Rafale was the winner of MMRCA contest which the IAF chose on merits among all the contender , The BJP came and then trimmed the deal to 36 because they figured out they cannot afford to buy the 126 type , The MMRCA selection itself was a very long drawn and the Government kept delaying it for some reason to sign the deal.

The field trials established that the Rafale was technically superior to the F-16E/F, SH Blk II & MiG-35 (the Gripen E was rejected mostly on basis of its immaturity). Hardly a big revelation.

And it was scrapped for two reasons. One, the Rafale’s L1 status was dubious (I’d be happy to post the links again if you want). Two, cost estimates were upwards of $25 bn, a crippling figure.

So Modi did not choose Dassult it was already a winner when he came into the picture , He just reduced the number to suite his budget ……To say Modi had some how went for Dassult and MOD or IAF are some separate entity is a fallacy , They are part of GOI that Modi leads hence any decision of cabinet is collective responsibility.

‘Winner’ of what exactly? A technical evaluation that was 5 years out of date? Or an deeply flawed bidding process that has little relation to the costs of an off-the-shelf purchase? The decision to buy these aircraft was made by Modi not by the MoD or IAF, both of which are separate entities from the PMO.

MOD has been stating that they might look to purchase additional 126 fighter of another type beyond the 36 Rafale , that could be Rafale or some other type

The Rafale deal like many other Defence Procurement in India just shows how badly managed Indian Defence Procurement system is , Virtually all the deal gets delayed and some like Agusta are now caught in corruption.

Except that the Rafale deal (the current one) wasn’t conceived by the procurement system, it was a political purchase. Which is also why EF Gmbh wasn’t asked to offer up a competing proposal.

Not at all. You’re not paying attention. That’s a minor detail.

What I’m saying is that taking 15 years to fail to buy aircraft can’t be due to the vendors. If Dassault refused to be reasonable, it should have been thrown out four years ago. But think about that date. It was selected in January 2012, after a process that had lasted ten years at that point. The fact that it had taken so long to get that far is a condemnation of the system. And the fact that there was still so much latitude in the terms that agreement could not be reached is another condemnation.

The MMRCA deal was terminated last year. The MoU for this entirely different deal was signed by Modi in April 2015 i.e 13 months ago. And its NOT stuck in bureaucratic red tape, its (apparently) stuck because they can’t agree on a mutually acceptable price.

If it was all the fault of Dassault or France, then it should never have reached that point. Why is this so hard to understand? Sellers were queuing up. Who chose Dassault? If there were conditions that Dassault refused to accept & which were non-negotiable, how did it get that far? Would other vendors have accepted them? If not, clearly the terms were wrong. If others would accept them but not Dassault, how did the system allow Rafale to be selected? Big fail!

Who chose Dassault? Modi chose Dassault. And yes it was a mistake, he should have left the entire business to his defence minister to manage.

FMS from the USA is pretty much a take it or leave it system, in very many respects. If India is happy to buy on terms similar to FMS (as close as is possible without the US structures which support it), it can simply require bidders to offer such terms from the start. If they don’t sign up, the bids can be rejected immediately. And note that India has failed to buy aircraft it wanted from the USA, through FMS, entirely because of Indian administrative failures.

India has bought roughly $14 billion dollars of military equipment from the US so far, most of it through the FMS channel. While European states can offer govt-to-govt deals these are entirely through ad hoc procedures none of which offer a comparable level of transparency (not least because most defence contractors are partially state owned).

The basic point here is that as long as it meets the minimum technical requirements, then anything is better than nothing – & so far the IAF has nothing.

Its not exactly rainwater harvesting. All of these acquisitions are being paid for with hard cash. And if a deal hasn’t been signed the money doesn’t evaporate. And there’s no shortage of avenues to productively invest it in (even within the defence sector). Signing a bad deal is NOT better than signing nothing.

And (just my opinion) buying a Rafale at F-35 prices is most definitely a bad deal.

The problem is that India struggles to make any deals for combat aircraft these days, apart from tacking more on to existing contracts. It’s not a new problem. Think how long it took to order the Hawk.

Walk away from this deal – & what? That’s it, no more Western aircraft, just what Russia is willing to sell, on Russian terms?

Assuming a third type is necessary, fact is the Rafale’s hardly the only western aircraft available to the IAF. There’s the F-35 & SH via FMS, as well as the Gripen E. (The EF will probably be no cheaper unless they throw in an assembly line and/or some T1s).

What India needs is decimation of the people involved in procurement, with a promise to repeat it regularly if the survivors don’t start doing their jobs properly. The problem is India’s bureaucracy & politicians, not the vendors. Giving up on deals because India can’t negotiate them is a recipe for disaster.

Except that the deal in this case isn’t stymied by bureaucracy or politicians. Simply put, there doesn’t appear to be any meeting ground on cost. Period.

Personally, I find that encouraging. I fully expected the MoD to sign an uncompetitive deal under pressure from the PMO. (Though that’s still a possibility, since the deal isn’t dead yet.)

The political factor is ironically the only thing keeping the negotiations going – since the deal originated with the PM rather than with the MoD or IAF.

Thats why there´s this thing called the FGFA.

The FGFA is years away. At least a decade or so I’d say, as they get the new engine operational, create the production infrastructure, fix inevitable hardware problems & software bugs, streamline maintenance processes & supply chains, and set up a personnel training pipeline, i.e. everything the F-35 program has been doing over the last five years.

Rafale deal: France rejects bank guarantee, awaits India’s reply

The initial French offer for the 36 fighters made by Dassault Aviation was for around Euro 10.5 billion, following which the Indian side asked for a 30 per cent cut.

The first aircraft is scheduled to be supplied within 36 months of the signing of the deal while the last aircraft will reach India in seven years.

INDIA IS yet to respond, either verbally or in writing, to a letter sent to Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar on April 1 by his French counterpart Jean-Yves Le Drian, who made what is said to be the “best offer” his country can make in a government-to-government deal for 36 Rafale fighter jets, sources told The Indian Express.

The initial French offer for the 36 fighters made by Dassault Aviation was for around Euro 10.5 billion, following which the Indian side asked for a 30 per cent cut. The latest offer, made in the French minister’s letter, is of around Euro 7.8 billion, said sources.

Days before the letter was sent, the French side had rejected an Indian request for a sovereign guarantee or a bank guarantee for the deal, and instead offered to provide a “comfort letter” from their prime minister.

As reported by The Indian Express on March 14, the law ministry had raised objections over France’s refusal to provide any bank guarantees. Asked about Le Drian’s letter, the defence ministry said it does not comment on ongoing negotiations between two governments.

Sources said there was “a significant difference” between the two offers. The original offer included a ten-year product support period, which has been brought down to five years, they said. The latest figure also does not include the cost of setting up infrastructure at two airbases for two Rafale squadrons, said sources.

It’s learnt that one of the bases is proposed to be established in the east, to tackle the Chinese threat, and the other in the north.

India will have to make a payment of 15 per cent of the total cost at the time of signing the deal, said sources. The first aircraft is scheduled to be supplied within 36 months of the signing of the deal while the last aircraft will reach India in seven years.

”Even though the Indian configuration is different from what the French air force flies, calculations show that the French government has agreed to provide a discount of around 7-8 per cent over its buying price. It will have to compensate Dassault for it in some way,” said sources.

The IAF has demanded a fighter configuration different from the one flown by the French air force, including an Israeli helmet-mounted camera and a third-party weapons system.

Price negotiations for the jets have been complicated by deals signed by France for selling the fighter to Egypt and Qatar. Sources said it would not be possible for France to go too far below those prices. Unlike India, Egypt and Qatar have opted for the same configuration as Dassault supplies to the French air force.

Sources also said that there was a small window available for the two sides to close the deal. French Ambassador François Richier, who has been closely involved with the deal, is ending his Delhi stint in June. It would take a few months for his replacement to present his credentials and understand the intricacies of the deal, they said.

The French establishment is also expected to go into election mode later this year with presidential polls scheduled next year.

India had announced its decision to buy the 36 fighters from France during Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s visit to Paris last April. This followed the selection of the French fighter in a decade-long competitive bid for India’s next Medium Multi Role Combat Aircraft (MMRCA). The 126-aircraft MMRCA tender was withdrawn by the NDA government soon after the announcement of the 36 fighter deal in Paris.

Technical negotiations were completed earlier this year and the deal was expected to be signed in January when French President Francois Hollande was the chief guest at the Republic Day celebrations. But both sides were unable to conclude negotiations over price by then.

Easy. The 2012 population of the islands was just under 3000. I go to my government and tell them to offer every one of those 3000 people a sum of £3mn to effectively pack themselves up and disappear within a 3 month period. All it needs to be a success is enough islanders to go for it that the remaining community isnt large enough to be viable. I tell my government to play the long game and go back after a year with a new offer of £3.5mn to each remaining islander to get lost…or accept a lesser amount and stay within the new more vibrant and viable planned Argentine community.

Cost £9-10bn. No need to buy an additional bullet let alone spend those billions in rebuilding my military infrastructure that, once I’ve taken the Falklands back and have UK aquiesence, I have no use for….save to make some of my neighbours nervous!.

UK get to declare that the wishes of the locals have been upheld at every turn and are free to negotiate constructive mineral exploitation contracts with Argentine companies…which the Argentine Govt has been offering as a sweetner all along….and cut out a big chunk of expenditure from their defence budget. Argentina gambles the spend against finding the mineral wealth to make the whole exercise worthwhile whilst wrapping herself in the flag. Google start changing names on maps!.

+1

As things stand, all three sides are losers. The Argentinians can’t exploit the Falklands resources because it flies the Union Jack. The Falklanders can’t efficiently exploit them because the only close market is Argentina. And the British are spending hundreds of millions of pounds to militarily secure the islands with little economic benefit.

Anything that allows them to break the status quo while still being able to sell it as a win to their electorate, should be pursued.

Personally, I thought the dual nationality proposal was a solid idea. Like a more ambitious evolution of the Anglo-Irish agreement. Should be cheaper to implement as well – say.. £1 mil lumpsum to fly two flags out front instead of just one, with an overall improvement in local economic conditions. Sounds like a good deal to me.

Oh no, that is not how politicians handle things :p What good it does for a politician struggling with BY2022 to consider what happens 10 years in the future? No, they whip out the cheese slicer and cut little bit right away – like they have done elsewhere in same situation, and what they indeed already have done with F-35…

I have no idea what you’re talking about. The current plan of ramping up production is not threatened by any politician. If anything they’ve rejected the minor cuts proposed by the US DoD.