BlackArcherI would say that short term and medium term (say 2012-2025) supplying TOT, Rafale components, kits and assembled aircraft will not result in job losses at Dassault or their suppliers. It will be surprising if it does not increase the number of people employed in France as well as securing existing jobs.
It will guaranteed increase jobs. Suppliers will need to add jobs since they will now need to produce parts for the SKD and CKD kits that will be sent to the HAL factory for assembling.
Only morons will complain about job losses since these fighters are not being completely assembled in France. The option was either to let HAL assemble them, or else someone else would’ve gotten the deal and the French would’ve been sitting without any export orders and the line would’ve closed by 2021 despite its current slow build rate.
In fact, the likely domino effect of a large Indian order is also a likelihood. We saw it with the Su-30MKI, which gave a new lease on life to the Su-30 and many nations went on to acquire modern variants of it.
BlackArcherOne could hope that an air force also will want to keep cost down,
or stand trial for treason if not
You Gripen fanboys only harp on costs- I can understand that a nation that probably has no real threat will be most worried about costs, but for a nation like India that has a threat perception from a nation like China, and a possible 2 front war, costs are but one factor. That alone isn’t the ONLY factor to be concerned about. Capabilities are more important for them than just costs.
BlackArcherSo what is the state of play now? Of the 2 aircraft meeting performance criteria, Rafale was estimated to have the lower L1 cost so Dassault now needs to negotiate TOT and arrange concrete offsets. Anything else required to sign a contract (apart from sanctioning the funds required)?
I wonder what arrangement will be made regarding local Rafale component production. As part of the deal will Dassault be providing India with the full specification of components so that they can be produced locally – and any TOT required for that to be possible?
Dassault now needs to negotiate the final prices for the deal and finalise their offsets as well as ToT. Much would’ve been promised during their proposals and now will be the time when they need to work on converting those into contracts, timetables and other ground work.
regarding local Rafale production, we can look at the Su-30MKI production as an example. Initially, it’ll begin with Dassault setting up production facilities with HAL, and teaching them how to assemble SKDs. Then it will go on to some components being built locally and the rest being sourced from Dassault as CKDs and finally they will reach a stage where HAL will build almost the entire Rafale indigenously using indigenously sourced raw materials.
BlackArcherYou missed out the Mig-29K:)
In 5-10 years from now, IAF will be that much stronger just in sheer numbers.
Then you can multiple with the phalcons A50I systems, etc as well.It will not even be a fair game.
I didn’t miss it- they belong to the IN, not the IAF. Of course, in a real war scenario, the MiG-29Ks and the N-LCAs will factor in as well. And considering the numbers that the IN has on order or plans to order (45 MiG-29Ks and 40+ N-LCAs if it is proven), they are a substantial number as well, but they will be used for fleet air defence as well as attacks on Pakistani forces/installations.
As regards AWACS, the IAF will have around 6 A-50Ei and 6+ EMB-145 based AEWACS whereas the PAF will have Erieyes and the Chinese AWACS..so both sides will have AWACS and here the IAF doesn’t yet have a decisive edge. They need more AWACS for sure, as they refuellers.
BlackArcherAlthough there was no deal, there was a serious “intention” to buy upto over 150 Mirages, but then Su-30 Mki happened. In fact I remember reading somewhere that IAF had even developed extensive infrastructure for over 150 M2K.
I mentioned that they did want to buy more Mirages OR MiG-29s. But, there was no termination of any contract which led to the final number being 49+10.
BlackArcherIn fact Dassault should not be toooo complacent for full 126 deal also. Earlier Mirage 2000 deal with India also was for 108 aircraft but was terminated around 40 planes.
First time I’m hearing this..source? I’ve always read that the original deal was always meant to be for 49 fighters and then 10 more attrition replacement Mirages were bought in 2000 or so for a total of 59 of which 8 were lost in crashes.
What I know is that the IAF wanted to buy more Mirage-2000s or MiG-29s, but right around the time the decision needed to be made, the early 1990s’ economic crisis struck India and basically froze all such plans. As such it wasn’t a “termination” of any contract that already existed.
the Mirage acquisition was:
1st batch – 26 single and 4 twin seaters supplied in 1985
2nd batch- 10 single seaters also supplied in 1985
3rd batch- 6 single seaters and 3 twin seaters supplied in 1987 and 1988
BlackArcherPakistani planes will tend to better more capable Indian planes, simply because the Indians are more likely to be on the offensive and perhaps have more restrictive RoEs, whilst the Pakistani will be more desperate.
Unlikely..the IAF will have Su-30MKIs/Super-30s, MiG-29UPGs, Mirage-2000-5s, Rafales, Jaguars and Tejas Mk1/Mk2 against the PAF’s F-16 Block50/52s, JF-17s and possibly J-10Bs..even if the IAF is on the offensive, the initial part of the war will be dedicated to mainly fighting the PAF. While the PAF is no slouch, they are and will be thoroughly outclassed by the IAF.
BlackArcherYes I agree and this is what I was saying .
Now , India is not going to buy American planes anymore . I bet a barrel of old Jack Daniel ‘s No 7 on it . 😎
I wouldn’t say that- the IAF is pretty happy with the C-130J and a new order is in the pipeline. So is one for the P-8I. AH-64D Apaches will also be ordered..the MH-60R is on offer and a top contender.
All home made as F3 standard 😎
Money wise and with the work hour cost in India , beat that !
All they need is to order a Carrier from France and they are up and running by 2020-2025 .Cheers .
Correction- All may not be F3 standard. Just look at the Su-30MKI production. before it ended, they’ve already started looking at the Super-30 upgrade. the IAF may want Rafale F4s whenever those upgrades are available to them.
And India doesn’t need the French to build a carrier for them- they have the INS Vikramaditya and their own IAC-I and IAC-II will follow.
BlackArcherIf you are going to put M2K in there, then add MiG-29UPG…
All in all an absurd diversity. I suspect AMCA will take a long time and Mirage and MiG-29 will be close to retirement by the time it enters squadron service, but nonetheless, quite the mix. Adding yet another type to that, from yet another supplier…dear lord.
Add the Jaguar to that retirement list – by the time the AMCA begins to enter service ~ 2025-2030, most Jaguars will be gone as well. And since the MiG-29UPG upgrade gives it 1000hr/10 years additional service life, most will be gone by then as well. That will leave the IAF with
Super-30s, Tejas Mk1/Mk2, Mirage-2000-5, Rafales, FGFAs and AMCAs.
BlackArcher1. I think you’re right with this. Rafale will be the default option (the IAF would prefer not to add yet another type), but the Indians will hold the threat of a proper competition over Dassault to make sure they get a good deal, & actually hold a real competition if Dassault is uncooperative.
2. Unlikely, I’d say. India will get FGFA for the air-air role of F-35A, & it & missiles can do the first day of war ‘kick the door in” strike against a high-end adversary. Gripen NG is too close to Tejas Mk 2, & unlikely to be considered again.
the first point actually has precedence- remember how India actually seemed to want to go for a competition for another AJT after the 66 Hawks had actually been purchased? They later on announced a deal for 57 more Hawks instead, most likely after BAe reduced their quote for this order.
BlackArcherWhat else is that second seat for? Everyone else is comfortable with single-seat A2A even for heavy aircraft like F-22, Su-35, PAK FA, J-20. What makes India different? And it’s not like the second seat comes free.
India’s numbers of twin-seat FGFA fighters has now come down dramatically from what they wanted initially. The breakup is now 166 single seaters and 48 twin seaters.
BlackArcherFirst, how many platforms can india manage?
The extra 80 would in my opinion be:
1. More Rafales (other bidders are there to lower the price)
2. F-35A or Gripen NG (single engine)F-35 for internal weapons, new capabilites, Gripen for lighter fighter and better logistics and price (use F414 and can use Micas,Meteor,Spice, IRST. etc.)
Tiffy is too dam close to Rafale in size, i dont see any point.
Unlikely to be the Gripen NG- the IAF has the LCA Mk2 in its sights post 2017 and is funding its development, so why would they want something that may bring only a bit more than the LCA Mk2 to the table?
IF (and its a big IF) there is a competition again for 80 fighters, it will be the F-35A that the IAF will want, for its stealth capabilities and the biggest competition will be from Rafales themselves. By then, the IAF’s force structure would’ve stabilised, with more Su-30MKIs, Tejas Mk1s and some of the Rafales in service, and the FGFA emerging on the sidelines. So, just adding to the fighter numbers won’t be the main concern as it is now.
BlackArcherIf these additional 80 fighters are US made, they will come straight from the assembly line of the manufacturer. It is insane to set up a second assembly line for 80 fighters. Its much cheaper to buy them directly. But I dont think India will consider something else than the Rafale.
Then why does Brazil want its own assembly line? they aren’t even procuring 80 fighters, in fact less than half that number..And even Japan wants its own assembly line for an F-X order of just around 40 units.
IF such an RFP were to be released, then I’d put the F-35A at the very top of the likely winners.
BlackArcherIf I was India , I would order 80 more Rafales but I am not India . They think differently than most of us . The old saying “not all the eggs in the same basket” is irrelevant for them or at least not THAT important .
On the contrary, the saying “don’t put all your eggs in one basket” is most closely followed by India, with a diverse mix in its combat and non-combat fleet, comprising of Russian, French, British, Indian and now American airplanes and helicopters.
BlackArcherblk60 is out because it’s an outdated airframe, there’s absolutely no reason to add it when you can manufacture the Rafale locally for cheaper (because you either need to buy the blk60 US built of set up a manufacturing facility for just 80 airframes, which would cost more in the end than more Indian built Rafales).
F35 is a possibility as India may want a small fleet of dedicated stealth strikers to complement stealth UCAVs, or as a stop gap measure. As for Gripen NG I’d say it’s doubtful because I think it’ll be cheaper to manufacture 80 more Rafales in India than make an off the shelf buy or set up a manufacturing plant (same as with the blk60, except it’s definately not an outdated airframe). Gripen NG also has big US content, and little commonality wrt the weapons set.
Nic
I agree- as surprised as I am to hear that they will open up the competition for another 80 fighters, I feel that it is being done for the F-35.
No other reason why the IAF would want 80 MRCA fighters other than the Rafale when it has won the contest fair and square on merit over all the others and price over the other finalist. It would after all be superior to buying 80 F-16 Block60 or F/A-18E/F which would end up being costlier than producing 80 more Rafales in India itself thanks to all the attendant infrastructure, training, maintenance, etc. costs.
Sign In
