG 35 or even the Mirage 2000(as many people have suggested, even though its not in the competition), 20 years from now, we would AGAIN be facing the very same problem we are facing now. We would have a very modern plane in decent numbers and rising like we have for the Su-30MKI right now and the majority of the fleet would be outdated with the Su-30MKI and MiG 35 and LCA.

And if we think of this MRCA as a major acquisition to break this vicious cycle and buy say the Typhoon or Rafale or even the Gripen NG, all of which might cost much more than the MiG 35(which, per your analysis of fly away cost of the plane-is the lowest) but are expected to be the frontline fighters of their respective airforces for the next few decades even after the advent of true 5th generation fighters, we would be doing ourselves a huge favour.

Imagine 20 years from now, the Su-30MKI which would form the bulk of our AF would be an average fighter of contemporary times, like the MiG 29's of today or the Mirage 2000's. While the MRCA would form the 30% modern planes and the PAK-FA being to us at that time what the Su-30MKI is today. That is what we want. IF we buy the MiG 35 and go for the cheapest route right now, it would come back and bite us int he a$$ after 2 decades.
 
.
Sorry Su, i disagree. I dont think of it as a fill gap measure. I think it is a long term measure that will cruicially enhance or cripple our AF in the future. The best mix of technology in an airforce should be ATLEAST 30:30:30, that is 30% cutting edge, 30% standard levels, 30% obsolete that is being replaced.

As of now, we are facing the problems of block obsolescence of a good percentage of our fleet ie from MiG 21's to MiG 27's. If we think of the MRCA as an interim measure and buy say MiG 35 or even the Mirage 2000(as many people have suggested, even though its not in the competition), 20 years from now, we would AGAIN be facing the very same problem we are facing now. We would have a very modern plane in decent numbers and rising like we have for the Su-30MKI right now and the majority of the fleet would be outdated with the Su-30MKI and MiG 35 and LCA.

And if we think of this MRCA as a major acquisition to break this vicious cycle and buy say the Typhoon or Rafale or even the Gripen NG, all of which might cost much more than the MiG 35(which, per your analysis of fly away cost of the plane-is the lowest) but are expected to be the frontline fighters of their respective airforces for the next few decades even after the advent of true 5th generation fighters, we would be doing ourselves a huge favour.

Imagine 20 years from now, the Su-30MKI which would form the bulk of our AF would be an average fighter of contemporary times, like the MiG 29's of today or the Mirage 2000's. While the MRCA would form the 30% modern planes and the PAK-FA being to us at that time what the Su-30MKI is today. That is what we want. IF we buy the MiG 35 and go for the cheapest route right now, it would come back and bite us int he a$$ after 2 decades.

i never suggested the MiG-35. read my post carefully. i said MRCA is mostly a fill-gap measure. remember, if LCA wasnt delayed, MRCA requirement wouldnt exist.

when i used the word cost-effective, i didnt mean cheap. i was talking about value for money in the long-term. it is not necessarily the cheapest plane that has highest value for money. I was in favour of Rafale and gripen, since they seem most cost-effective when all factors, even the non-monetary ones like life span, are considered.

i hope i have clarified my point.
 
.
Guys I think with MRCA acquisition the structure of IAF would be something like this (2015-2020 time frame)

Heavy category (Primary air dominance): SU 30 MKI (some MLU'ed using SU 35 tech) and PAK-FA as it starts induction

Medium category (Primary A2G with Heavy category planes and air defense missions with Light category planes): (There are lot of specialized planes here these will changed to single MRCA winner) MiG27, Mirage 2000, Jaguar, MiG29 [These guys will be in last leg for there life time] MRCA winner (my favorite rafale) and complimented by MCA as and when it emerges

Light category (Point defense role and occasional A2G with medium category for cover): LCA and MiG21 BiS (I am taking reference from Air Chief interview posted in LCA thread that IAF plans to have 6 squadrons of LCA by 2018).

My choice for rafale is because as per recent reports snecma is going to help GTRE with kaveri project so bringing rafale in will be a good choice.

Correct me if I am wrong
 
Last edited:
. .
i never suggested the MiG-35. read my post carefully. i said MRCA is mostly a fill-gap measure. remember, if LCA wasnt delayed, MRCA requirement wouldnt exist.

when i used the word cost-effective, i didnt mean cheap. i was talking about value for money in the long-term. it is not necessarily the cheapest plane that has highest value for money. I was in favour of Rafale and gripen, since they seem most cost-effective when all factors, even the non-monetary ones like life span, are considered.

i hope i have clarified my point.

Roger! Seems i jumped the gun:oops:
 
.
Guys check this info, some interesting turning possible:

FT.com / World - UK tries to offload Typhoon fighters

UK tries to offload Typhoon fighters
By Stephen Fidler, Sylvia Pfeifer and Alex Barker
Published: August 19 2008 23:31 | Last updated: August 19 2008 23:40
Talks have been held with countries including Japan about offloading large numbers of Eurofighter Typhoons that the British Ministry of Defence has ordered but can no longer afford.

The talks, which officials say are at an early stage, underline the scale of the cash crisis facing the MoD as it grapples with an estimated budget deficit of £2bn.

The Royal Air Force, which had ordered 144 Eurofighters in two earlier contracts, is committed to buying another 88 as part of its membership of the Eurofighter consortium with Germany, Italy and Spain.

Severe financial penalties would be incurred for cancelling or cutting this number and the UK is sounding out potential buyers for all or part of its order.

Defence officials have confirmed that Japan, Saudi Arabia and India are among countries that have expressed interest.

Japan’s interest will surprise many in the industry as it has tended in the past to buy more aircraft from US manufacturers.

India, which has in the past bought Russian fighters, has made no secret of its ambition to expand its indigenous defence capabilities and is evaluating bids from five groups, including Eurofighter, for a new multi-role combat aircraft.

India’s tender could be a lucrative order for the consortium. In order to divert aircraft intended for the RAF to India, the UK would need approval from its consortium partners. The transfer of sensitive military technology is likely to be another potential hurdle.

The Saudi Royal Air Force has 72 Typhoons on order from the UK under an agreement signed last September, to be built by BAE Systems, the arms contractor. Separately, Riyadh has begun talks with London to buy between 48 and 72 additional Typhoons, a source close to the Saudi government confirmed.

The initial BAE order, known as Project Salam, was worth £4.3bn for the aircraft, with the contract value likely to rise to £20bn once support and maintenance are included.

Any agreement on offloading the RAF Eurofighters is unlikely to be reached until next year.

The MoD said: “We would not comment on government-to-government discussions, even to confirm that such discussions are taking place.”

The sounding of potential buyers comes as the four partner nations in the consortium remain locked in difficult negotiations over whether each must buy the same number of aircraft from the group as agreed originally.

Both the UK and Italy asked late last year what it would cost to buy fewer aircraft than agreed initially or none at all, but both options were regarded as unworkable because they would incur such a high financial penalty.

The Eurofighter contract, designed to discourage countries such as Germany from cutting back orders, is written so tightly that it would be almost as cheap to take delivery of the aircraft as to incur the penalties.
 
.
things are getting really for eads........would this be a handicap for ef in mrca:what:
 
.
i feel by going though this type of news that there in no point in getting a plane in which the member countries are not keen esp after F35 on the grabs. Now I am revising my favorite list :D

1. Rafale
2. S Bug
3. MiG 35
4. Typhoon
5. F 16 IN
6. Gripen
 
.
yes i agree with you that the rafale has to have the first place.........uae is going to place orders and hopefully more will follow from other nations,this may ensure finance for future development and reduce unit cost,french are helping us like no other in kaveri,no problem of sanctions,iaf familiar with tech................the french must have made a good offer but they are not going bublic and that is the reason many are ignoring it......may be even the jv kaveri can power the rafale as the french suggested earlier.......it may well be the front runner
 
.
I feel like if nuke deal passes the NSG barrier SH will come to first place.

But only IF it passes
 
.
but sh tot is not up to the mark..........i hope the iaf goes for a plane which suits best in combat and not diplomacy.
 
.
IAF will give it's recommendation but the end result will on GoI about on whom to place order
 
. . .
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom