Dassault Rafale, tender | News & Discussions

[sancho]

The problem now with Rafale (with Brazililian Competition being opened up again as well as delayed) is that who will pay for the future upgrades of the aircraft.
The French are themselves trying to cut cost by focusing on export of the plane but without any success. So will India have to support these upgrades? This is a big question mark right now. Inspite of being a good plane these factors can hurt Rafale's chances in the competition.

The upgrades will be paid mainly by French gov, because they are the main customer so far, but more interesting for us would be to customise our Rafale version, because that could reduce the cost as well. Integrating Kaveri - Snecma engine for example, instead of M88, makes us not dependent of French upgrades of their engines. We could upgrade the Kaveri to our needs and at lower costs as well.

Another point to reduce costs are integrating Indian weapons, like our LGB instead of US paveways, Astra instead of MICA EM for the medium range and a cost-effective addition to METEOR.

Regarding co-development is concerned the French have spent over $50 Billion on the R&D of the plane. I don't think they are going to just give us the co - development rights for $10 Billion deal. Also India just comitted $30 billion for FGFA. So I don't think MOD will have an appetite for another co-development. esp for a plane which is very expensive and we cannot inducted in very large numbers.

I think you misunderstood something here, we were talking about the AESA radar co-development for LCA Tejas MK2. MoD is searching for a co-development partner and Thales with the RBE 2 radar was one alternative, although the last unofficial report said only ELTA and EADS are left in the race.

With Gripen NG coming around 2017 and if what Sancho has said about Euro Fighter is still valid then I guess the Super Bug becomes the front runner esp. if the Yanks play their cards right ( e.g in terms of offset and giving the EPE version of the engine). And I don't see why they won't.

The problem with US fighters are not the offsets, especially not with Boeing, but the high restrictions and limited useful ToT that they offer. Besides that the F18SH seems not to offer the flight performance IAF seems to require.

 

[the rafter]

Dogfight! India’s Medium Multi-Role Combat Aircraft Decision
Ashley J. Tellis
CARNEGIE REPORT, JANUARY 2011

The Indian air force (IAF) is entering the final stages of selecting a new medium multi-role combat aircraft (MMRCA). At a cost of about $10 billion for 126 aircraft, the MMRCA competition is the largest Indian fighter tender in years. Eight countries and six companies eagerly await the outcome of the selection process, which has garnered high-profile attention for its sheer size, its international political implications, and its impact on the viability of key aircraft manufacturers. Furthermore, the winner will obtain a long and lucrative association with a rising power and secure a toehold into other parts of India’s rapidly modernizing strategic industries. Once selected, the aircraft will play an essential role in India’s military modernization as the country transitions from a regional power to a global giant.

The MMRCA competition comes as challenges to India’s national security are increasing in intensity and complexity. Ever since the 1971 war, India’s defense strategy has relied on maintaining superior airpower relative to both China and Pakistan. In the event of a regional conflict, Indian air power would serve as the country’s critical war-fighting instrument of first resort. Due to delays in its defense procurement process as well as accidents and retirements of older fighter aircraft, however, India’s force levels have reached an all-time low of 29 squadrons, and the IAF is not expected to reach the currently authorized force levels of 39.5 squadrons before 2017. This growing and dangerous hole in the IAF’s capabilities comes as India’s neighbors are aggressively modernizing their own air forces, making India’s need to expand its combat aircraft inventories all the more urgent.

In choosing an aircraft, the government of India must employ a speedy decision process that is focused on the right metrics, taking both technical and political considerations into account. The IAF has already evaluated the six MMRCA competitors against 660 technical benchmarks and has provided its recommendations to the Ministry of Defense. While the IAF has paid special attention to the fighters’ sensors and avionics, weapons, aerodynamic effectiveness, and mission performance, India’s civilian security managers are certain to emphasize technology transfer as well as costs when making their decision. In fact, the winning aircraft for the IAF ought to be chosen on the triangular criteria of technical merit, relative cost, and optimal fit within the IAF’s evolving force architecture.

Political considerations, however, will be key in the selection process. In choosing the winning platform, Indian policy makers will seek to: minimize the country’s vulnerability to supply cutoffs in wartime, improve its larger military capacity through a substantial technology infusion, and forge new transformative geopolitical partnerships that promise to accelerate the growth of Indian power globally. While Indian leaders may be tempted to split the purchase among vendors to please more than one country, doing so would needlessly saddle the IAF with multiple airframes in return for meager political gains.

Given the technical and political considerations, New Delhi should conclude the MMRCA competition expeditiously, avoid splitting the purchase between competitors, and buy the “best” aircraft to help India to effectively prepare for possible conflict in Southern Asia. Because of the dramatic transformations in combat aviation technology currently underway, the Indian government should select the least expensive, mature, combat-proven fourth-generation fighter for the IAF as a bridge toward procuring more advanced stealth aircraft in the future.

Under this criterion, the European aircraft are technically superb, but the U.S. entrants prove to be formidable “best buys.” If Washington wants an American aircraft to win the game, however, it will need to offer generous terms on the transfer of technology, assure India access to fifth-generation U.S. combat aircraft, and provide strong support for India’s strategic ambitions—to counter the perception that the older U.S. designs in the MMRCA race are less combat effective.

In making its decision, India’s government must keep the IAF’s interests consistently front and center to ensure that its ultimate choice of aircraft is the best one for the service. This will not only help India to strengthen its combat capabilities in the coming years but position it as a rising global power worthy of respect far into the future.
Dogfight! India?s Medium Multi-Role Combat Aircraft Decision - Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

 

[the rafter]

U.S. May Allow India to Join JSF Effort

PENTAGON ACQUISITIONS CHIEF Ashton Carter said there is "no principle" that would prohibit India from participating in the JSF program. (Senior Aiman Julianne Showalter / U.S. Air Force)

The United States is open to Indian participation in the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) program, and eventual purchase of its fifth generation F-35 Lightning II stealth fighter, Pentagon acquisitions Chief Ashton Carter said Jan. 26.

"There is nothing on our side, no principle which bars that on our side, Indian participation in the Joint Strike Fighter. Right now, they're focused on these aircraft which are top-of-the-line fourth-gen fighters," Carter said.

However, the decision to pursue the F-35 is India's alone.

In a follow-up email, Pentagon spokeswoman Cheryl Irwin said, "If, at some point down the road, India were interested in purchasing JSF from us, then we would engage the Indians in an open, transparent manner at that time. But this would obviously be something that the Indian government would have to decide it wanted or needed."

Carter was speaking at the release of a report by the Carnegie Endowment's Ashley Tellis on India's Medium Multi-Role Combat Aircraft (MMRCA) program. The Indian contract calls for the purchase of 126 fighters and is valued at more than $10 billion, Carter said. Competitors include the Lockheed Martin F-16IN Super Viper, Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, Eurofighter Typhoon, Dassault Rafale, Saab JAS-39 Gripen and the Mikoyan MiG-35.

Carter touted the American-built F-16 and F/A-18 as being the most technologically advanced aircraft in the competition.

"I think that, without saying anything disparaging about the other entrants, both F/A-18 and the F-16 offers include the best technology," he said.

Tellis echoed Carter's comments, saying the two U.S. competitors offered the best capability for the lowest price. Of particular interest to India are the American fighters' Active Electronically Scanned Array radars (AESA), he said. The European and Russian aircraft do not currently have operational AESA radars available. The U.S. military, meanwhile, is currently operating its second generation of AESA radars.

The most important factors in any Indian decision will likely be technology transfer and industrial participation, Carter said. Carter also stressed the importance of lifecycle costs because 70 percent of a weapon's total cost resides in not in the initial purchase price, but rather in sustainment. According to Tellis, both the F-16 and F/A-18 offer the lowest lifecycle costs out of the aircraft on offer.

Carter also stressed the importance of transparency.

"I'm committed to in our process, both with respect to India and in our own internal processes, an open and transparent process, and I think we can promise the Indian government that," he said.
U.S. May Allow India to Join JSF Effort - Defense News

 

[MST]

The upgrades will be paid mainly by French gov, because they are the main customer so far, but more interesting for us would be to customise our Rafale version, because that could reduce the cost as well. Integrating Kaveri - Snecma engine for example, instead of M88, makes us not dependent of French upgrades of their engines. We could upgrade the Kaveri to our needs and at lower costs as well.

The main issue here is time. Integrating an engine which is not even compelted (Snecma-Kaveri) will add many years. Look at time line for Tejas MK2 that too for engine thats very mature.
Snecma-Kaveri Engine can be good option for upgrade.

Also I agree the French Govt will pay for upgrades but they may charge us heavily for it since at this point we seem to be the only customer. In the end it will depend on what Dassault offers but these things will be running in minds of MOD babus. Brazil tender would have had a very positive fall out on Rafale in MMRCA.

Another point to reduce costs are integrating Indian weapons, like our LGB instead of US paveways, Astra instead of MICA EM for the medium range and a cost-effective addition to METEOR.

That will be great but has Dassault committed to it.

I think you misunderstood something here, we were talking about the AESA radar co-development for LCA Tejas MK2. MoD is searching for a co-development partner and Thales with the RBE 2 radar was one alternative, although the last unofficial report said only ELTA and EADS are left in the race.

No I was only replying to some other comments regarding co development of fighter.
AESA co development if it happens will be a good thing.

The problem with US fighters are not the offsets, especially not with Boeing, but the high restrictions and limited useful ToT that they offer. Besides that the F18SH seems not to offer the flight performance IAF seems to require.

Agreed but the Yanks may bite the bullet looking at the CARNEGIE report. They may also add the EPE as part of the deal.
Ideally i too want a european plane but MOD/Finance people may just push for the super bug if it fulfills all the offset/TOT requirements considering short comings of european fighters.

 

[the rafter]

Eurofighter Typhoon Achieves 100,000 Flying Hours

January 26, 2011 - Typhoon, the leading edge swing-role combat aircraft continues to protect the UK airspace around the clock. Across the world the six Air Forces who operate Typhoon have passed the significant milestone of 100,000 flying hours.

The 100,000th hour was achieved in collaboration with the Nations’ Air Forces in the UK, Italy, Germany, Spain, Austria and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia with a combined fleet of over 260 in-service Typhoons – the largest number among the new generation fighters available in the world today.

In the UK, the Royal Air Force working with BAE Systems’ support, ensure Typhoon is available for full operational duty, protecting and defending the national air space 24 hours a day, seven days a week. The role of the aircraft includes air and air interception.

The UK’s contribution to the 100,000 flying hours was achieved through the combined efforts of the Royal Air Force at RAF Coningsby in Lincolnshire, RAF Leuchars in Scotland, and Mount Pleasant in the Falkland Islands and also, in a range of operational deployments that tested the readiness, durability and reliability of Typhoon.

Chris Boardman, BAE Systems’ Managing Director responsible for Typhoon said: “This is a significant achievement for Typhoon and the partner Nations’ Air Forces. Such a milestone demonstrates the extensive operational capability of the aircraft both within the UK and in differing environments overseas. It also increasingly highlights the importance of Typhoon for NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization) air responsibilities.”

Typhoon is Europe’s largest military collaborative programme which delivers unrivalled combat capability coupled with improved situation awareness, high survivability and the most advanced array of integrated sensors makes Typhoon a total solution for the modern Air Force.

The Eurofighter Typhoon is a twin-engine, canard-delta wing, multirole combat aircraft, designed and built by a consortium of three companies: Alenia Aeronautica, BAE Systems, and EADS; working through a holding company, Eurofighter GmbH, which was formed in 1986. The project is managed by the NATO Eurofighter and Tornado Management Agency, which acts as the prime customer.

The series production of the Eurofighter Typhoon is underway, and the aircraft is being procured under three separate contracts (named "tranches"), each for aircraft with generally improved capabilities. The aircraft has entered service with the British Royal Air Force, the German Luftwaffe, the Italian Air Force, the Spanish Air Force and the Austrian Air Force. Saudi Arabia has signed a contract worth £4.43 billion (approx. €6.4 billion, $9.5 billion) for 72 aircraft.

The Eurofighter Typhoon is unique in modern combat aircraft in that there are four separate assembly lines. Each partner company assembles its own national aircraft, but builds the same parts for all 683 aircraft (including exports). A fifth assembly line will be established for the final 48 Saudi aircraft. Alenia Aeronautica – Left wing, outboard flaperons, rear fuselage sections, BAE Systems – Front fuselage (including foreplanes), canopy, dorsal spine, tail fin, inboard flaperons, rear fuselage section, EADS Deutschland – Main centre fuselage and EADS CASA – Right wing, leading edge slats.
Production is divided into three tranches (see table below). Tranches are a production/funding distinction, and do not necessarily imply an incremental increase in capability with each tranche. Tranche 3 will most likely be based on late Tranche 2 aircraft with improvements added. Tranche 3 has been split into A and B parts.

Tranches are further divided up into production standard/capability 'blocks' and funding/procurement 'batches', though these do not coincide, and are not the same thing e.g. the Eurofighter designated 'FGR4' by the RAF is a Tranche 1, Block 5. Batch 1 covered Block 1, but Batch 2 covered Blocks 2, 2B and 5.
Eurofighter Typhoon Achieves 100,000 Flying Hours

 

[luckyyy]

Another point to reduce costs are integrating Indian weapons, like our LGB instead of US paveways, Astra instead of MICA EM for the medium range and a cost-effective addition to METEOR.

that's the point , what acttually IAF buying in MMRCA , just the airframe , radar and engine......even for radar DRDO looking for JV partner...

 

[rockstarIN]

Damn it is becoming so complex, F-16, F-18 is operational but strings attached, EF as well as Gripen will take long time to evolve-could not wait till and the Rafale is too expensive. what to buy?

 

[kish]

Only the teens and Rafale have operational AESA. The teens have lot more mature AESA compared to Rafale.

Eurofigher is expected to get AESA by 2015 while SAAB signed the deal for the development for raven AESA in 2009 only so they will be the last to get the AESA. I don't know about Mig 35

Rafale have operational AESA?
pls provide some source coz i knew its not operational yet, though its ahead of EF and Grippen

@sancho can u confirm it with source to me
thanks in advance

 

[angeldemon_007]

No I was only replying to some other comments regarding co development of fighter.
AESA co development if it happens will be a good thing.

But there is no co-development of fighters.

Snecma-Kaveri Engine can be good option for upgrade.

Upgrade ??/Is our engine better than the current Rafale engine ??/

Eurofigher is expected to get AESA by 2015 while SAAB signed the deal for the development for raven AESA in 2009 only so they will be the last to get the AESA.

That Gripen deal was signed after the aesa was made.

The problem with US fighters are not the offsets, especially not with Boeing, but the high restrictions and limited useful ToT that they offer.

Actually, its a big problem...They are making fun of all the policies. It won't be too far when all other companies will start the same strategy and then our deffense minister will run here and there to develop new DPP, although it will take 4-5 years for our dumb ministers to understand what is wrong ?/

 

[MST]

Rafale have operational AESA?
pls provide some source coz i knew its not operational yet, though its ahead of EF and Grippen

@sancho can u confirm it with source to me
thanks in advance

Here You go

Aviation Week

Low-rate production of the first active electronically scanned radars is now underway for the Rafale multi-role fighter.

Thales, developer of the RBE2 radar, says it's completed development work and now is starting series production. The radar should deliver around 40 percent greater range performance than the current standard, and be able to track many more targets simultaneously.

Final software validation and delivery of the first AESA system to Dassault is planned for early 2010. Low-rate production will involve only a handful of radars.

 

[MST]

But there is no co-development of fighters.

I was only responding to POST #3902. I had also seen a few older post asking for fighter co-development with Rafale so just put my thoughts on it.

Upgrade ??/Is our engine better than the current Rafale engine ??/

Will leave this for Sancho. But if its our engine with similar thrust it will be cheaper reducing the cost of aircraft.

That Gripen deal was signed after the aesa was made.

Pls share the source. Raven is based on an existing radar Vixen 1000ES AESA radar but its not a off the shelf radar. It needs development. See the text from . I don't have a source about when this radar will be operational.

Source

The ES-05 Raven FCR is derived from the Vixen 1000ES AESA radar manufactured by Selex Galileo, designed for the Saab JAS 39 Gripen NG multirole fighter aircraft. The new Gripen radar will be based on the Selex Galileo Vixen 1000ES AESA, with Saab Microwave Systems providing the hardware 'back end'. The Gripen team opted not to integrate an off-the-shelf AESA from an outside supplier so as to retain control over critical radar software - full ownership of radar software and algorithms gives Saab the final authority for export release and technology transfer, with no restrictions, a critical requirement considering the intended markets for Gripen NG.

oops system is deleting J@nes name from the source.
What happened? Can't we give J@nes as a source?

 

[Bang Galore]

Dogfight! India’s Medium Multi-Role Combat Aircraft Decision
Ashley J. Tellis
CARNEGIE REPORT, JANUARY 2011

Link:

http://carnegieendowment.org/files/dogfight.pdf

A very long but satisfying & an absolutely must read!

 

[SR 71 Blackbird]

Only the teens and Rafale have operational AESA. The teens have lot more mature AESA compared to Rafale.

Eurofigher is expected to get AESA by 2015 while SAAB signed the deal for the development for raven AESA in 2009 only so they will be the last to get the AESA. I don't know about Mig 35

Mig 35 has ZhuK AE AESA radar.

 

[sancho]

The main issue here is time. Integrating an engine which is not even compelted (Snecma-Kaveri) will add many years. Look at time line for Tejas MK2 that too for engine thats very mature.
Snecma-Kaveri Engine can be good option for upgrade.

That's not correct, because MK2 needs so much time for the re-design of the airframe (to house the new engine, new air intakes and new wings) and integrating new techs (AESA, IRST). The integration of the engine alone can be done way faster, what the integration of the US engines in the LCA prototypes shows.
In regard to Rafale, it depends on the airframe changes that would be needed, I don't see the airframe to be changed because the diameter is not that different, only the air intankes might be bigger as well, but that's it.

Also I agree the French Govt will pay for upgrades but they may charge us heavily for it since at this point we seem to be the only customer. In the end it will depend on what Dassault offers but these things will be running in minds of MOD babus. Brazil tender would have had a very positive fall out on Rafale in MMRCA.

No doubt about that, the cost in generall will be the higher, just topped by the cost for the EF possibly, but people tend to look at the unit cost only and don't see that there are several points for the Rafale to reduce costs on the other side as well.
Personally I would have liked to see Rafale winning the Brazilian tender not because of the costs, but because of some techs and weapons they are likely to integrate and that would have made Rafale even better.
Capabilities are easier to compare than costs, because the later includes more variables. For example, the argument against the M2K upgrade was the comparison to Mig 29 costs, but the key question is what costs are included?

It's often stated that the Mig upgrade includes new engines and the Mirage deal not, which is true, but was their cost part of the around $900 million deal in 2009?

A deal to upgrade IAF MiG-29s with the RD-33 Series 3 engines was finalized on January 24, 2007 between the engine manufacturer Klimov and HAL.

Under the $250 million contract singed by Russian Defense Minister Ivanov, Klimov was to establish a production line at HAL for 120 RD-33 Series 3 engines. The deal involved complete transfer of technology.

HAL, Klimov deal for RD-33 Series 3 production, TOT makes progress

Also what about the French and Israeli avionics that will be integrated in the upgrade as well are their costs included?
On the other side the Mirage upgrade included new weapons, because they wasn't BVR capable before, but weapon cost were not included to the Mig deal. These M2K weapons costs around $700 million, which reduced the costs of the upgrade itself to $1.5 billions.

So when we compare upgrade costs for the fighters only we have:

- $1.5 billions for 51 Mirage 2000
- $964 millions + $250 millions + X for avionics = $1.214 billions + X for 60 Mig 29s

Also one should ask why the Migs needs to be reengined and the M2Ks not, although they were inducted pretty much at the same time? Which tells us something about the quality of western techs and why they cost more as well.

That will be great but has Dassault committed to it.

AFAIK yes, they stated it in Brazil for their weapons just like they seems to be ready to integrate SLAMER for UAE.


Agreed but the Yanks may bite the bullet looking at the CARNEGIE report. They may also add the EPE as part of the deal.
Ideally i too want a european plane but MOD/Finance people may just push for the super bug if it fulfills all the offset/TOT requirements considering short comings of european fighters.[/QUOTE]

According the latest reports they have to, because the F18SH don't fulfill IAF requirements otherwise, but that also means additional costs for the F18SH per unit, because the EPE is not developed yet and we would be nuts to pay for the upgrade of an foreign engine, instead of our own.
The SH is a good fighter mainly for strikes, but the main argument for it are political. It falls short in flight performance, ToT, independance and customisations and that's what we pay extra at European fighters. Imo, clearly the better deal!

 

[sancho]

that's the point , what acttually IAF buying in MMRCA , just the airframe , radar and engine......even for radar DRDO looking for JV partner...

Not for MMRCAs, only for Tejas and they will add Indian weapons only to European, not replace them like they do with Russian missiles.

Upgrade ??/Is our engine better than the current Rafale engine ?

Our engine is Kaveri, which according recent reports offers 70 to 75kN thrust.
Current Rafale engine is the French M88-2, which offers 75kN thrust.
The Kaveri - Snecma co-developed engine is said to have the latest M88 core and generate 90 to 95kN thrust.

What MST meant was, we could add Kaveri - Snecma with the MLU later, which seems to be the same aim that IAF has with the foreign LCA engines. But as I explained in my last post, Kaveri - Snecma engine could be integrated even earlier to Rafale, possibly through the license production, which would be a big advantage imo!