VnomadIt’s unclear if the make in India is dead or not. Depending on the article, informations are different.
The Indian defence minister just confirmed yesterday that all deals will be on a govt-to-govt basis which positively kills the MMRCA thing. Follow on orders for off-the-shelf Rafales haven’t been ruled out. On other hand if they were a surety, it would have made more sense to order a single bulk order for a better price rather than break it into costlier piecemeal purchases.
Vnomadthing is, Tejas is a lightweight aircraft, carrying half the ordnance you can expect from a Rafale. The SU30, on the other hand, is a heavy fighter which isn’t necessarily a good fit for close air support. Another thing with those two is that teh SU30 has some reliability problems while the Tejas never seems to finish being tested. With the Rafale, India gets a fully capable combat proven aircraft, not to speak of other advantages it may get from the French. For example, during MMRCA competition, I’ve read that the French, in case India choose the Rafale, proposed to share ELINT data they gather through their satellites in all that region. Such data is of strategic importance and can very well outweigh a lot of offers they may get from elsewhere
– What prevents the Su-30 from being effective at CAS? Its certainly got precision strike capability.
– Its availability can (and is) being boosted. Faster overhauls, better spares management and so on.
– The Tejas is ready now. Aside from the nose cone retrofit (another 2-3 months), most of the pending work pertains to weapons integration.
– It can carry four to six air to ground weapons. Should be enough considering that it can be fielded in large numbers (as a result of its low cost).
______________________
– How much spying does France do in East and South Asia? My understanding was that most of it was focused on the Atlantic & Mediterranean. Also how much will it being willing to release for a 36 aircraft order? (If anything the US might have some interesting China-related data to share. They’ve been confirmed to have been sharing intel on PLAN sub ops in the IOR.)
Vnomada possibility is for France to provide Rafales from AdlA (already in service) until new ones are delivered.
AdlA obviously won’t like it, but the government has the power to do it
the major difference would be the removal of nuclear related material, which is, more or less, a module to plug out anyway.
As the French Rafales are pooled so that different squadrons pick aircraft when needed, it gives the government a central aircraft reserve from which to take the aircraft they need
They’ll also need to replace the NATO kit with Indian datalinks and IFF before transfer. And then revert back to the previous configuration when the aircraft are returned to the AdlA.
VnomadYou’re a typical example of a bandwidth-waster with theories pulled out of thin air, occupying another half dozen of sensible people trying to politely show him that he’s wrong. And yet to no avail..
I have personally made the effort to look up the materials for you which you seemed to be interested in and in return you have turned to childish bickering about semantics and trying to paint me an idiot.. I will simply deal with the situation the way you deserve – show a quote about the dirt cheap price offered for those T1s… ah, there is none? then get lost..
I’m finished here..
LoL. You attempted to ‘prove’ that the T1s were $60M and were shown that the figure referred to lightly used in-service types. You’ve been back-pedalling ever since.
VnomadWhy’re they a better option Vnomad? the IAF has been operating both the Mirages and Fulcrums for decades now, and are intimately well versed with them..the tactics to use them exist, they have plenty of experience with maintenance and operations for both types, weapons stocks exist, the infrastructure to overhaul and support them exists..in fact it was a no-brainer to upgrade both these types since they are relevant in the sub-continental scenario right now and will remain so till 2030 or till whenever F-16 Block 50s and JF-17s are a part of the PAF.
Not for India. For Peru. See post & links on last page.
why would you, a sensible poster, even suggest adding a new type, that too second hand, and as expensive as our Su-30MKIs, with part their lives used up as a stop-gap measure?? the Rafale was selected as the MRCA winner, the deal has been in negotiations for 3 years now, it is combat proven, and it is pretty much outside the US sphere of influence, which is a plus as far as the IAF goes..and I don’t suppose even you would be comparing Typhoon T1s with Rafale F3 and seeing them on par with each other.
The MMRCA is done for as per yesterday’s reports. Now we’re just talking 36 off-the-shelf, albeit with the ‘possibility’ of more. 36 EF T3s with 53 EF T1 equals nearly five desperately needed squadrons. And unlike the $60M Spanish EFs in question, all the 53 T1s are headed for the boneyard. Expect them to be far cheaper than the MKIs.
So except for quick deliveries, what is the rationale that you would have for these Typhoon T1s? We don’t need them- if you want stopgap, order 40 more Su-30MKIs direct from Irkut to just tide over squadron retirements. But why add a new type that is limited in capabilities compared to the Rafale F3 and still costs so much?
IAPO built Su-30MKIs as an alternative… is fair. The advantage of logistical commonality will certainly be appealing and will the collapsed Ruble might be somewhat cheaper than usual. On the other hand, given the lead time involved, the delivery would begin only after 2018 with the last units flying in only after 2020. Doesn’t provide an immediate fillip to numbers.
VnomadA much better thing to say would be that your entire post was irrelevant to start out with. You claim about how T1 Typhoons must be available for dirt cheap just because retired Harriers were sold for $50mil quid for an entire sqn once, does not offer any informative value to start with. There is no dirt cheap offer on the table for those, it’s just a theory based on thin air. I find it quite amusing how you think that everyone must now break his neck to provide you with evidence to refute it – there is nothing to refute here, in the first place. I have simply tried to help you out to get real with the quote I have provided. But you can stay in your $50mil-for-an-entire-squadron bubbleworld – I could not care less.
A person who ‘couldn’t care less’ wouldn’t have bothered to type out a response. Let alone one draw a false equivalence (and then admit as much).
I am sure many air forces will break their legs to get these T1s, then. There is nothing to fear if the offer is THAT good, as you say..
So the value/merit of an aircraft is based on ‘air forces breaking their legs to get it’? Could you please repost that line on the F-35 thread.
VnomadI don’t know what are you talking about.. I have clearly written that Spain offered 18 T1s to Peru, with each airframe having flown 600 hours on average. What about you read it slower and let it sink in, for a change? I have never mentioned a word about their retirement, you have..
You mean to say that your reply to my post was irrelevant to start out with? Seeing as its clearly not the same case as EFs or Harriers headed to the boneyard.
Exactly what sense does it make to purchase aircraft otherwise destined for a scrapyard? In few years they’d end up worn and beaten like the first IAF Su-30Ks/MKs.. and then what?
They’re stopgap measure for arresting a diving squadron strength. Excellent for air superiority, available at short notice while having a fair few years remaining. The logic is the same as that driving the IAF’s upgrades for its (far older) MiG-29s & Mirage 2000s. The platform is however a lot more capable.
VnomadCome on he was just replying to some stupid point that EF Tranche 1 would be a better deal for india than the Rafale F3+whatever.
Then you ought to read it slower and let it sink in. 36 EF T3 (or however many) plus 53 or more EF T1s is a better deal.
Nevermind that India would need to ask the US permission to order some AMRAAMs, which I doubt they’d get.
1. If you’ve followed (which you evidently haven’t) recent developments in their bilateral defence relationship like the DTTI, you’d know approval for AMRAAMs isn’t an exceptional hurdle.
2. Where does it say that the Meteor can never be integrated on the Tranche 1? (Most of testing was performed by the T1 standard IPA1.)
VnomadSure… Both articles dated 2013
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/peru-moves-to-maintain-modernize-its-fighter-fleet-07400/
http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/spain-offers-eurofighters-to-peru-381843/
Where does it say that the T1s are being retired? In fact, these seem to be serving T1s with 90% of their service life still remaining. And at $65M they’re a still a better option than a Mirage and/or MiG-29 upgrade priced at $40M.
In either case, this is hardly the same as ex-RAF EFs being diverted from the scrapyard/museum to the IAF.
VnomadTwo years ago Spain has tendered a proposal to Peru regd. sale of 18 T1 Typhoons, each having flown approx. 600 hours on average, for €45 mil per airframe (over $60mil a piece at that time). So don’t hold your breath on the “damn cheap” claim.
Can you give me a link for that? I didn’t know the Spanish were retiring their T1s. That’s sounds more than the T1 costed to start out with.
VnomadDid you know that the workers on the assembly line of the Rafale (consistent) actually switch from time to time onto the Falcon line (highly fluctuating)?
I did. And like I said in my last post, the (Dassault run) assembly line isn’t the issue. The supply chain is. Every one of the 500 subcontractors will need to double production instantaneously to take delivery rate to 24 by 2018. And while the Falcon production is elastic, the Rafale not so much (which is actually a positive, the stability enabling lower costs quoted by suppliers).
VnomadYes there is a lead time, it is 2 years, everybody is aware of that.
Now, you are free to distort my argument and invock an appeal to authority when I was merely pointing out Dassault experience in that domain :
Dassault is used to non constant production rates (the bizz jet business is also fluctuating a lot) and knows perfectly well how to adapt to momentary production raise or drops. They proved it many times in the past for their military or civil products.
Lead time for subcontractors is two years but that is for normal production. Any ramp up is bound to take some time to implement.
Dassault’s experience in terms of production is industry standard but hardly outstrips its peers like BAE, LM, Boeing, Saab etc. The current rate of 11 units per year is not a momentary drop but has been consistent (default) for several years.
Here are a few more facts to consider :
Dassault assembly line is designed for a production rate of 2.5 a/c per month and it is currectly running at 1 a/c per month. So there is a lot of room there.
Dassault aviation has been increasing his Rafale workforce for a couple of months now.
Dassault subcontractors working on the Rafale have been asked to prepare for a production increase since the Egyptian deal.
– Capacity at the assembly line is not an issue. More than sufficient.
– Egyptian deal would have provided an early start of a couple of months, no more. No so much when one looks at the bigger picture.
For the rest, there is realy nothing more to discuss. You think that T1 typhoon would have been valuable for the IAF… Well, unfortunatly, the IAF and India Prime Minister don’t share your opinion and prefer to buy 36 brand new Rafale F3 O4T off the shelf. Get over it.
The equation does seem to be tipping in Dassault’s favour, though signing is still a while away. As and when it gets signed, I’m sure the news will be welcomed in New Delhi, Paris and Beijing.
VnomadWhy would the Indian buy a machine that the british government does not even bother to fund for its upgrades?
I suggest you count the number of second and third generation aircraft serving with the IAF and you’ll find your answer.
VnomadThey are obsolete in the sense that too many of their core components are not produced anymore for the current typhoon standard or are incompatible with current software upgrades.
I grant you that they could, in theory, be retrofited to the lastest standard, but you imply yourself that it would be very coostly and probably cheaper to buy brand new T3 airframes with full potential in the first place.
You’re missing the point of the T1 argument entirely. Its being pitched not as a substitute to the T3 but as a supplement. What is the cost of an aircraft (with residual life) that’s being retired early? Just for reference, the entire 40 strong fleet of British Harrier IIs was sold to the USMC for $50 million. That’s $50 million total, not $50 million each.
I don’t know what the cost of used EF T1s would be, but the evidence suggests they’ll be damn cheap. Which makes it a fantastic opportunity for any customer looking for a good deal, and doubly so for an air force as desperate for MiG replacements as the IAF.
IMHO, It is not in India’s interest to spend money on a product that is more or less a dead end, even as a stop gap, when they clearly need and want new airframes and have the ressources to buy them.
You find few who concur on the last point. The Indian military’s list of stated and pending requirements comfortably outstrip its current resources.
VnomadWe are talking about Dassault here. You know, the guys whose softwares (DS PLM solutions) are used by most major industries around the world to organize production in advance ….
Ahh.. the appeal to authority. Dassault has the bestest engineers therefore _______. Following from that LM’s F-22 pedigree would probably make it easy choice for an F-35 customer.
Unfortunately, there’s lead time involved for all aircraft, and no amount of software prowess would enable subcontractors to perform miracles.
You mean those Typhoon that nobody wants, not even the countries which produced and bought them in the first place ? You mean the planes that the RAF plans to decomission within 3 years because they are obsolete and impossible to upgrade seriously ?
Does India really want to get such fighters ?
What a curious argument. Its almost like Rafale domestic orders were never cut from 287 to 225 down to possibly 180 (depending on whether the Mirage 2000 is retired). Having signed just one confirmed export contract. Surprising thing is that you, being French, would assert that production/operational numbers are a true reflection of an aircraft’s capability. An F-35 fan saying the same would have been understandable, seeing as its production numbers and exports are huge, but in this case its a puzzle.
As for EF T1s being ‘obsolete’, I’d really be interested in your definition of the term ‘obsolete’. Maybe for expeditionary air forces that are being downsized to 150-180 fighters. For India on the other hand, fielding a sizeable number of MiG-21s, MiG-27s & Jaguars and numbers being critical, EF T1s acquired on the cheap would invaluable. Especially for air defence & air superiority (i.e. non multirole functions).
Sign In
