What's new

Ditching Rafale

It's funny how the economics of The MKI only extend to unit/off the shelf costs and no one making this argument seems to factor in life cycle costs (which the MMRCA deal does by the way). Whilst the Rafale is that bit more expensive than the MKI upfront (nowhere near the twice as costly mark however, look at how much the latest batch of MKIs are costing the IAF- almost $100 million a piece) it is about 2-3 times cheaper to operate over the course of its life.

Additionally I don't know if there is any open source empirical data on this but the likes of the Rafale and all western designed fighters are vastly easier to maintain than any Russian origin product.

It's hilarious how everyone now has rose tinted glasses on now when it comes to the Russians and the after sales support (or lack thereof) and availability of their products in indian service. There is a very legitimate reason to move away from the Russians as defence suppliers, they have proven time and again that they are not capable of matching international standards on support and maintainability.

The MKI is not a viable alternative to the Rafale/MMRCA and never was or are we forgetting the reason this competion was launched (to find a complimentary aircraft to the top end MKIs and bottom end LCAs)?


The anti-Dassualt sentiment on here is being fuelled by half truths and down right lies from the indian media.


and what will you say about how French milked us during mirage upgrades ?
 
.
Nobody has said that the deal is ' over ' ... ( at least so far )

People are debating whether the deal should be kept on or not ... and why it should be so ...

it is possible that the deal will be consummated eventually ...but getting right deal with proper negotiations...is also important .

this is not just about getting 126 - 4.5 gen battle worthy aircraft ....it is also about value for money ...at cost of 30-40 billion dollars ....and we must leverage the money we are spending in the best possible way .
Brother, please, I have a lot of respect for you but do not propagate this $30-40 billion figure. That is ABSURD. the deal is worth today $15-16 billion. Any figure quoted above this is WRONG.

This is part of the problem. Many are basing their entire aversion to the Rafale on inflated figures that have been put out in the media often by vested interests (SAAB, EFT and perhaps even the Russians).


The MoD and Dassualt are to blame for not effectively countering this narrative.
 
.
and what will you say about how French milked us during mirage upgrades ?
The IAF made its case and this deal was cleared by the MoD, Fin Min, DAC and CCS so obviously there was merit to this upgrade. The perception of "milking" is just that- perception and hardly borne out by any facts.
 
.
Brother, please, I have a lot of respect for you but do not propagate this $30-40 billion figure. That is ABSURD. the deal is worth today $15-16 billion. Any figure quoted above this is WRONG.

This is part of the problem. Many are basing their entire aversion to the Rafale on inflated figures that have been put out in the media often by vested interests (SAAB, EFT and perhaps even the Russians).


The MoD and Dassualt are to blame for not effectively countering this narrative.

may be that figure is wrong ...

it is sure that we will end up paying more than what was envisaged due to inflation , and devaluation of rupee etc .

question is ..is it going to be value for money ?

The IAF made its case and this deal was cleared by the MoD, Fin Min, DAC and CCS so obviously there was merit to this upgrade. The perception of "milking" is just that- perception and hardly borne out by any facts.

so basically if IAF ,FIN MIN ,DAC , CCS all are party to particular decision ...then it has to be sacrosanct enough to be kept beyond any questions . is that what you are trying to say ?

You can always find merit in something if you are hell bent to justify particular thing ...

but what does the objective evaluation stands for?

did not we end up paying an extravagant sum of money during mirage upgrade ???
 
.
The anti-Dassualt sentiment on here is being fuelled by half truths and down right lies from the indian media.

This is unnecessary & pointless. This is not being published in some random blog but in a major paper. This follows a series of articles in different papers talking about the difficulties in the Rafale deal. Then there are the actual statements of the DM. You can disagree with the author's conclusion but attempting to question everyone else's motive is hardly fair. After all that charge can well be made in reverse too.

It's not like this government can simply go ahead with this deal no matter what. They too will have to answer the CAG. If there is an adverse report from the CAG, it could damage the government badly. Little wonder that the DM is asking Rafale to stick to the RFP

The IAF made its case and this deal was cleared by the MoD, Fin Min, DAC and CCS so obviously there was merit to this upgrade. The perception of "milking" is just that- perception and hardly borne out by any facts.

Not so. There was strong opposition even within the IAF to such an expensive upgrade even if the final decision was to go with the upgrade. This is a matter of record & has been reported.
 
Last edited:
.
may be that figure is wrong ...

it is sure that we will end up paying more than what was envisaged due to inflation , and devaluation of rupee etc .

question is ..is it going to be value for money ?



so basically if IAF ,FIN MIN ,DAC , CCS all are party to particular decision ...then it has to be sacrosanct enough to be kept beyond any questions . is that what you are trying to say ?

You can always find merit in something if you are hell bent to justify particular thing ...

but what does the objective evaluation stands for?

did not we end up paying an extravagant sum of money during mirage upgrade ???

Life cycle costs are themselves not something easy or straightforward to calculate. It is variant on god knows how many factors, time and market fluctuation being just a few. And precisely because life cycle costs are so complicated and so variable, they can easily be manipulated to paint a rosy picture during the bidding process.

And worse yet, because it is so indeterminate, even if large deviations from the original calculations arise, and I'm sure they will, you cannot conclusively prove anything against the company.

But that aside, the number of voices are against the deal is only increasing, both within and outside the AF. And Parrikar isn't some half educated dolt who can't understand if he is being taken for a ride.
 
.
Ditching rafale reminds me of a scene from many of typical Indian movies where boy has promised girl that he will marry him and then after lots of her use he refuses and girl says mujhey na schoro ma kissi ko moan dekhaney ka kabil nahi rahoo gi...lol...:P
but jokes apart, ditching rafale is not so easy as per my understanding...india has gone a way too far with this MMRCA contract...canceling it will definitely effect its reputation amongst international community...all of the country has been buttering India for it...at the end France took it and also invested a lot of money to promote its jet in India....
 
.
This is unnecessary & pointless. This is not being published in some random blog but in a major paper. This follows a series of articles in different papers talking about the difficulties in the Rafale deal. Then there are the actual statements of the DM. You can disagree with the author's conclusion but attempting to question everyone else's motive is hardly fair. After all that charge can well be made in reverse too.

It's not like this government can simply go ahead with this deal no matter what. They too will have to answer the CAG. If there is an adverse report from the CAG, it could damage the government badly. Little wonder that the DM is asking Rafale to stick to the RFP



Not so. There was strong opposition even within the IAF to such an expensive upgrade even if the final decision was to go with the upgrade. This is a matter of record & has been reported.
Sir when I say lies I am referring specifically about the biggest issue many here (and in the media ) have with the deal- the cost. The figures many quote are blatantly wrong. This is not just my opinion by FACT. Anyone propagating a price above $15-16 billion is engaging in misinformation whether intentionally or not is irrelevant.


What is that line, you say a lie enough times and it becomes truth? I've seen this for myself on here. Many members are clearly disillusioned with this deal and their main bone of contention is the reportedly extortionate price Dassualt are demanding. Now if it was as high as $18-40 billion (exaggerated figures IVE seen quoted in the media) i too would be questioning this deal.

BUT this is not the case, a modest 25% price increase 5 years after the initial bid was made is not bad at all and perfectly reasonable for what india is getting.

On this matter(price) no one on the indian side (in an official matter) has said this is the sticking point. The DM didn't say cost was why they were looking at the Rafale but a failure to adhere to the RFP which is a legitimate concern.

The cost issue is a red herring and I am very sure the continuous inflating of the figure that goes on in the indian media is being fuelled by those with vested interests in seeing the Rafale talks fail.
 
.
It's funny how the economics of The MKI only extend to unit/off the shelf costs and no one making this argument seems to factor in life cycle costs (which the MMRCA deal does by the way). Whilst the Rafale is that bit more expensive than the MKI upfront (nowhere near the twice as costly mark however, look at how much the latest batch of MKIs are costing the IAF- almost $100 million a piece) it is about 2-3 times cheaper to operate over the course of its life.

Additionally I don't know if there is any open source empirical data on this but the likes of the Rafale and all western designed fighters are vastly easier to maintain than any Russian origin product.

It's hilarious how everyone now has rose tinted glasses on now when it comes to the Russians and the after sales support (or lack thereof) and availability of their products in indian service. There is a very legitimate reason to move away from the Russians as defence suppliers, they have proven time and again that they are not capable of matching international standards on support and maintainability.

The MKI is not a viable alternative to the Rafale/MMRCA and never was or are we forgetting the reason this competion was launched (to find a complimentary aircraft to the top end MKIs and bottom end LCAs)?


The anti-Dassualt sentiment on here is being fuelled by half truths and down right lies from the indian media.

When my RM says that MKI costs Rs. 358 Crores/Unit , I have no reason to doubt this figure. Especially when he is Honest and has no affinity towards Russian lobby. This $100 MIl./Unit was reported at the time when MRCA ( Rafale) was considered the only option available and I seriously doubt it was done to make Rafale look less costly.

Rs. 358 Crores is roughly equal to $60 Mill. and Rafale Will cost more than double of that. That does make it very very costly.

As much as operational cost is concerned, thats something which I have no way to confirm. But I have reasons to doubt this figure of "2-3 times costlier to maintain". The available data for per hour running cost puts both planes in same league.

Now lets come to reliability of supply : Latest stunt by France to block Mistral (which was half built by Russain Money ) does no good to their reputation. I would never want my country to not follow a certain foreign policy just because France will get jittery because of this.

Russia has been notorious for lack of after sale support. The only solution to this is building indigenous capability to support the planes. Which is already happening. Except few critical components MKI is being made from Raw materials. HAL is doing good job in maintaining MKI and this is only going to get better. I doubt if HAL will be able to invest so much resources for a small order of "108" planes.

I agree MKI is not a viable alternative for Rafale. But then Rafale was not what IAF wanted in first place. All they wanted was Mirage : A good enough plane to be produced in huge numbers. Rafale OTOH is such costly that the top end of IAF costs half. Rafale will never be our Frontline Fighter, MKI will be. This role will be later taken by FGFA. Why spend so much for a plane which is being inducted as a gap filler...?

And BTW if anyone is pushing Anti-Rafale sentiments in India, its Dassault. Its Dassault which is charging much more than quoted cost in RFP. They are the one selecting Reliance over HAL. They will be responsible if the deal gets screwed up.
 
.
Life cycle costs are themselves not something easy or straightforward to calculate. It is variant on god knows how many factors, time and market fluctuation being just a few. And precisely because life cycle costs are so complicated and so variable, they can easily be manipulated to paint a rosy picture during the bidding process.

And worse yet, because it is so indeterminate, even if large deviations from the original calculations arise, and I'm sure they will, you cannot conclusively prove anything against the company.

But that aside, the number of voices are against the deal is only increasing, both within and outside the AF. And Parrikar isn't some half educated dolt who can't understand if he is being taken for a ride.
You do realise the reason the IAF (and all other branches) have adopted the life cycle costing evaluation process is because it is more scientific than simply buying the product with the cheapest unit/upfront costs and it could be argued because india has been so badly burnt by the misleadingly low prices the Russians place on their products.

Yes it is a tricky and complex equation but it is necessary. When a western product costs 3-4 times the unit price over its life span a russian product ends up costing 5-6 times and during that period you get less life out of the product thanks to abysmal after sales support from Russia.

You can, i hope, understand why I am so appalled to see many proposing the MKI as a CHEAP alternative to the Rafale!!

And as for voices growing against the Rafale, this is not true in regards to the IAF they are perhaps more desperate than ever to get the Rafale. As for the other noise this can be due to a multitude of external factors and could actually indicate this deal is getting closer to being finalised.

Interestingly many don't seem interested to address the other (incredibly important) component of the MMRCA deal in the first place- developing india's aerospace industry. Whilst many seem to beleive (erroneously ) the MKI can bring the same capabilities to the IAF, what more can it bring to the indian aerospace industry? Will a further buy of MKIs devlop the industry in the same way a Rafale buy would? We all know the answer....

It is unfair and unwise to look at the MMRCA/Rafale deal as purely about buying 126-200 jets (as many do). It is about MUCH more and no one (least the DM) has been able to articulate how scrapping the Rafale deal and going with the MKI would meet the same intentions.

I don't doubt the DM's abilities to get to the truth and thus this is why I am confident the deal will be signed imminently IF the MoD truly is serious about India's military modernisation and IF political considerations remain removed from this deal.
 
.
and what will you say about how French milked us during mirage upgrades ?

Not just Mirage. Their conduct during P-75 is also to be noticed. Their antics ensured the cost getting more than doubled.

They have a habit of extracting as much as they can. I m sure they will do the same in Rafale also. With certain amount of lobbying, they were able to convince the then Govt. to go for that much expensive upgrade for Mirage which IDK how long will take.
 
. .
Rs. 358 Crores is roughly equal to $60 Mill. and Rafale Will cost more than double of that. That does make it very very costly.

The $60 million figure is for the "current" MKI in HAL's production, not for the upgraded one and it's questionable if that figure includes the costs for Indo / western upgrades that are necessary for any Russian fighters, or if that is the basic figure we pay to the Russians for the fighter and license production.
For example, we paid around $45 million for each Mig 29K to the Russians. This figure does not include the HMS, EW upgrades, the French IFF system, data links... and all that adds costs and must be included when you want to compare the fighters. Not to mention that one of the prime criterias for the MMRCA competition, was the implementations of operational costs into the evaluation, which puts heavy class fighters into disadvantage again.
Also, the MMRCA costs include higher ToT & Offsets, which automatically gives us more in return for the money we spend, compared to what we spend for the MKI according the older deal.

I agree MKI is not a viable alternative for Rafale. But then Rafale was not what IAF wanted in first place.

On the contrary, Rafale is exactly what they wanted! A multi role fighter, capable of being used in a variety different roles, with good flight performance, AESA radar, good weapons as well as avionics and reasonable operational costs over the lifetime of up to 40 years.

All they wanted was Mirage : A good enough plane to be produced in huge numbers.

In the MRCA tender and mainly because of the ease of inducting it, since it was already available in the fleet and not because it was cost-effective, for M-MRCA the requirements were modified based on the types of fighters and techs that then were available.
 
.
The $60 million figure is for the "current" MKI in HAL's production, not for the upgraded one and it's questionable if that figure includes the costs for Indo / western upgrades that are necessary for any Russian fighters, or if that is the basic figure we pay to the Russians for the fighter and license production.
For example, we paid around $45 million for each Mig 29K to the Russians. This figure does not include the HMS, EW upgrades, the French IFF system, data links... and all that adds costs and must be included when you want to compare the fighters. Not to mention that one of the prime criterias for the MMRCA competition, was the implementations of operational costs into the evaluation, which puts heavy class fighters into disadvantage again.
Also, the MMRCA costs include higher ToT & Offsets, which automatically gives us more in return for the money we spend, compared to what we spend for the MKI according the older deal.

Again... I have no intention of doubting the figure quoted by RM. If he says that MKI coming out of HAL costs us Rs. 358 crores, I will believe that includes all the costs because he has no ulterior motives. I trust him kore than random figures thrown by people on Internet.


On the contrary, Rafale is exactly what they wanted! A multi role fighter, capable of being used in a variety different roles, with good flight performance, AESA radar, good weapons as well as avionics and reasonable operational costs over the lifetime of up to 40 years.


AESA radar was made mandatory when GoI decided to open up the competition as MMRCA. MRCA in its initial stage was Mirage in numbers. When GoI decided to offer IAF "better" planes, they decided to add features as prime requirements.


In the MRCA tender and mainly because of the ease of inducting it, since it was already available in the fleet and not because it was cost-effective, for M-MRCA the requirements were modified based on the types of fighters and techs that then were available.
MRCA was never envisioned to be a Frontline fighter. Instead it was supposed to fill the "gap" between heavy and light fighters. That too in numbers. Cost was not an issue because MRCA was supposed to cost ~$10 Biil. Our economy was growing faster then and was considered good enough to spend $10 Bill. on 126 planes. Now economy has slowed a bit and the deal will cost $20 Bill.

WIth Rafale costing so much, I doubt GoI would want to induct so many Rafales. Especially when an "adequate" fighter is already being produced at less than half the cost. Not to mention the extra sweetness Putin would have offered.
 
.
Pretty simple- Reliance are a fully private profit maximising entity just like Dassualt, HAL is a DPSU with a different set of motivations and control structures to a corporation like Reliance. Corporations like Dassualt would always prefer to tie up with a similar entity to themselves like Reliance.

I think your argument is not logical here. If Reliance is profit maximising firm so is Nirma. Now Should Govt/ADA ask Nirma to manufacture LCA? No because they have zero experience manufacturing planes. Same is with Reliance. I mean they don't even have experience manufacturing a scooter.

Dassault is out to Fleece the GOI but bad luck for them Modi, a pucca Gujju, won't let it happen.

If IAF wants a dedicated ground attack plane then they should throw away the MMRCA competition and buy 5 squadrons of F 18 in a Govt to Govt deal and invest the remaining MMRCA money into LCA/Technology development.

Its dumb in the first place to think that Dassault will transfer its bread and butter technology.

and what will you say about how French milked us during mirage upgrades ?
Also Add Scorpene to the list.
 
.

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom