Dassault Rafale, tender | News & Discussions

[Bang Galore]

I just hope current border dispute put the MMRCA negotiations on fast track and India order the follow on jets right away form France.

I'm one of those who rather have the follow up order diverted elsewhere, the French have given us enough warnings about putting everything in their basket

 

[sancho]

Which missile is that mate.METEOR.

MICA EM:

 

[Sergi]

I'm one of those who rather have the follow up order diverted elsewhere, the French have given us enough warnings about putting everything in their basket

What do you mean by elsewhere ??? Who's gona make Rafael if not French ??? Or you suggesting a new type of ac for follow on ??

I would not like to add follow on to HAL line. They will take ever to deliver them. On other hand French production line can produce 30+ ( I guess ) ac per year.

 

[sancho]

I just hope current border dispute put the MMRCA negotiations on fast track and India order the follow on jets right away form France.

Would be nice, but it doesn't seems that way, once because we still insists on the a single squadron from France, secondly because the current issues are from French side.

I'm one of those who rather have the follow up order diverted elsewhere, the French have given us enough warnings about putting everything in their basket

The aim is to reduce the types of fighters and since only the US contenders would be available now, that would be a bad idea.
My choice would be, increase the order to 200, get the first 3 x squads directly from France and build an more upgraded version in India.

 

[Sergi]

Would be nice, but it doesn't seems that way, once because we still insists on the a single squadron from France, secondly because the current issues are from French side.



The aim is to reduce the types of fighters and since only the US contenders would be available now, that would be a bad idea.
My choice would be, increase the order to 200, get the first 3 x squads directly from France and build an more upgraded version in India.

How ??? HAL is supposed to produce current 108 ac for years and you want to give them more order

There are few clauses which allow govt to take some decisions out of "Standard Procedure" like the way we get Israeli stuff during Kargil in fast track. I hope they use that clause now for operational needs and add more to off shelf order

 

[sancho]

How ??? HAL is supposed to produce current 108 ac for years and you want to give them more order

The 108 are expected to be done by 2021, 32 more doesn't take that long, but we could participate on more upgrades / customisations for such a version.

 

[Bang Galore]

The aim is to reduce the types of fighters and since only the US contenders would be available now, that would be a bad idea.

I have never bought into this idea that we must necessarily reduce the number of fighters. That works well only if you are building your own. Relying on a foreign vendor as we do, there is no great logic that I see in permanently attaching ourselves to them & enabling them to be in a position to apply pressure during future negotiations. I'm aware that others think differently but I disagree.

What do you mean by elsewhere ??? Who's gona make Rafael if not French ??? Or you suggesting a new type of ac for follow on ??

That is correct. I'm suggesting a different aircraft. I don't see any reason to necessarily buy the same type when the negotiations thus far (even before we have signed any deal) have been rough and gives enough inclination that we might end up with a M2k type of rip off later.

 

[Sergi]

That is correct. I'm suggesting a different aircraft. I don't see any reason to necessarily buy the same type when the negotiations thus far (even before we have signed any deal) is rough and gives enough inclination that we might end up with a M2k type of rip off later.

Yes that's true if one party is desperate. But be assure French need is deal more than we do. It will help their business and future development of platform.

In case if M2K it was our need they closed down their line decade ago. So rip off was obvious

 

[Bang Galore]

Yes that's true if one party is desperate. But be assure French need is deal more than we do. It will help their business and future development of platform.

That's what I thought too but their behaviour since then has given plenty of cause for alarm. In any case, once the deal goes through, your leverage lessens with every aircraft inducted.

 

[sancho]

I have never bought into this idea that we must necessarily reduce the number of fighters. That works well only if you are building your own. Relying on a foreign vendor as we do, there is no great logic that I see in permanently attaching ourselves to them & enabling them to be in a position to apply pressure during future negotiations. I'm aware that others think differently but I disagree.

Reducing "types" of fighters to reduce maintenance or logistics and ease operations, not reduce number of fighters. That has nothing to do with foreign or indigenous, but with replacing older single role fighters with multi role fighters.

That is correct. I'm suggesting a different aircraft. I don't see any reason to necessarily buy the same type when the negotiations thus far (even before we have signed any deal) is rough and gives enough inclination that we might end up with a M2k type of rip off later.

How is M2K a rip off? And when you look at the negotiations, the current issue might be from Dassault, but most likely caused by Reliance! Otherwise there is no issue with the French offer, the offset negotiations with are going well as confirmed from Indian officials. I see it more as a disappointment, that such a big deal is only seen as an import/export and not as a chance to form a partnership and co-developments.

 

[Sergi]

That's what I thought too but their behaviour since then has given plenty of cause for alarm. In any case, once the deal goes through, your leverage lessens with every aircraft inducted.

French are trusted but dam good businessmen. They will bargain hard. A additional order will make them little generous too

They can stop the support. If they do we have to find somebody else who can help us.... Russia. And that would be the last thing French would want we might start copy paste and won't stop

I think IAF will look for the M2K that are going to retire form French AF. That will be a cheap and good deal too

 

[Bang Galore]

Reducing "types" of fighters to reduce maintenance or logistics and ease operations, not reduce number of fighters. That has nothing to do with foreign or indigenous, but with replacing older single role fighters with multi role fighters.

I'm aware of the reason but I simply don't believe that a country which imports in quantities like we do should get tied up with any single platform & should give ourselves the option of adding newer platforms in smaller(but still decent numbers) when we chose to. No need to get too tied down to any single platform making replacing it a nightmare, not to add the pressure that can be bought to bear. I believe any cost savings by reduction of platforms could quickly be neutralised if the seller plays rough on newer technology additions.

How is M2K a rip off? And when you look at the negotiations, the current issue might be from Dassault, but most likely caused by Reliance! Otherewise there is no issue with the French offer, the offset negotiations with are going well as confirmed from Indian officials. I see it more as a disappointment, that such a big deal is only seen as an import/export and not as a chance to form a partnership and co-developments.

I'm aware of your stand on the M2k but I hold a different opinion in that we should have jettisoned it & gone in for the Gripen even if there was an increased cost to such a decision. Atleast we would have had a newer frame & further upgradations wouldn't have cost the earth. What next with the M2k? Further upgrades on aging frames ?

I don't give a damn whether the problem is caused by Reliance, that is Dassault's lookout not ours. My concern is with the willingness of Dassault to play rough so early in the game, even before a deal is struck. I want Dassault on their toes, not them keeping us on ours.

 

[sancho]

I'm aware of the reason but I simply don't believe that a country which imports in quantities like we do should get tied up with any single platform & should give ourselves the option of adding newer platforms in smaller(but still decent numbers) when we chose to. No need to get too tied down to any single platform making replacing it a nightmare, not to add the pressure that can be bought to bear. I believe any cost savings by reduction of platforms could quickly be neutralised if the seller plays rough on newer technology additions.

Buddy, that's EXACTLY the reason why we buy the Rafales! We already are importing huge numbers of Russian MKIs and to be not dependent only on them, their weapons and techs, an additional multi role fighter must have been bought. IAF prefered Mirage 2000-5s and now they get Rafales, for different reasons, but the outcome is the same and with the same advantages you mentioned. So we will have 2 different options, besides our own or co-developments and that#s more than enough alternatives.

I'm aware of your stand on the M2k but I hold a different opinion in that we should have jettisoned it & gone in for the Gripen even if there was an increased cost to such a decision. Atleast we would have had a newer frame & further upgradations wouldn't have cost the earth. What next with the M2k? Further upgrades on aging frames ?

Oh you mean the upgrade, Gripen could never have been an alternative, for obvious reasons. It would have taken IAF years, to train pilots, ground crews and set up the necessary logistics for a new fighter, from a new country. That's exactly why IAF prefered new Mirage over Gripens in the initial MRCA competition too. Now everybody is free to judge about the price, I also think it's too expensive, but not by the margin that is often speculated in comparison to the Mig 29 upgrade and mostly because we have the silly idea to do the upgrade at home, which alone made things costlier too.
This is the last upgrade for the M2K, just like for the Mig 29s, both will be replaced by FGFA in future.

I don't give a damn whether the problem is caused by Reliance, that is Dassault's lookout not ours. My concern is with the willingness of Dassault to play rough so early in the game, even before a deal is struck. I want Dassault on their toes, not them keeping us on ours.

That's how business works, at the end we are in need to buy, because we messed up our own developments, which caused the lack of fighters in the first place and as long as everybody knows we can't do similar things alone, they will take benefit of it. Do you think the Russians wasn't happy about the hold on AMCA? Because that means more FGFA orders are granted, which are needed for them to keep the costs for their version reasonable too.
The problem for me is, that most Indians see only the both extreems, either to buy foreign or to develop indigenously, while co-developments are the best midway for us! But sadly there is this attitude that anything that is not fully developed and produced in India, including every nut and bolt, isn't a good development.
So bottom line is, if we don't want others to be on the better side in negotiations, we must go for co-developments and partnerships, with as much control and participation from our side, in return fot the big market and orders we provide.

 

[Bang Galore]

Buddy, that's EXACTLY the reason why we buy the Rafales! We already are importing huge numbers of Russian MKIs and to be not dependent only on them, their weapons and techs, an additional multi role fighter must have been bought. IAF prefered Mirage 2000-5s and now they get Rafales, for different reasons, but the outcome is the same and with the same advantages you mentioned. So we will have 2 different options, besides our own or co-developments and that#s more than enough alternatives.

I have no issue with diversifying, if you see I didn't support a Russian platform. However given how the French are behaving, I would much rather hedge my bets.

Oh you mean the upgrade, Gripen could never have been an alternative, for obvious reasons. It would have taken IAF years, to train pilots, ground crews and set up the necessary logistics for a new fighter, from a new country. That's exactly why IAF prefered new Mirage over Gripens in the initial MRCA competition too. Now everybody is free to judge about the price, I also think it's too expensive, but not by the margin that is often speculated in comparison to the Mig 29 upgrade and mostly because we have the silly idea to do the upgrade at home, which alone made things costlier too.

Why not. The M2k will have to be phased out sometime like all other aircrafts & we will still need to invest in a new platform. I'm still not clear why Gripen could not have been opted for continuing to keep the M2k in the same state for the next few years.

This is the last upgrade for the M2K, just like for the Mig 29s, both will be replaced by FGFA in future.

My point. When compared with the additional cost for Gripen as an alternative, the fact that the airframes are old & will really be neither viable nor upgradable (as opposed to the Gripen) I believe the additional cost that purchasing Gripen would have added would have been neutralised.

That's how business works, at the end we are in need to buy, because we messed up our own developments, which caused the lack of fighters in the first place and as long as everybody knows we can't do similar things alone, they will take benefit of it. Do you think the Russians wasn't happy about the hold on AMCA? Because that means more FGFA orders are granted, which are needed for them to keep the costs for their version reasonable too.
The problem for me is, that most Indians see only the both extreems, either to buy foreign or to develop indigenously, while co-developments are the best midway for us! But sadly there is this attitude that anything that is not fully developed and produced in India, including every nut and bolt, isn't a good development.
So bottom line is, if we don't want others to be on the better side in negotiations, we must go for co-developments and partnerships, with as much control and participation from our side, in return fot the big market and orders we provide.

I know that is how business works which is why I suggested additional leverages. No point in giving additional orders unless the French see it our way.

 

[sancho]

Why not. The M2k will have to be phased out sometime like all other aircrafts & we will still need to invest in a new platform. I'm still not clear why Gripen could not have been opted for continuing to keep the M2k in the same state for the next few years.

As I said, because it's a new type of fighter, that needs new training, tactics, maintenance..., but the M2K was not to be replaced, which would have justified a new type, but to be upgraded to extend it's life in IAF, which is more than happy with the fighter.
It's like you have have a car, which you love and that does perfectly what you want of it, is highly reliable and has no other issues. But instead of buying the next set of tires and giving it some new oil, or replace a few older parts, you consider to buy a new car, only because the parts are expensive.

The fact is, the M2K is a great fighter for IAF and will be even better after the upgrades, it most likely have crucial roles within IAFs tactics, which can't be simply changed either and IF they would want a new type of fighter as a short term replacement, the most logical choice would be additional Mig 29SMTs, or Rafale, since the earlier is already available in IAF too and the latter is based on the tactics and logistics of the M2K, which makes a switch easier. The Gripen, EF or any of the US fighters would never be considered, since IAF would have start from zero again and that's what many forget while comparing the upgrade cost to the cost of a fighter, which btw is often only the flyaway cost, not the system cost!!!

No point in giving additional orders unless the French see it our way.

There are many points for that:

- reduced costs of the overal procurement, since higher units reduces the unit costs
- we can ask for more ToT/offsets or additional leverages as you wanted
- on the other side, buying a new type in low numbers means high unit costs and low leverages
- adding types of fighters increase overall maintenance and logistical costs
- adding types of fighters, that doesn't offer tactical advantages, make operations more complicated
...
...
...