LokeHow? I mean sure if the Gripen wins you were right and the MoD was all about fair-play. But if the F-16 wins, you could argue it was chosen because it was the ‘right’ aircraft. Right? 😉
You got it 🙂
LokeOnly one significant deal with Brazil and that was for Embraer jets for an AEW&C function.
I was referring to future collaboration not existing…
Great, so GE will be able to share tech with India as part of LCA Tejas and Gripen IN deals. 🙂
LokeAs much as one admires it as the scrappy underdog, the Gripen isn’t going to get a fair shake in this fight. They just don’t have enough political muscle to swing this one.
hmmm.
Could one say this about the Brazilian competition:
“As much as one admires it as the scrappy underdog, the SH isn’t going to get a fair shake in this fight. They just don’t have enough political muscle to swing this one. ” 🙂
Joking apart: Sure the US is bigger and heavier than Brazil and Sweden combined, however just like the US lost in Brazil, and also lost the MMRCA (and the “replacement” quick-fix) in India, all I am saying is that it is not a guarantee they will win this one. The US has lost in the past in India and they may do it again. But then again, they may win (with a plane developed in the early seventies, no less!)
I predicted several years ago that a twin-engined fighter like Rafale would be too expensive for India and suggested they may need to combine with a cheaper, single-engine fighter.
It turns out they are doing exactly what I predicted all those years ago.
Now I am saying this is an open race, either may win. We shall see who is right… 🙂
LokeBRICS means jack squat, the only nation pushing BRICS is Russia.
Nevertheless there is already defence cooperation between India and Brazil, and as mentioned in a previous post, initial talks were recently held between India and Brazil focusing on potential collaboration on fighter jets and subs.
Sweden and Brazil may be willing to share more, but the question is: what ToT can they share? Not Raven AESA (though Saab said they were willing to develop a GaN radar with India), not IRST tech (they don’t own it), not engine tech. Saab can transfer EW systems, manufacturing processes, mission software, etc.
Getting access to GaN AESA technology should be highly interesting to India! So I don’t understand why you seem to play down that point. When it comes to engine tech, I still believe the US will not be willing to share any critical technology with India, so no loss.
Also what you seem to dismiss is the possibility of ToT transfer from non-Swedish and non-Brazilian companies.
There is a consortium trying to sell Gripen, and they will put together a package. No doubt Saab will ask e.g. the UK and Selex (or is it Marconi now?) what will be possible in terms of collaboration with and tech transfer to India regarding the UK components. If the UK is interested in selling to India, they may try to come up with something; however if they are not at all interested in selling to India (why should they, they are leaving the EU and will probably not need any future deals with places like India) then of course they will tell Saab “sorry we can’t help you sell to India, and we cannot enter any tech transfer agreement with India on those products”.
– Sure they will, only certain hot section/compressor technology is on the list of controlled technical data. If the restrictions were so onerous, they wouldn’t have ordered F414IN engines.
Sure they will; screwdriver technology…
The F414IN is another argument for Gripen, BTW…
Would it? They didn’t ask for nor receive a bid to meet an order for SH. Saying it would have been cheaper is not a given.
Looking at the information from other competitions, and looking at some basic facts around the French compared to the US defence industries it seems highly likely that the SH would be cheaper.
A lot of the technology in the Rafale has been developed for Rafale and Rafale only; in the US they have a very large, very competitive defence industry. Most components in a SH will be cheaper than in the Rafale. The F414 for instance has been produced in very large numbers, this helps keeping the price down. The same goes for most other components in the SH.
LokeHow do you know the others won’t make it? How do you know the MiG-35 won’t make it? Or the Rafale? Especially given the commonality argument.
I know they won’t make it because the didn’t 🙂 Seriously, if India could afford to buy 200 Rafale they would have done so already! Typhoon is in the same price category.
I do not know why they skipped the Mig-35, but I doubt it is because they already have decided on the F-16.
Actually many people (including me) were asking questions around the wisdom of running complete eval of 6 contenders being so different in terms of price and capacity. It would have made more sense to include all 6 in the first round, and then do a short-list, depending on the needs and costs. Well now they have actually short-listed two, and they are Gripen and F-16.
I think it is still open which one they will choose. They claim it will depend on ToT and costs whereas you claim it will be a political decision. I think it will be a bit of both. No doubt they want to strengthen the ties to the US on the other hand, perhaps they also consider strengthening the ties to Brazil, which is after all a BRICS country. Sweden and Brazil is probably willing to share more Tech than the US ever will.
True, they cannot share tech on the engine but that is irrelevant since the US will never share engine tech with India even if F-16 is chosen.
If it is a political decision favoring the US, why did they not go for the SH instead of the Rafale? Since MMRCA was cancelled they could in theory have done that. It would also have been a cheaper solution.
LokeThe company i.e. TASL already exists. Its already got tieups with 10-12 foreign OEMs. Its already won the MoD tender to locally build an LTA with the Airbus C-295. And its already building a extensive portion of the Dornier 228, also ordered by the MoD (among other foreign companies).
I was merely correction your misconception. Also the point is that this is a multi-stage process, where the next stage depends on the previous one. Thus a receipt for delays along the way. Several delays that will add up in the end.
“Not waste time any time and energy”… precisely.
Even though the ‘fair’ thing would have been to let the other contenders prove their price. Especially Dassault, which is already a contracted supplier. Same for MiG/UAC that also has the advantage of lower input costs.
Even the Gripen has only really been retained because they was no plausible grounds to exclude it at the first stage. Couldn’t really have included ‘non-Swedish’ along with ‘single engine’ in the list of requirements.
They have recently evaluated all those airplanes — it makes sense to limit to single-engine since they know the others will not make it. It is your assumption that they have already decided to go for F-16. Perhaps you are right but you have not very strong arguments. There are some arguments for F-16 and some against, just like it is for the Gripen.
The 36 unit GtG was an entirely different deal from the MMRCA. Different acquisition model (technically). Different offsets model. Different mode of production. Different maintenance model. Different pricing system. Different modification reqs. Different basing model.
Very far from an ‘almost done deal’. The only major get from the previous negotiations was the absence of field/technical evaluation.
The MMRCA was an “almost done deal”. The final Rafale deal was different of course, but saying they had “zero preparation” is IMHO still not correct. Anyway, I strongly doubt they will be able to do it faster with the single-engine, AFAIK they have very little experience in dealing with both LM and Saab (they have more experience with Boeing and Dassault both excluded from this competition).
LokeThe US Senate has failed to recognise India as a “global strategic and defence partner” after a key amendment necessary to modify its export control regulations could not be passed on Wednesday.
Loke“The technical discussions on India’s entry into NSG are undergoing in Vienna. Brazil is of opinion that India’s NSG membership will contribute to global peace and stability,” said a senior Brazilian government official, who did not wish to be identified.
Brazil’s support will come in handy for India ahead of the NSG meet in Vienna in November.
However, it is not just NSG that will dominate the high-level engagement between Temer and Modi.
The summit will also give impetus to defence partnership with the Defence Research and Development Organisations of two countries having launched initial dialogue on collaboration in fighter jets and submarines.
LokeNew Delhi: The Indian Air Force chief, Air Chief Marshal Arup Raha today left New Delhi on a four-day visit of Brazil in an effort to strengthen defence ties between India and the South American nation.
Mr Raha, who is also the chairman of the Chiefs of Staff Committee, will meet the chiefs of the Brazilian army and air force. He would also interact with the chief of joint staff of the armed forces and Defence Minister Jose Aldo Rebelo Figueiredo.
“The visit is aimed at enhancing the bilateral cooperation between the two countries in defence-related matters,” an official statement said.
Additionally, there are plans for the two countries to engage with each other on a wide array of issues under the aegis of the BRICS grouping.”
As noted before, Gripen E is not Swedish, it is Brazilian/Swedish…
LokeI don’t believe the article has it all tied down. The process is still being defined and those timelines are completely speculative and have not been given by the DM, but by unknown MoD officials.
Well Indian media are unreliable, however also the Diplomat mentions 2021 as the expected year of signature:
The final government-to-government deal for the new IAF single engine fighter jet is expected to be inked in 2021.
http://thediplomat.com/2017/01/is-india-buying-200-f-16-fighter-jets/
Also Sputnik (admittedly as unreliable as Indian media) mentions 2021:
Officials say this process could take two years or longer, with the final deal slated to be signed in 2021.
Read more: https://sputniknews.com/asia/201701031049237061-india-announces-new-domestic-jets/
LokeWhat do you suppose the ‘Strategic Partnership Model’ means? (Hint: its got nothing to do with a foreign nation/state/company.)
I’ll save you the trouble. Its a pvt sector company (‘strategic partner’) exclusively designated by the govt to specialize in a particular defence segment.
No it is not a company. It is a model. You need that model defined before you can choose the company according to the model.
Why is it limited to single engine anyway? Why not invite all and sundry? If the single engine contender is cheaper it’ll win through naturally on life-cycle cost? Why is the Rafale being excluded? Why are the Russians being excluded? And just ‘coincidentally’ LM has a freshly decommissioned production line all ready for transfer having delivered its last aircraft in 2017?
It is single-engine because, as you say, they have realized there is a real difference in price (but also in performance) between single and twin engine. With the knowgledge they have about the aviable machines it makes a alot of sense to short-list the single-engines and not waste any time and energy to pretend to be looking at the twin-engines in the same process. One of the few sensible decisions in this mess.
~18 months. And the MoD had zero warning/prep time for that one, which came almost out of the blue.
Zero prep time!?? After spending several years of evaluating the Rafale, and then spending several years of trying to negotiate a deal? They should have had intimate knowledge about not just the Rafale system (including things like maintanence etc) but also intimate knowledge about the costs of different options, knowledge about the French negotiation team and tactics, etc. etc. etc. In spite of having an “almost done deal” as a starting point; in spite of all that knowledge, and in spite of enormous pressure to finalize the deal ASAP, it still took them 18 months. How long did it take Egypt and that other ME country which name I always forget?
LokeThe ‘decision’, if you can call it that, is to be made this year, not in 8-9 years. The F-16 line has enough orders to run to the end of the year. Even with delays, its completely feasible.
Completely wrong.
Parrikar disclosed another single fighter line will be done under the Strategic Partnership model that will be announced later this month.
“We will submit a new acceptance of necessity proposal for new single engine fighters to Ministry of Defense in the next four months[…]
However a top MoD official said selection of an Indian private company to manufacture single engine fighters will only be approved by the cabinet by the end of 2017.
The global tender will be floated in the first quarter of 2018. At that time, a private company will be nominated as the strategic partners production agency and a two or more year process will kick off to evaluate technical and financial bids and conduct extensive trials, MoD official noted.
The final government-to-government deal will be inked in 2021.
This is a multi-step multi-year process consisting of (at least) the following steps:
1. Strategic Partnership Model must be finalized (within 1 month)
2. Proposal for new single engine fighter program (within 4 months)
3. Selection of Indian company (end of 2017)
4. Floating of global tender (Q1 2018)
5. “two or more year process to evaluate technical and financial bids and conduct extensive trials” (Q1 2020)
6. Finalization of government-to-government deal (current estimate: 2021).
Read (and re-read) the steps above.
What is the probability of this going according to plan, and having the “deal inked” in 2021?
How long did it take to “ink the deal” with Dassault after the decision to do a g2g deal with France?
I say there is a quite high likelyhood of having several delays in several of the steps above…. thus IMHO 2025 is probably a more realistic (and maybe even still rather optimistic) estimate for when this deal will be inked (if ever…!)
LokeF-16. The whole business is tailor-made for the F-16 and driven by political/strategic considerations.
The ‘competition’ aspect is pretty superficial. LM has this in the bag, more or less.
Perhaps, then again, perhaps not…
Keep in mind this is India we are talking about. Even if they try to speed up the “competition” it will still take some time, as written in the Defensenews article, the plan is for 2021. Then there is a high risk of delays on top of that.
Furthermore, at least one article says there are 3 in this race, not 2:
https://www.telegraphindia.com/1170104/jsp/nation/story_128457.jsp#.WG0IuIWcHg8
AFAIK the backlog of F-16 will keep the line running until end of this year. How will LM keep the line “warm” until around 2025, when India may be ready for the transfer?
Most likely this will be another MMRCA; run for a long time then become cancelled in the end. If they can fix the Tejas within the next 7-8 years then that will probably become their preferred option.
LokeIts not a small rebuild. That’s why the govt had to reverse itself after opting for the F-35C. The costs associated with a Emcat ECO were very steep and this is when the vessel was still in construction.
I was being ironic…
LokePerhaps the most realistic scenario is that after several delays they will decide (sometime around 2025) to cancel, and instead buy more Su-30, Rafale and Tejas…
IMHO Canada has already lost the competition of the worst procurement processes on this planet.
Sign In
