This reminds me of the RD-33’s horror stories..I’m sure you’d say that perhaps even those were somehow the IAF’s fault. Read this and it won’t come as a surprise that the IAF (not the IN) never ordered more MiG-29s. The institutional memory is such that even recently when I was talking to an ex-IAF pilot on the Fulcrum, his first point was that it was an aircraft that gave a lot of maintenance headaches to the IAF, whereas the Mirage-2000 was a lot easier to maintain and far more reliable. Sure, it was a beast in the air, but on the ground, maintainers weren’t enamoured of it.

Surprisingly even the very modern RD-33MK on the MiG-29K has been packing up in-flight.

I do not dismiss what you are saying , but all the communications so far points to that workforce ratio of 2.7 being the main source of the cost escalation for local production.It is apparently sufficiently significant to be pointed out before anything else tooling and machinery land…etc, possibly because the rest was expected and fairly accounted for while this was unexpected.

How can a workforce ratio of 2.7:1 be the primary cause of cost escalation when the ratio of payscales is something like 1:4 (if not lower)? I have seen just one solitary communication that’s entirely devoid of detail or context. For all you know it could be part of an effort to bring Reliance back in the game.

However, it is still unclear if the ratio is HAL’s or an RFP imposed. One of the latest statement of the MINDEF talking of a questionable formula related to that ratio makes me wonder if it could have been imposed for calculation of the life cycle. In which case beyond projected manufacturing cost,that would certainly explode also maintenance one beyond reasonable, even with cheap labor.

When did the MoD ever reference that ratio?

Beg to differ here, while HAL and others may have some experience in the technology whether on composite , radars , the manufacturing process and level of spec to achieve on those are clearly foreign to them. Take composite , HAL proud itself in mastering it for the plane it currently produce. Fair enough. Problem is Rafale requires a higher grade that they have not yet been confronted with and that can only be achieved with total change of their current process. Almost like starting from scratch.

How do you know the Rafale requires a ‘higher grade’ of composites? All we know is that composites production for the Rafale was through an automated process while it was manual at HAL. Says nothing about the specifications of the product.

In radar it is even worth,AESA manufacturing requirements are light years from those for MECA or PESA.To the point where you may consider other contractors than in the legacy radar manufacturing industry, because the process is so alien to what is used to be.

While India hasn’t employed the tech on a fighter radar, it does build AESAs in fairly large numbers for ground based systems (including some developed with assistance from Elta and Thales).

More importantly, even for license produced units, the chips for the AESA will still be fabricated at UMS and then shipped across. Unless there’s a foundry set up locally (which would be prohibitively expensive), the ‘radar manufacturing’ in India will consist of basic assembly which isn’t much of a step up from what they already do.

Even on assembly or machining parts, that most industry would claim to master , the level of quality, the dimensions and the quality to attain is not the same. Take the example of the EuroFighter and the effect of a small innocuous hole improperly trimmed. This may be inconsequential on an M2000 or TEJAS, but on latest gen fighter striving for yet being lighter, stronger, 9 G compatible optimal TWR and MTOW it does matter.

Production tolerances for the Tejas are equal to 80 microns (link) which is comparable to the 70 microns for the Eurofighter (link). Machining parts with OEM supplied equipment isn’t that big a deal.

All in all, the technology and material may be known , but the manufacturing process is yet to be mastered . This is what the TOT is/was/should have been about. Not sure this was understood, since HAL did not really considered changing its process ( composite still manually processed ), and expressed that the plane design alone should allow Dassault to guarantee quality whatever the manufacturing processes.

With the volumes that HAL was dealing with so far, coupled with its low labour costs, producing it manually might well have been a more economical proposition. And as the scale of production escalated they would most likely have shifted to an automated process. In any case, point is the value of ToT while not absent, has still been vastly overhyped.

What I’m saying is that Dassault works with some 500 specialized subcontractors on the Rafale. be it for materials, RAM, assembly/welding technology, you name it. Every manufacturer has its secrets, so, saying, “they already make a 4th gen fighter so they should be fine” is somewhat optimistic 😉

Its highly unlikely that a HAL employee could finagle a lucrative private sector contract by exploiting the ‘secrets’ of one of the 500 subcontractors involved in the Rafale production. License building at HAL is a fairly prosaic deal with the advanced research staying put in France.

The timeline is “2 squadrons in 2 years” or something along these lines. If Dassault agreed on that, give them credit they’ll do it at least until they say they can’t or until they fail to deliver

This particular debate was not about the actual deal currently being negotiated between India and France, but rather your proposal viz. the transfer of AdlA fighters to the IAF.

Thing is, when you acquire knowledge about composites, for example, you can use it elsewhere than aviation… programming, same thing, and the list goes on. While HAL won’t loose its workers for another company in the same business, they may loose them for other areas where their new capabilities may be interesting

That’s bit of a stretch really. The technology in question isn’t entirely new to HAL; its evolutionary rather than revolutionary. Better manufacturing techniques would have refined capabilities but that experience is not easily transferable and other sectors like automobiles aren’t really short of (even high end) technical staff. The aircraft’s software is already very mature and involvement in that aspect would minor at best. Actual core competencies are generated through process of development rather than customization.

In any case, building experience from scratch is a costly business. Dassault’s subcontractors work with them for decades which allowed them to acquire experience and knowhow. India would have to gain their level of excellence in months (a few years at best)… it’s all but easy

They’re already manufacturing two 4th gen (albeit less sophisticated) aircraft, so they would hardly be ‘building experience from scratch’. But yes, technology can’t be absorbed by building-to-print so expecting some major impetus to the domestic industry from license production was probably a futile hope.

Not at all what it ends to be in this occurence.One has to factor training ,certification,turnover.Besides that type of labor cost do not sink and has a tendency to rise once competence are acquired to fight turnover.

HAL being a state owned company would probably have employee pay pegged to a national scale. So you have limited pay rises during prosperous times but the with the safety of an assured job in a downturn. Point is HAL’s labour costs will not significantly change with time. Also HAL doesn’t have a lot of domestic competition, so the opportunities for its employees in terms of migrating to the private sector are significantly less than they would be in the West.

Have you any experience…of working with the Indian workforce at all?

(I’m guessing from your statement above the answer is probably no.)

Some experience of things you wish to offer an opinion on may make the opinion more worthwhile.

Not in the software industry no. But putting anecdotal evidence aside for the moment, a cursory google search tells me that the revenues from the Indian IT industry grew from about $8 billion in 2000 to about $120 billion expected in 2015. Ten seconds on the calculator tells me that’s a growth rate of roughly 20% yoy. That would be quite err.. miraculous, if India’s cost advantages were as illusory as suggested in invictus_slo’s post.

That seems to contradict what he’s directly quoted as saying in other reports. Given a choice between a direct quote & an indirect report, such as your link, I always prefer the direct quote to someone’s interpretation or paraphrasing of what was said.

To me, it looks as if he’s been careful to be non-commital over details of future purchases, over numbers, type of contract – everything – while praising his boss over the latest move & criticising (with justification, considering how long it’s taken so far) the deal made by the previous government.

I can’t find the transcript of the interview anywhere but there’s still this –

Future Rafale Deals Will Also Be Under Govt to Govt: Parrikar

“Scope was only possible in Government to Government deal. Instead of going through the Request for Proposal (RFP) route where there was lot of confusion and chaos, it was decided that we will go through the G2G route,” he said explaining that 36 Rafale jets would be procured in ready-to- fly condition.

He said what has to be done about the rest would de decided after discussions between the two governments.

Asked what it means to the eight-year-old tender process for MMRCA, for which Rafale was shortlisted, Parrikar said it has not been decided yet.

“But if this (G2G) route is followed, obviously, one car cannot travel on two different roads. There were a lot of problems on that (tender) road. That is why we have adopted the procedure of direct government to government,” he said briefing reporters at South Block.

Replying to another query if future deals on Rafale would also be through G2G route, Parrikar said, “All deal(s) will be in G2G only. The 36 are in fly-away condition which means they will be manufactured by the company in France and supplied in fly away conditions.”

Still not completely clear though since there’s some editing involved there.

Something else said by Parrikar –

So, contrary to claims that he said that the MRCA deal has been abandoned, he not only didn’t say that, but thought it worth pointing it out that he hadn’t said it.

Now, can all this reading too much in, & over-interpreting, stop?

Well he’s prevaricating on that point but he was quite emphatic when he said all future deal would be govt-to-govt.

Future Rafale deals will also be govt-to-govt, says Defence Minister Parrikar

That rules out a licensing deal which would inevitably have to be negotiated directly with Dassault & Co. Also, he stated that the number of follow-on aircraft was not set in stone (or words to that effect). That too suggest that the MMRCA deal (which provided no such flexibility) has been conclusively abandoned.