Dassault Rafale, tender | News & Discussions

[ejaz007]

MMRCA: Updates and Developments


Oct 16/09:

India’s Business Standard reports that the long-awaited Mirage 2000 upgrade deal may have fallen through. The beneficiary would be the MMRCA competition for 126+ medium fighters, which would rise to 8 squadrons via a follow on order or local production of 2 more squadrons (40-48 planes, to replace 51 Mirage 2000s). According to their report, however, Dassault may have hurt its chances there, too:

“According to senior IAF sources, Dassault has refused to reduce its quota of Rs 10,000 crore ($2.1 billion) for extending the service life of the IAF’s Mirage-2000 fleet by fitting new radars and avionics. The Ministry of Defence (MoD) considers this price – Rs 196 crore ($41 million) per aircraft – unacceptably high…. Israeli aerospace companies have reportedly entered the fray, offering to upgrade the Mirage-2000 for half the price being quoted by Dassault. The MoD, however, is not inclined to accept that offer.

....The IAF, traditionally a staunch supporter of Dassault and the Mirage-2000 fighter, is apparently changing its views. Dassault, say pilots, has badly damaged its credibility during the recent negotiations by arm-twisting the IAF over the supply of spares for the Mirage-2000 fleet.”

India’s MMRCA Fighter Competition

 

[sancho]

Boeing assurance on ToT for production of F-18IN

I guess you missed this post by duhastmish, there is a loophole in US laws that govern technology exports. The law can be circumvented if technology is passed to a subsidiary in India. You need to read between the lines when dealing with US firms and American CEO’s in particular . Of course, I’m no lawyer, perhaps prior Congress approval may still be required; but all things considered I don’t see Congress raising an objection for transfer of F-18 tech to a Boeing subsidiary in India.

Boeings assurance is worthless since the US Gov don't clear it and in the old tradition that they didn't even share techs with close alleys, how realistic is it for India to get ToT of the really important techs?
The Brazil defense minister said, the offer of Boeing gets better now and the US has changed the policy of ToT, but still is not comparable with the offers of Dassault Rafale/France, or Saab Gripen/Sweden.

And as Tejas-MkII said, you are offering us just some upgraded old fighters, whereas the Europeans offers their latest fighters and techs. And with these options, F16 and F18 will have a though competitions, specially because many US weapons are on offer with the Eurocanards too (Aim-9, AMRAAM, Paveway, Gripen now fired Mavericks and gets clearance for other US weapons and I guess JDAM will be available for EF in future too). If you had offered F35 instead, which are even more expensive than EF, but gives a clear advantage, I'm sure IAF and IN had bought them, even with restirictions.
Anyway, just wait and see how the Mod will decide, for the Air Force, or for political benefits.

 

[sancho]

Cover of the flightglobal article posted on the last page by Screaming Skull:





Btw, the list of possible Rafale operators gets longer and longer. India (126+), Brazil (36 -100+) and Switzerland (22) already evaluating it, UAE (60), Qatar and now Kuwait are highly interested. And in times when other countries reduces their order of fighters, France goes on and now placed a new order of 60 Rafale F3 (180 totally ordered now) with AESA radar and upgraded EWS for it's forces.

 

[Screaming Skull]

From the Flight Global article I posted in my previous post-

My evaluation aircraft was two-seat Rafale B number B301, the first production model to be delivered, which Dassault retains for test purposes. The cockpit was to full F3 standard, with just a small additional test control panel (telemetry) fitted in the front cockpit.

A reliable source tells me that the same B301 along with B302 came to India for flight evaluations. So, all the features mentioned by Peter Collins must have been available to the IAF test team too. My source further confirms that the trials in Jaisalmer meant to test the hot weather tolerance also included air to ground firings, air refueling with an Il-78 and landing at max landing weight .

 

[Tejas-MkII]

From the Flight Global article I posted in my previous post-



A reliable source tells me that the same B301 along with B302 came to India for flight evaluations. So, all the features mentioned by Peter Collins must have been available to the IAF test team too. My source further confirms that the trials in Jaisalmer meant to test the hot weather tolerance also included air to ground firings, air refueling with an Il-78 and landing at max landing weight .

If your source is true , then i must say:

FOR GOD SAKE BUY RAFALE

It definitely have no match in asia....

 

[brahmastra]

Interesting evaluation

by mathew63

Any decision of such strategic dimensions and magnitude, I am sure will have huge Government and Military thought processes in the play as there are geo-political, strategic, technological, competitive and self interests at play

1. Technologically Western is any day better because of R&D budgets, huge user base and actual war deployment experiences
2. Basic A/C fighter characteristics, aerodynamics, I guess the Russian systems may be equal if not better
3. Quality wise and spares reliability – Western is better by very nature of the Industry – non government controlled and driven by market forces
4. Power pack – bomb for bomb, missile for missile, perhaps both are similar, but Western are still ahead due to other critical sub systems for delivery and guidance which is an advantage in today’s high tech battles
5. Aerobatic performance – good for shows and general bravado, but useless for BVR with high tech missiles locked on to you 100s of miles away coming in at mach 2+ (akin to choosing ones partner by going to a strip tease bar and seeing how well her wares are?)
6. Cost ratio of Russian to western aircraft = 1: 2 on average (assuming avg MRCA price being $70M+ each

Geo-political speaking
1. The Russians and French have always stood by us and have adapted to our idiosyncrasies whereas the Western world have not
2. The Russians/French don’t treat us differently due to government or power changes
3. They don’t care whether we went nuclear, smuggled Uranium or tested another one
4. Both seem to run an independent foreign policy (from Nat0, US and Europe)
5. Both are willing to give TOT and share in new technologies
6. Sanctions – that’s is an American/European word as far the Russians and French go
7. America and India may want to appear to get close due to our similarities (democracy, government, common causes etc), and it is great if we do, but current scenario – till India learns to understand the functioning of the US Government, internal politics and bickering, bipartisan politics, lobbying etc, there is no chance of India being able to substantially get on the American law makers mind share any time soon (the Nuclear deal was by few good souls there)
8. Another nuke test, and believe me another auto/ immediate sanction for next 20 years till another 911 type. So absolutely no go this direction until the yanks guarantee by both houses that unless there is direct war between India and the U.S, spares and support will not be affected even if there is a sanction due to some other cause

Strategically and threat wise
1. For us basically only 2 threats Pak and China
2. Pak threat for next 50 years is F-16, JF-17, J-10 and the Aim-120 if they get it
3. China – I see no great threat (to the degree of Pak) except helping arm Pak.
4. Now question is do we need an $80M plane to counter the Pak toys for air dominance and air superiority?
5. I guess no, if we can do it safely and with a large margin of success with say anything of the $40M to $50M range
6. So assume you get a lower tech/performance plane than the best the Americans/British have got to offer say something like the Grippen, Rafale or Mig-35 armed with Mica/Meteors/Derby/R77 with AESA coupled with Phalcon AWAC cover, you have more than what is needed to cover the PAK threat + neutralize or hold the Chinese threat.

Bottom-line
1. Considering all above factors – 3 good choices, Grippen, Rafale and Mig-35
2. Grippen and Rafale totally new platforms, untested and difficult logistics issues
3. That leaves Mig-35 with AESA (either Russian, French or Israeli) + all the matching WVR/BVR next-gen A2A arms and of course longer range and punch
4. We can take care of spares, upgradeability, quality by going the MKI route (Israeli/French/Indian components) + local manufacturing (pvt), and R&D sharing
5. A huge logistical and cost nightmare will be avoided due to commonality between Navy, Air force and getting benefits of standardization for spares, manufacturing, pilot training, knowledge management and logistics

BANG for the BUCK – MIG-35 is my choice

Journals - (Indian MMRCA Combat Aircraft decision)

 

[sancho]

I agree with the first parts, but "Strategically and threat wise" and "Bottom-line" ar not correct.

Strategically and threat wise
1. For us basically only 2 threats Pak and China
2. Pak threat for next 50 years is F-16, JF-17, J-10 and the Aim-120 if they get it
They will get AIM 120 with new F16s but the main threat from pak won't be their fighters, but the induction of Erieye and Y8 AWACS, because it will equalise the edge that IAF has now with the long range MKI radar and Phalcon AWACS. Guided via datalink even our old Mig 21 Bisons are able to take out an PAF fighter in BVR and a JF 17 will do so against MKI.
3. China – I see no great threat (to the degree of Pak) except helping arm Pak.

Wrong, China is a way bigger threat to India than Pak, because China has similar interests in Asia and Indias stratigic location is a big threat for Chinas oil supplies.
Also their military is way bigger, more capable and rapidly growing, some reports say they will overtake US (in numbers of ships, subs... ) in a few years. No doubt is the main threat for India and that's exactly why the Gov and Mod concentrates way more on them now by arming up the Indo - Chinese border, procuring and developing new arms clearly aimed to counter Chinese arms.

4. Now question is do we need an $80M plane to counter the Pak toys for air dominance and air superiority?
5. I guess no, if we can do it safely and with a large margin of success with say anything of the $40M to $50M range
6. So assume you get a lower tech/performance plane than the best the Americans/British have got to offer say something like the Grippen, Rafale or Mig-35 armed with Mica/Meteors/Derby/R77 with AESA coupled with Phalcon AWAC cover, you have more than what is needed to cover the PAK threat + neutralize or hold the Chinese threat.

Rafale should also cost around $80 million dollar, so it don't fit in his list. Anyway the main point to counter PAF in future will be, to have fighters with very low RCS, that can't be detected so early by their AWACS. That's exactly where our MKI and Russian Migs lacks behind (mainly because of old design) and fighters like Gripen, Rafale, or EF have clear advantages. So to counter the AWACS and Air Force threat from PAF and PLAAF, we need high tech fighters with high tech weapons.

Bottom-line
1. Considering all above factors – 3 good choices, Grippen, Rafale and Mig-35
2. Grippen and Rafale totally new platforms, untested and difficult logistics issues
3. That leaves Mig-35 with AESA (either Russian, French or Israeli) + all the matching WVR/BVR next-gen A2A arms and of course longer range and punch

Wrong, Mig 35 only in prototype stage (and only the double seat was shown so far, no infos about the single seat available now!) Mig officially said the production will be delayed and can only start by 2013. Rafale instead came to Bangalore with ready AESA radar and proven techs, Gripen is integrating weapons now and testing the first AESA versions, but will need some time too.
I have some doubts about matching arms, because at the moment we have nothing comparable to Aim-120 and the R73 is several years old and can't compete with latest Aim9, Mica, Iris-T..., so even one on one without AWACS it will no be so easy against the F16s.

5. A huge logistical and cost nightmare will be avoided due to commonality between Navy, Air force and getting benefits of standardization for spares, manufacturing, pilot training, knowledge management and logistics

The other side is overdependance on Russia and it arms, possible price increasings and delays and no major rise of maintenance, logistics, or pilot training with Rafale.

 

[sancho]

From the Flight Global article I posted in my previous post-



A reliable source tells me that the same B301 along with B302 came to India for flight evaluations. So, all the features mentioned by Peter Collins must have been available to the IAF test team too. My source further confirms that the trials in Jaisalmer meant to test the hot weather tolerance also included air to ground firings, air refueling with an Il-78 and landing at max landing weight .

Does your source have some infos about the performance of Rafale, or whether the IAF liked it or not?

 

[vnomad]

And what about end user aggrement and routine inspection by US..

And these MRCAs will be among our frontline aircraft, then how is it justifiable that india give stratiegical information like location of F-18 or F-16 to US under end user agreement..,if india bought these aircrafts....

Thing is if End User Agreements or sanctions are still a worry, well that ship has sailed. India has already signed agreements for the C-130J, C-17 and most importantly the P-8I. I guess India and the US are past the stage where sanctions were a concern.

 

[Screaming Skull]

Does your source have some infos about the performance of Rafale, or whether the IAF liked it or not?

Well the news is that it was flown by a senior IAF M2K pilot and if we are to believe Peter Collins-
“The Mirage 2000 had previously been my favourite FBW aircraft in terms of handling qualities, but the Rafale with its DFCS betters it in every aspect of handling by a significant margin.”
I also learnt a few things about the performance of the aircrafts during the trials from my source but I will refrain from sharing the info here. Don’t want to sound speculative. Bottom line is the fight is going to go down to the wire.
In our ACM’s words- “all aircrafts are going neck to neck”.

 

[Iggy]

Well the news is that it was flown by a senior IAF M2K pilot and if we are to believe Peter Collins-
“The Mirage 2000 had previously been my favourite FBW aircraft in terms of handling qualities, but the Rafale with its DFCS betters it in every aspect of handling by a significant margin.”
I also learnt a few things about the performance of the aircrafts during the trials from my source but I will refrain from sharing the info here. Don’t want to sound speculative. Bottom line is the fight is going to go down to the wire.
In our ACM’s words- “all aircrafts are going neck to neck”.

So the decision will be based up on who is giving bigger kickbacks

 

[Insane]

The MRCA was supposed to replace the MIG-21 .. Another MIG at this time should be a NO-NO specially since we have FGFA in the pipeline with Russia. IMO Time factor should be important here. Mig 35 will surely come with huge delays.

At this point its almost sure that Mig-35, Gripen and F-16 are out. They are just going through the process now.

I am looking forward to F/A 18 joining IAF ( As the things stand today). Well i would have loved the RAFALE but seems like their campaign has received jolts during past few months and the Mirage upgrade issue could affect the decision. But I am not complaining if 126 F/A-18 are coming our way

My Personal Preference would be -
1. Rafale
2. F/A -18
3. EURO FIGHTER

Actually MOD could split orders now that they have decided not to upgrade the Mirage Jets. So potentially they are willing to go for 48 more planes. 126+48 = 174 in all.

100 Rafale + 54 F/A -18 would be Nice ( Reduce 20 from 174)

1. It would be within the budget for MRCA+ Mirage Upgrades. ( $12 - $13 Billion)
2. Instead of being skeptical about the Americans always, why not try with a Decent order with them like 54 Aircrafts.

* I think we should be able to take care of the logistic challenges associated with it as a nation. so i am not thinking that way.

* 100 Rafale should still get us all goodies associated with it. TOT and everything.

* 54 F/A-18 may not come with lot of TOT but still must help getting first hand experience of a US Fighter, building trust and platform for future Deals. Just in case there are issues with spares and other things crop up with the Americans during crunch times, this number wont be too detrimental to our cause, But if everything goes well, who knows wot lies around the next corner.

 

[vnomad]

Btw, the list of possible Rafale operators gets longer and longer. India (126+), Brazil (36 -100+) and Switzerland (22) already evaluating it, UAE (60), Qatar and now Kuwait are highly interested. And in times when other countries reduces their order of fighters, France goes on and now placed a new order of 60 Rafale F3 (180 totally ordered now) with AESA radar and upgraded EWS for it's forces.

Well the list of confirmed international orders the Rafale has secured is pretty short.

I'm convinced that opting for the F-18E/F is the right decision. Its airframe is comparable to the Rafale but the rest of the aircraft outshines the Rafale in every other aspect. Its fly away cost is much lower, it fields better and cheaper munitions. US avionics regardless of developments elsewhere remain the benchmark for rest of the world(they developed the AESA in the early 80s). In terms of stealth the Superhornet is at the very least comparable to the Rafale, and probably better. It has secured far more orders(over 400 delivered) and the Growler EW variant is something that the IAF would really prize.

Most importantly, with regard the future upgrade potential, while the Armee de l'Air and Marine nationale are first class organisations, thanks to its sheer financial muscle, the USN are a better bet to ensure that the MRCA's lethality doesn't diminish with time (and their upgrades wouldn't cost an arm, leg and a kidney).

 

[sancho]

So the decision will be based up on who is giving bigger kickbacks

Here is a hint what France is ready to give Brazil if they go for Rafale:

Fighter: In the final competition, Dassault offers additional items to try to sell the Rafale to Brazil

Posted on 13/11/2009 at 17h24m
José Meirelles Passos

RIO - In the final of the competition for a contract for the sale of 36 fighter jets to the Brazilian Air Force (FAB), the government of France - whose company competes with Dassault your model against the Rafale and Boeing Swedish Saab - added some items the package had already offered to Brazil. One is the possibility that, over the agreement, the Embraer Company may develop a more modern version of that plane and eventually export it to France itself. (See also: France fights back lobbies of competitors in the sale of fighter jets to Brazil)

This possibility is embedded in the fact that the promised technology transfer that aircraft without any restrictions, it includes the transfer of its source code - the heart and brain of the plane. Are the lines of code for programs that control both the weapons systems (missiles and on-board computers) as well as radar, engines, and moving surfaces (such as installations) of the game.

"The fleet will have all the technology of the Rafale, including the so-called source code. With them she can either modify the aircraft as do, for example, a Super Rafale"

This promise, plus the guarantee of several other advantages, were presented to the government for a special envoy of President Nicolas Sarkozy during a mild two-day visit to Brazil last week: Admiral Edouard Guillaud. He is "chief of staff particularly from the president."

- The agreement that proposed to Brazilian government is writing that the FAB will have all the technology of the Rafale, including the so-called source code. With it they can either modify the aircraft as do, for example, a Super Rafale, a new version - Guillaud said in an interview with O Globo. - These are technical specifications, ranging from the most general to the last screw of the landing gear. This is called transfer of trade secret - he insisted.

Rafale-Photo: Reuters

Guillaud talked privately with Defense Minister Nelson Jobim, the Copacabana Palace Hotel in Rio de Janeiro. Hours later, in an interview after commenting that "a fighter without weapons is an airplane flying club, very expensive", he revealed that in the spirit of strategic partnership France-Brazil signed last December, the Brazilian government assured that the France is prepared to go further: if the Rafale win the competition, Brazil could produce even the weapons for such aircraft.

- The French missile industry also agreed with Brazil to share their trade secrets. This shows that we are not just talking about a plane, but an entire global system for which we propose the transfer of technology.

Guillaud also said that it reinforced the French proposal with a plan for the exchange of top-level officials, especially the staffs of the armed forces of both countries:

- We are not talking as traders. It is a strategic thinking, which can go much further - he said.

Guillaud came to Brazil in the company of Damien Loras, Sarkozy's advisor for the Americas. During the interview he also emphasized some points of the proposal for his country, especially that technology transfer would be "free course" and not an additional cost to the value of the airplane:

- The value of this unprecedented transfer represents years of experience, developments, studies and know-how (design and manufacturing). This value is estimated between five and seven billion euros, ie more than the amount of the contract - said Loras.

Despite that mention of price, both he and Guillaud avoided mentioning specific figures on the cost of the Rafale - except the fact that it would be 4% more expensive than the F-18 Super Hornet, the American Boeing. This difference, they argued, would disappear over the 15-year contract to be signed with Brazil, because of currency fluctuations during that period.

- Independence and autonomy always require investment. Even the French paid a price to be autonomous and not depend on supply from other countries in the military. We accept invest more, a little more, to master our destiny. And Brazil now has a chance to do the same: the economy is strong, political will, and seeks the means to earn respect and be respected. This is where the tool operates military - argued Guillaud.


The estimate is that the French package would cost about 5.5 billion euros. The admiral, declining to specify a value, said that in practice, taxpayers would pay for the Brazilian fighter a price equal to cost for the French themselves. Guillaud suggested that, in the last minute, there could be some kind of agreement regarding the value of the contract:

- We are in a competition and whoever is chosen (in terms of technical and operational) will enter into trade negotiations. Did not come here on behalf of the manufacturer (Dassault), but rather the president. What I can say is that during negotiations the French state will be present. President Sarkozy has pledged to do so. This is a commitment in writing, and firm - said Guillaud

 

[sancho]

Well the list of confirmed international orders the Rafale has secured is pretty short.

Yes, but not because the Rafale was inferior compared to other fighters in the competition, but because of political decisions. For India I see the same way, Rafale suits IAF at best, but politically the F18SH would be a bigger benefit.

I'm convinced that opting for the F-18E/F is the right decision. Its airframe is comparable to the Rafale

What? All other fighters in the competition are more maneuverable than the F18SH and especially the Eurocanards!

but the rest of the aircraft outshines the Rafale in every other aspect. Its fly away cost is much lower, it fields better and cheaper munitions. US avionics regardless of developments elsewhere remain the benchmark for rest of the world(they developed the AESA in the early 80s). In terms of stealth the Superhornet is at the very least comparable to the Rafale, and probably better.

Cheaper in unit and ammo cost yes, but more expensive in maintenance and logistic and not necessarily better ammo (US was impressed by the precision of AASM, compared to JDAM during Red Flag and Meteor should be better compared to the actual Aim120).
The huge and only redesigned F18 should have a better RCS than a new and with stealth in mind design of the Rafale? More than doubtful!

It has secured far more orders(over 400 delivered) and the Growler EW variant is something that the IAF would really prize.
Not correct, the Superhornet has only a single foreign operator, that is Australia with 24 on order and a comparable EW suit like Growlers is now on offer for MKI too (search for Su 30 MKI Growler), so that is no point anymore.

Most importantly, with regard the future upgrade potential, while the Armee de l'Air and Marine nationale are first class organisations, thanks to its sheer financial muscle, the USN are a better bet to ensure that the MRCA's lethality doesn't diminish with time (and their upgrades wouldn't cost an arm, leg and a kidney).

That will depend on how much more orders the USN will place for the F18SH, because it is clear that sooner or later it will be replaced by F35. Rafale instead will serve the French military at least till 2040, so I don't see a problem for upgrades there. Btw, when talking about arms twisting we should ask Japan, or Israel about experience with US.