But we can compare the French mold with Russian mold to gauge the similarities and differences in their approaches towards solving the same problem
Dassault Rafale, tender | News & Discussions
- Thread starter Srirangan
- Start date
- Status
But we can compare the French mold with Russian mold to gauge the similarities and differences in their approaches towards solving the same problem
MilSpec
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2011
- Messages
- 12,931
- Reaction score
- 38
- Country
- Location
Not entirely true. It depends on nature of ToT, during ToT for Mig21, all subsystem dfmea and Pfmea were transferred to HAL, For MKI there was predetermined Phase I,II and III planned. The company I currently work for has transferred technologies for multiple products to our subsidiary plants in brazil and china, and we have achieved 100% ToT. At the end of day it, has to do with the complexity of technology, sustenance of certain capabilities, ability of local industries to sustain certain process etc. Feasibility evaluation and gap analysis are the backbones of technology transfer.
cloud_9
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jul 16, 2010
- Messages
- 4,921
- Reaction score
- -2
- Country
- Location
I'm not into aero industry and got little blue about the standard practices followed in typical TOT contracts.
But transferring tech to subsidiaries is all together different scenario than the one we have on hand.
But it all depends on what they are transferring and that will dictate the clauses of TOT.But a general observation is that nobody transfers there core/latest/cutting edge tech to third parties.So it will all depend on what role is given to Indian companies.
But transferring tech to subsidiaries is all together different scenario than the one we have on hand.
But it all depends on what they are transferring and that will dictate the clauses of TOT.But a general observation is that nobody transfers there core/latest/cutting edge tech to third parties.So it will all depend on what role is given to Indian companies.
sancho
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2009
- Messages
- 13,011
- Reaction score
- 27
- Country
- Location
Unless you have to win the deal! We know that the RFP basically says 50% ToT, but that doesn't meant core techs of course. That's why even US fighters that were restricted to not divert any core radar or EW techs, were able to fulfill the ToT requirements. BUT, that was far too less to be shortlisted, because Russians and Europeans offered far better ToT packages "including" core techs!
We know from EF and Rafale officials that high radar ToT and source codes would be provided (Dassault stated full ToT of the radar). Halloween has stated that Snecma might divert up to 100% engine techs to Indian counterparts. We also know that Thales would divert the FSO production, most likely even with the IRST to Samtel under ToT. So besides the normal ToT of airframe parts, the French (and most likely the EF consortium too) do offer a credible ammount of core techs, which shows why the move from MRCA to M-MRCA is so important for India and also explain why only these 2 fighter were shortlisted.
Last edited:
cloud_9
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jul 16, 2010
- Messages
- 4,921
- Reaction score
- -2
- Country
- Location
The only positive outcome from this deal would be upgradation of the shop floor and the increase in efficiency of the org's that will be feeling with the production.
By giving radar tech......You mean they will sell us the technology ?
By giving radar tech......You mean they will sell us the technology ?
sancho
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2009
- Messages
- 13,011
- Reaction score
- 27
- Country
- Location
atlssa
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2014
- Messages
- 220
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
Modi Should End His Own Honeymoon - Bloomberg View
Jul 6, 2014 6:00 PM EDT
By Swaminathan S. Anklesaria Aiyar
In India, a new government's first post-election budget is usually a time to hand out rewards -- freebies and tax cuts for the ruling party's loyal supporters. This might seem like good politics as well as good manners. But if Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi wants to meet the high expectations that markets have set for him, he needs to take a different path when he presents his budget on July 10.
In fact, India's troubled finances are going to require two tough budgets in a row. At 7 to 9 percent, the combined fiscal deficit of the central and state governments has been unsustainably high for years. Blame for this can be laid upon the previous Congress Party-led government, which produced two soft budgets after being elected for a second term in 2009. The ruling coalition had already slashed taxes in 2008 to combat the fiscal crisis, and it decided to go slow in rolling these back. It increased subsidies for oil, fertilizers and food. It announced big increases in government support prices for crops, helping farmers but stoking food inflation.
At first, this spending spree stimulated the economy. Gross domestic product grew by 8.6 percent in 2009-2010 and 8.9 percent in 2010-2011. But a slowdown inevitably followed, exacerbated by the global downturn. Meanwhile, high fiscal deficits helped stoke consumer price inflation of 8 to 10 percent for several years. The central bank raised interest rates, but these hit production without curbing prices. Rating agencies threatened to downgrade the country's debt, and the government responded with savage cuts in capital spending. At the same time, the threat of corruption investigations paralyzed decision making, so project approvals froze. Result: GDP growth was almost halved, to 4.6 and 4.7 percent respectively, in the Congress Party's last two years in power before Modi's blowout victory.
The lesson for Modi is clear: If you start with soft budgets, you will win only temporary popularity. Then you'll have to pay the price in the second half of your term, exactly when fast growth is needed to ensure your re-election.
Modi is enjoying a honeymoon with voters and political supporters now. Cutting it short could be the best antidote against a divorce down the line. That means disappointing all sorts of constituencies that contributed to the win. One of Modi’s party allies in the southern state of Seemandhra, for instance, promised during the campaign to waive repayment of bank loans made to farmers and self-help groups. The local party now wants Modi to help pay for its foolish pledge. The prime minister should refuse. His own budget is under strain, and besides, such brazen favoritism to one state would explode all his claims to good governance. Loan waivers reward defaulters and make honest repayers look foolish. This will encourage willful default in the future, weakening the entire rural financial system.
The core support for Modi's party comes from the Indian middle class. So, the news media are full of speculation that his finance minister, Arun Jaitley, will reward these voters by raising the income tax exemption limit to 500,000 rupees ($8,384) per year from 200,000 rupees ($3,354). This would be fiscal suicide. Instead, the new government should focus on plugging loopholes, reducing the huge array of existing tax exemptions and exceptions, and improving tax administration.
Fuel subsidies account for almost 1.5 percent of GDP. They are not even targeted at the poor or needy, benefiting mostly big farmers, the middle class and owners of luxury diesel cars. Troubles in the Middle East threaten to push global prices (and hence Indian budget subsidies) even higher. Modi needs to raise the government-designated price of oil products such as diesel and kerosene immediately and phase out price controls completely within two years.
Modi’s election platform promised massive new spending on infrastructure and health. Where will all this money come from? Private infrastructure companies cannot be the solution: Most are deep in the red, unable to pay their bank debts. Indeed, the swelling tide of bad debts threatens the viability of banks themselves. State-owned banks, which account for 70 percent of all banking, need almost 6 trillion rupees of fresh capital by 2018 to meet the new Basel norms. But New Delhi lacks cash for recapitalization.
In sum, the situation calls for tough decisions and stringent budget discipline. This must be accompanied by good policies and a slashing of red tape to revive economic growth. Only then should Modi embark on his promised infrastructure spending spree. This approach will disappoint his gung-ho supporters in the short run. But it will yield dividends when Modi has to face the voters again.
Modi Should End His Own Honeymoon - Bloomberg View
Jul 6, 2014 6:00 PM EDT
By Swaminathan S. Anklesaria Aiyar
In India, a new government's first post-election budget is usually a time to hand out rewards -- freebies and tax cuts for the ruling party's loyal supporters. This might seem like good politics as well as good manners. But if Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi wants to meet the high expectations that markets have set for him, he needs to take a different path when he presents his budget on July 10.
In fact, India's troubled finances are going to require two tough budgets in a row. At 7 to 9 percent, the combined fiscal deficit of the central and state governments has been unsustainably high for years. Blame for this can be laid upon the previous Congress Party-led government, which produced two soft budgets after being elected for a second term in 2009. The ruling coalition had already slashed taxes in 2008 to combat the fiscal crisis, and it decided to go slow in rolling these back. It increased subsidies for oil, fertilizers and food. It announced big increases in government support prices for crops, helping farmers but stoking food inflation.
At first, this spending spree stimulated the economy. Gross domestic product grew by 8.6 percent in 2009-2010 and 8.9 percent in 2010-2011. But a slowdown inevitably followed, exacerbated by the global downturn. Meanwhile, high fiscal deficits helped stoke consumer price inflation of 8 to 10 percent for several years. The central bank raised interest rates, but these hit production without curbing prices. Rating agencies threatened to downgrade the country's debt, and the government responded with savage cuts in capital spending. At the same time, the threat of corruption investigations paralyzed decision making, so project approvals froze. Result: GDP growth was almost halved, to 4.6 and 4.7 percent respectively, in the Congress Party's last two years in power before Modi's blowout victory.
The lesson for Modi is clear: If you start with soft budgets, you will win only temporary popularity. Then you'll have to pay the price in the second half of your term, exactly when fast growth is needed to ensure your re-election.
Modi is enjoying a honeymoon with voters and political supporters now. Cutting it short could be the best antidote against a divorce down the line. That means disappointing all sorts of constituencies that contributed to the win. One of Modi’s party allies in the southern state of Seemandhra, for instance, promised during the campaign to waive repayment of bank loans made to farmers and self-help groups. The local party now wants Modi to help pay for its foolish pledge. The prime minister should refuse. His own budget is under strain, and besides, such brazen favoritism to one state would explode all his claims to good governance. Loan waivers reward defaulters and make honest repayers look foolish. This will encourage willful default in the future, weakening the entire rural financial system.
The core support for Modi's party comes from the Indian middle class. So, the news media are full of speculation that his finance minister, Arun Jaitley, will reward these voters by raising the income tax exemption limit to 500,000 rupees ($8,384) per year from 200,000 rupees ($3,354). This would be fiscal suicide. Instead, the new government should focus on plugging loopholes, reducing the huge array of existing tax exemptions and exceptions, and improving tax administration.
Fuel subsidies account for almost 1.5 percent of GDP. They are not even targeted at the poor or needy, benefiting mostly big farmers, the middle class and owners of luxury diesel cars. Troubles in the Middle East threaten to push global prices (and hence Indian budget subsidies) even higher. Modi needs to raise the government-designated price of oil products such as diesel and kerosene immediately and phase out price controls completely within two years.
Modi’s election platform promised massive new spending on infrastructure and health. Where will all this money come from? Private infrastructure companies cannot be the solution: Most are deep in the red, unable to pay their bank debts. Indeed, the swelling tide of bad debts threatens the viability of banks themselves. State-owned banks, which account for 70 percent of all banking, need almost 6 trillion rupees of fresh capital by 2018 to meet the new Basel norms. But New Delhi lacks cash for recapitalization.
In sum, the situation calls for tough decisions and stringent budget discipline. This must be accompanied by good policies and a slashing of red tape to revive economic growth. Only then should Modi embark on his promised infrastructure spending spree. This approach will disappoint his gung-ho supporters in the short run. But it will yield dividends when Modi has to face the voters again.
Modi Should End His Own Honeymoon - Bloomberg View
sancho
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2009
- Messages
- 13,011
- Reaction score
- 27
- Country
- Location
Abingdonboy
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2010
- Messages
- 29,597
- Reaction score
- 46
- Country
- Location
This is such nonsensical phrasing- the way it is worded makes out the deal is in trouble when there is no such indication of such.
George Osbourne's discussions on the matter are nothing special, every visiting minister/head of state from a EFT consortium nation had taken this up with their Indian counterparts during bilateral discussions- it is more out of protocol, hope and expectation than out of any tangible belief these talks will lead to the EFT's sale to India.
The assertion he is "laying the ground work" for the EFT' sale to India is utterly farcical. India has shown zero interest in exploring another option beyond the Rafale. It is either Rafale or nothing- the EFT and the Gripen's chances are precisely 0.
sancho
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2009
- Messages
- 13,011
- Reaction score
- 27
- Country
- Location
It doesn't say that the deal is in trouble, just that there is no deal yet and that is the important point! That and the fact that a new government is in charge, is enough for them to make a new approach, much beyond the normal discussions as you think and I expect the same to happen when PM Modi is in Germany.
The fact is, the new government has not stated anything that would make Rafale as their only choice and that is the straw the EF consortium / partners will try to use. If they really get a chance is another question and needs to be seen if we finally get an idea about the defence policies. Till then, the deal is more open than it was before the elections and for India that surely isn't a bad thing.
P.S. It seems as the British minister was more successful in fixing deals btw:
Indian Air Force News & Discussions | Page 180
Last edited:
Abingdonboy
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2010
- Messages
- 29,597
- Reaction score
- 46
- Country
- Location
Pretty irrelevant don't you think sir? That sale had been on the cards for a LONG time and anyway the French foreign Minister also signed some deals when he was in India, didn't he? As I say though, these are all irrelevant signals that don't point to any thing one way or the other regarding the MMRCA.
I'm more optimistic for the Rafale's chances than I had been immediately after Modi had been elected. I had taken on board what you had said in the lead up to elections vis a vis Modi could look to expanding the pie for the likes of Ambani/Reliance, look more at other options (EFT for e.g) , and such, I had also been seriously concerned about the price escalation which Modi might take issue with but it is reported Jaitley was very receptive to the $16BN spread out over a decade costs. From all I've read (from credible sources) it seems Modi, Jaitley and the IAF are all on the same page regarding the Rafale however there are the details to go through now.
Bang Galore
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2010
- Messages
- 10,685
- Reaction score
- 12
- Country
- Location
No harm if the French are left stewing for a little bit. Anything that will cause some behavioral alterations. Don't particularly want anyone to be too sure of their position. Let them sweat a little.
sancho
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2009
- Messages
- 13,011
- Reaction score
- 27
- Country
- Location
Not necessarily, now the EF basically has the same advantage as the Rafale has, by already having available a SR missile in IAF's weapon package (Mica for M2K and Rafale, ASRAAM for Jags and EF).
How did you came to that conclusion? Where did Modi said anything in favour for Rafale, or that would hint on a fast decision?
Jaitley in fact didn't supported the Rafale deal either, but raised questions about the costs, which on the one hand is understandable since he is Finance Minister and has to deal with all the promises they made during the elections now. On the other hand, that also could had been based on the life cycle cost issue, that they have raised too and interestingly the cost that was quoted by IAF, also was a cost over … years and not the unit or procurement cost of the the 126 x Rafales now. Not to mention the points mentioned in the Hindu article in post #9788 which clearly shows concern about ToT and a possible buyer-seller relationship with the French.
The point for the EF however is purely dependent on the EF partners, if they offer a deal that the BJP can't reject (better ToT, more industrial participation of Indian companies, more jobs created in India, co-developments rather than the buyer-seller relationship that the French still aim on), things can change and the BJP might re-evaluate! The fact that the government doesn't say anything now and talks with all sides is actually showing that they are leaving all options open and that's the right thing to do for India's interests.
Of course not, it's a competition and we need to get the best deal for us, in return for the huge ammount of money we spend and eventhough we like the French, we also know that they are difficult to deal with (cost issues with Shakti engine deal of LUH, ToT issues for Maitri SAM and now the useless workshare issues of Rafale). That's why we need these competitions, to be on the upper side of the negotiations and put some pressure on them if needed. The sad thing is, that this wouldn't be necessary if they see us as partners and would aim on joint developments.
Last edited:
sancho
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2009
- Messages
- 13,011
- Reaction score
- 27
- Country
- Location
- Status
Similar threads
- Article
