Rafale vs EF comparison, based on reports, or analysises from journalists, or IAF officials, part 2
Former Air Marshal B K Pandey pointed out in his analysis "Selection of MRCA for the IAF" (about the intial competition with Mirage 2000-5, F16 B52...):
...Apart from the technological attributes, versatility and operational capability of the machine, they need to bear in mind a number of other important factors such as:
1) assurance of long-term logistic support -
Advantage Rafale (Europeans are known in India for quality products and good after sale supports, be it Mirage 2000s, Jaguars, Eurocopter helicopters, or German subs, all with clearly less technical problems and without spare supply issues like Russian counterparts. But the official reports from England about canibalisations of EFs and limited training time for pilots caused by several problems in the spare supply should be a major concern for Indian forces, especially with the recent issue of the BAE Hawk trainer and not supplied toolings)
2) problems of integration with the IAF inventory -
Advantage Rafale (there are a few weapons on Jags, that could be used with EF as well, but the the Rafale is based on the Mirage 2000 and shares the full weapon pack and several avionics with it, more over the maintenance routines are based on Mirage as well, which makes it easier for the ground crews as well)
3) technological gains for the Indian aerospace industry -
Tie (EFs offer of ToT is very good and the partnership offer gives indian companies the chance to be involved in a big foreign project, which will improve their capabilities. Rafales offer will be very good in ToT as well and the French companies have the advantage of already beeing involved in several JV, co-developments with the Indian industry...)
4) sanctions and denial regimes -
Advantage Rafale (all main techs are developed by French companies, no major components comes from the US and can be sanctioned, France has proven to be reliable in the past sanctions, was the first who supported accepted us an official nuclear power and supported us for a permanent UNC seat. French government cleared ToT and no EUM for the Rafale from the start and Dassault was the first who offered radar source codes and full ToT of the radar. Is there anything left how they could prove their reliability to us?
5) financial implications and the nuances of the political dimension -
Advantage Rafale (In terms of costs of the deal, the Rafale should have an advantage, it's unit cost is already lower and the EF T3 B requires further fundings of upgrades, that to make it equally capable. With UK as a veto power and Germany as one of the most influential countries in Europe they have a lot o offer on the political side, the problem is their close relation to the US. France on the other hands remained to be an independent country although they are a NATO member and showed in the Libyan conflict how influential they can be, especially by the fact that Qatar and the UAE was ready to send (mainly French) fighters. So although it is only 1 country, the political point is strong and only the US could offer more here from the western countries.
Results:
Rafale - 4
EF - 0
Tie - 1
Reports:
Security Research Review: Volume 1(3) Selection of MRCA for the IAF - Air Marshall(r) B K Pandey
Former Air Chief Marshal Fali Homi major said in an interview:
The Air Staff Requirements are secret documents and cannot be revealed. However, I can assure you that the ASRs are designed to be contemporary and futuristic, and also have a cost-benefit angle.
In a generic sense, we want:
1) a medium weight, multi role combat aircraft that can undertake air defence, ground attack, maritime attack (anti-ship) and reconnaissance roles with ease -
Advantage Rafale (with 9.5t emptyweight it is the 2nd lightest fighter in the competition, but is able to carry the highest payload. With AESA radar, multi spectra passive sensors, MICA IR, EM and METEOR, it offers 3 weapons for BVR combats, which is a unique capability for air defence. For ground attack it offers Laser and GPS and IR guided bomb kits, as well as cruise missiles, with the latest Reco NG pods, it already is deployed in reconnaissance missions over Afghanistan and Libya, while target aquisition and assessment of strikes can be visually identified with the Damocles pod as well. For maritme attack it uses the Exocet missile and in addition is also deployed is SEAD missions with the SPECTRA / AASM combo)
2) the aircraft to have adequately long range and endurance to meet our operational requirements -
Advantage Rafale (it has the higher fuel fraction, has more wet station for fuel tanks and has also bigger fuel tanks)
3) extension of range through air-to-air refueling is also desired -
Tie (both fighters can be air refuelled. If at all, one could say Rafale squads are not dependend on refuelling aircrafts, because they can act as mid air refuellers as well, but the requirement is not aimed on that)
4) ease of maintenance and low life cycle costs would form part of the selection criteria -
Not rated (all hints shows an advantage for Rafale, very few ground crew are needed, provenly high reliability rates in oversea deploymeants be it in wars, or exercises, reported in Brazil to have slightly higher per hour costs than F18SH, but there are too less infos known about the EF from comparabel competitions to make a fair comparison. From what is known of EF customers like the RAF, German Bundeswehr, or the Austrian air force, operating the EF turned out way costlier than expected and the official reports about difficult spare supply are reasons to worry. But any country rates these costs differently, so only figures from the same evaluation would be a base to compare them)
Results:
Rafale - 2
EF - 0
Tie - 1
Report:
..:: India Strategic ::.. Indian Navy: All new MRCA to be purchased from one company
Four different reports, but for all their requirements, the Rafale is clearly the fighter that suits IAF the most!
Feel free to disagree, comment and discuss about it.
