Riihttp://www.defense-aerospace.com/cgi-bin/client/modele.pl?shop=dae&modele=feature&prod=132379&cat=5
Good article … Different perspective on the deal …
Politics, politics, politics…
That, Indian sources say, was New Delhi’s real reason for eliminating Boeing and Lockheed Martin from the fighter competition; India has resolved, these sources say, to buy only second-line equipment from the U.S., such as transport (C-17, C-130J) or maritime patrol aircraft (P-8I). Vital weapons such as missiles and fighters, when they cannot be locally produced, will remain the preserve of France and Russia.
I don’t buy this in the least. The P-8 and AH-64 are frontline platforms, and transport (i.e. logistics) may be less sexy but is hardly of secondary importance. Technology transfer issues re: CISMOA and the like are more plausible.
But no, the real reason F-16 and F/A-18E/F were eliminated is because they are fat and slow and India actually cares about such trivialities as acceleration, agility, etc.
RiiYeah, probably. To be honest I was just going by the trial/delivery photos. 😮
RiiIt really is an impressively awful name.
RiiBrazil wants 36 initially, but hopes to replace all its current combat fleet (12 second hand Mirage 2000, 57 F-5M, & 60 AMX), & possibly the 12 naval A-4, with the same type.
Yeah, the Brazilian contract is a much bigger deal than the 36 aircraft in the headline would indicate. In terms of the implications for the future evolution of whichever platform is selected I think it’s more important than MMRCA even.
RiiIt’s clear the Pentagon meant that the US contenders offered an unbeatable overall package, i.e. price/performance/maturity/etc. It’s debatable, but well within the range of normal self-promotion. No need to get panties in a bunch.
David Cameron’s claims that Typhoon has “far better capabilities than Rafale”, OTOH… :rolleyes:
RiiThese guys aren’t serious, really. They are like spoiled children. I almost don’t want them to buy Rafale (well that’s me been very very happy about India talking :D). Anyway I hope they will stop losing our time.
This is pretty much my sentiment also. The Gulf states are unworthy of respect. If they want to buy, sure; but to play games with a nation like France … walk away from the table. Perhaps make any new offer 1% more expensive than the old, just to drive the point home. :rolleyes:
RiiOr they could get the cheaper C-295….(just a little promotion, save our local jobs and all that)
Hey we’re already buying Spanish LHDs and Spanish destroyers and the A330 MRTTs were assembled in Spain too. :p
RiiThe RAAF was very close to a FMS buy of C-27J’s (B’s?) but given the link below maybe the whole thing is in question:
http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/usaf-woes-clip-c-27js-wings-in-australia-367521/
Thanks USAF top brass! The RAAF (and Army) have waited this long for a Caribou replacement so whats a few more years……..:p
This can be read in a few different ways:
(1) Australia wants to buy these ex-USAF C-27Js
(2) Australia is re-evaluating C-27J in light of what could be perceived as loss-of-confidence in the program by USAF.
(3) Australia is re-evaluating C-27J in light of loss of interoperability bonuses with USAF.
(2) is sensible enough in the sense of dotting-the-is-and-crossing-the-ts, even if we already know the real story behind USAF’s decision. The prospect of (3) makes me retch.
Incidentally, although the C-130J and C-17A acquisitions made sense at the times they were made and were even laudable in the sense that nothing went wrong — a rarity for Australian defence acquisitions — ultimately I think a C-27J/A400M/A330 combination would be better than the C-27J/C-130J/C-17A/A330 combination it looks like we’ll end up with. Alas the clean slate only exists in the imagination…
RiiBut over time, it’s not really much of a job creator for France.
“Not much” vs. “None because we lost the contract.”
And then you get into all the ancillary benefits outlined by myself and others above.
And if the deal includes provisions to allow Indian-made Rafales to be sold outside India, like the Brazil deal did, then it’s even worse for French industry.
Do you have evidence of this?
RiiIndia has 2 serious ‘enemies @ the gates’, as opposed to Brazil which will have to contend with scary-looking indigenous tribes and swaggering drugs lords.
And yet they have an aircraft carrier and plans to build nuclear submarines.
Brazil (quite reasonably) sees itself as a regional hegemon and future global power. To that end it — like India — aspires to permanent membership on the UN Security Council (a position in which it enjoys at least French support) and all of the other trappings that distinguish major powers from lesser ones in the world today, including aircraft carriers and nuclear submarines. And as with all of the global powers, the domestic aerospace industry — led by Embraer — is a point of national pride and its future development is a national priority.
I don’t wish to rubbish either Gripen’s qualities as an aircraft, or the possibility of its selection by Brazil, but of the three contenders I believe the one that best fits the Brazilian ‘big picture’ as outlined above is Rafale, and that that big picture will trump short-term price considerations.
Of course one potential wildcard here is under-the-table negotiations between SAAB and Brazil for a long-term strategic aerospace partnership including the production of a 5th generation aircraft for introduction post-2025. Indeed if I were SAAB I’d be pushing for just that: “C’mon Brazil, you don’t want to rely on the French for everything, they’ll take you to the cleaners…” 😀
RiiI’m not sure if that’s completely true. The bulk of the indian Rafales will be built in india and I don’t think there are significant orders from the French airforce/navy.
Even before the Indian contract the Rafale line was scheduled to remain open till 2019 servicing French orders at a low rate.
Unless there are further orders, there may be some job losses from the French production line.
Losses that would’ve been worse and/or occurred earlier without the MMRCA contract. Even ignoring all the indirect benefits arising from the contract, 20% workshare in something is preferable to 100% workshare in nothing.
However, even countries like Brazil are considering local production for significantly fewer numbers than the indian order.
In the long-run I could see the Brazilian contract leading to ~150 airframes and indeed I think they’ll have to make some sort of long-term commitment for more than 36 aircraft to get the kind of ToT they’re seeking, but probably fewer than India, yes.
Any orders from the Middle Eastern gulf region are not expected to include local production, so I only see these regions keeping the French production line open.
And the win in India can only improve Rafale’s prospects in those regions.
RiiI wouldn’t be too sure about Brazil, Dilma Rouseff and her new Defence Minister aren’t as susceptible to Sarkozy’s assiduous courting as her predecessor. They’re most likely to go for the lowest cost option i.e. Gripen.
That India has seen fit to give Rafale the nod should go some way towards allaying any concerns that the previous administration’s preference derived solely from idealistic rather than pragmatic considerations.
I can’t believe some MP in UK PM’s parliamentary questions has just raised the issue of using British govt. aid to India as leverage to overturn the MMRCA decision. Some people really need to get over themselves!
Ha ha, talk about cutting off your nose to spite your face. Seriously, they should try it and just watch as UK industry is mysteriously excluded from future contracts with the government of the world’s third-largest economy. Someone still thinks they’re living in the days of the Raj it seems. :rolleyes:
Ironically, now that a UK MP has raised the prospect of ‘aid as a weapon’ it will be far more difficult for UK diplomats to talk about the proper levels of aid to India going forward without that nation perceiving and reacting to it as a threat/attempt-at-leverage, where the UK will want to avoid that perception because it knows that it is in British interests to maintain good relations with India — in the long-term, more important than it is for India to maintain good relations with the UK. So, well done nameless MP, your comments probably just guaranteed that British money will continue to flow to India for a few more years than it otherwise might’ve.
RiiWhy are French people “foolish” and “idiots” for being concerned about job losses?
Because the losses they are complaining about are imaginary.
If they had their way and Dassault offered less workshare to India then the contract would’ve gone elsewhere leading to actual loss of work for French workers and less income for Dassault (and tax income for France to spend on its citizens). And of course it would’ve left the Rafale program – and the French military aviation industry – without the long-term security the Indian contract offers and improved prospects for further contracts in Brazil, UAE and elsewhere.
Of course this isn’t just a French or a European thing. Prestowitz over at Foreign Policy magazine recently penned an article about making Japan ‘buy the whole airplane’, i.e. F-35. Like Japan wouldn’t have said ‘haha, no’ and bought Typhoon instead if presented with those conditions. The arrogance of westerners never ceases to amaze.
Riihttp://www.sukhoi.org/eng/gallery/?id=5804&gallery_id=3&cur_gallery_id=1120
Nice… The Mighty Duck is nice in its new colours…
Someone should tell Sukhoi that there are sizes between too-small and way-too-*******-huge. :p
RiiI read that the French people ain’t that happy about the deal, they fear job losses and so and so.
I guess there are foolish people everywhere.
Sign In
