niravIts been a bad week for PAF.
2 jets crashed during their “High mark” exercises. An F-7pg and a JF-17 which went down in the Arabian sea.
Its weird, the news about the JF-17 took so long to get out officially, while the forums were buzz with details about the crash from the day it happened.
Still no clarity about the pilot who was reported to have successfully ejected.
http://nation.com.pk/national/02-Oct-2016/jf-17-crashes-into-arabian-sea
nirav1- US Pak relations are seasonal, no one thought Pakistan will get a single bullet from US in late 90’s and few years later they signed up for Block 52s, P3Cs etc etc so hold your horses as see how this plays out.
Pakistan will get jets from elsewhere if F-16 funding not arranged, Aziz cautions US
Pakistan PMs adviser almost gave an ultimatum to the US, subsidize the 8 F 16 buy for PAF or else we will buy “fighter jets” from elsewhere.
The thrust of my post was however on Pakistans aeronautical capability and independence.
2- Aviation industry can not be started from scratch by participating in a joint venture, that too with limited resources. There are simply not enough funds to start a 5th Gen project, and why reinvent the wheel? if there is a suitable platform available than just buy that and invest your scare funds into something more meaningful.
Funding scarcity has always been there with Pakistan. Yet they committed scarce funds to get their engineering capability up with the JF17 project.
Since the J31 will be available off the shelf, they could possibly work in parallel on a 100% Pakistani jet .. like say a twin engined JF17.
India has been pumping money into the LCA project for 30 years and even today nearly half of its components are imported. Maybe India needs to increase its “input” in LCA above 50% first. Its easier said than done.
http://www.newindianexpress.com/nation/Made-up-in-India-Many-Indigenous-Arms-of-DRDO-Have-Imported-Parts/2016/03/13/article3324605.ece
I agree, its easier said than done. Case in point, China with its advanced industry and after pouring a few billion dollars into getting a jet engine still goes to Russia for an engine for the JF17 to fly ! PAF still considers western avionics for the Thunder fleet.
The seasonality of international relations that you spoke about, is a very valid and real issue. Its just not restricted to US Pak relations. Could affect Sino PAK or Russia Pak relations too.
As of now the Americans are literally toying with Pakistan for just 8 F 16s !
With the US out of the picture, China gets unprecedented leverage over Pakistan.
If not a self funded researched fighter project, PAF can certainly look to buy out the JF 17 project 100%. As of now, if China so decides it can put the whole program to a halt. Considering how highly Pakistan treats China as their all weather friend, taller than mountains and stuff, this is a easy thing for China to do by giving Pakistan full control over the JF17.
niravTo answer my own question. Most likely they are the first customer for F-16V
http://www.janes.com/article/55455/us-prepares-to-sell-eight-newbuild-f-16s-to-pakistan
“These new aircraft will be more advanced than the last batch of F-16s [the contract for which was signed in 2006],” said the Pakistani government official.
Hmm. Turns out those 8 Blk 52s themselves are in doubt, forget the “V” ..
Anyway,
PAFs long term planning looks to be headed to a single source supplier in China. US wont subsidize anymore, EU ware is non affordable, Russia too will charge heavy. Only option left is China.
Which gets me to the most important point. The JF-17 was supposedly a 50:50 JV between Sino-Pak with Pakistan press/posters telling everyone of how Pakistan actually contributed 50 % to workshare on the jet. Why is Pakistan not going in for 100 % ?
No one in the 1980s in PAF thought that the US would leave them stranded wrt the F-16. With China going to be PAFs solitary supplier, it has HUGE leverage over PAF and Pakistan. Who knows what they might do 10/20 years from here on.
The next Jet for PAF post the JF-17 is either the J-10 or the J-31. PAF will end up going back to an importing airforce from being the only airforce on the planet that makes its own fighters.
Why is PAF not pursuing its next gen fighter project on its own or even in collaboration with the Chinese?
The JF-17 has so much of PAF “input” and its success with PAF is evident. By doing nothing it will risk its ‘input’ and expertise gained from manufacturing 50% of the JF17 go to waste.
niravIAF Iron Fist 2016. Fire power Demo intro. Its in Hindi, but has good footage. Its scheduled for 18th March and will be broadcast live on national TV.
niravhttp://m.ndtv.com/profit/defence-ministry-gets-rs-86-000-crore-for-modernisation-1282641
86,000 crores = ~12 billion USD
The article mentions the Rafale deal @60,000 crores i.e. ~9 Billion USD with 1/6th payable in the financial year 16-17. Outgo for Rafale deal would be 10,000 crores, leaving about 76,000 crores or roughly 10.5 billion USD for modernisation for the next financial year.
MoD returned 20,000 crores ~3 billion USD to the exchequer as unspent funds.
A couple of things clear from the numbers. Money is not a problem. And that MoD is certain about what its willing to pay for the 36 rafales.
Dssault wont agree, and the “deal” will get canned.
@vikasrehman : this is the Indian air force thread not MMRCA thread.
nirav^ TR1 was replying to Riis question in the previous post .
INs ships on order.
Combined order value is ~ USD 20 Billion.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]244181[/ATTACH]
niravThe MOD made HAL mandatory prime contractor and decider of the process and logistic network. Actually it was more to act as a subcontractor given it will not carry any of the responsibilities. All this while Dassault was denied any means of control over the process ,only accountable for the result. In the end it is the much higher and unaffordable production cost of HAL made airframe , as per HAL chosen process that was the last nail to the coffin, and accelerated I must add, a change toward terminating HAL monopoly and opening competition to private businesses.
I am sure MOD would like nothing else than to get ride of Dassault from the picture , MD speech have notably been implying it on a regular basis ,and MOD has been visibly working hard toward that end twice now. Latest being to convert a gov to gov MOU for 36 FAF priced off-shelves airframes for short term delivery to demands leading to a whooping 13 billion price tag ,if figure is to be believed, where they are only ready to give 10 billions…..
Before talking the 25% difference, one should wonder what kind of demands have been added for which MOD claim it is willing to spend 10 billions for 36 airframes.
Im afraid you are conflating issues.
When Indian MoD has come out with a tender for MMRCA which involves ToT, it goes by default that its the MoD who decides whom Dassault transfers technology to.
The points you made earlier about the tie up with Reliance and a JV hold true when Dassault out of its own willing wishes to setup a manufacturing plant for Rafale in India and Indian govt denying it a right to choose its industrial partners. But that was never the case.
@ HAL monopoly: I dont get it why it bothers Dassault so much ! Dassault too has a monopoly in the France. So what ? You might want to think that Indian govts moves regarding including a pvt sector is to end monopoly of HAL but thats not the case. Its to build additional capacity. Its not as if the broken down negotiations with Dassault forced MoD to do something about HAL !
HAL has executed the Sukhoi 30 project quite well and is lined to execute Pakfa/FGFA when it comes online.
I suspect that negotiations broke down as Dassault probably had reservations on actual ToT. Which is why it propped up a nobody like Reliance industries as its preferred partner. The issues that you mentioned Dassault quoted with HAL are obviously non issues with BAE and Sukhoi. The non issues resulted in India currently being the largest operator of TVC equipped 4+ gen fighters and also the largest operator of the Hawk AJT..
The Su30 contract started with 190 nos and now stands at 312. Hawk contract started at 66 nos and now its 123+20 being negotiated.
Mig29K initial order was 16 nos and now stands at 45.
This is just to show a trend in Indian armed forces procurement. In light of this, while MMRCA cancellation will cause temporary issues in Indias re armament, its only Dassaults major financial loss. 126+96 jets & a possibility of way more supported over a span of 25-30 years was screwed royally.
niravYou should look deeper in the setup of Dassault , they are far from producing all the parts, hence if Renault was willing to move in aerospace and Dassault lacked competence in a domain , there will be nothing wrong in involving Renault in that domain to produce the required parts ,even key ones. HAL primary contractor did not meant unique and absolute contractor in all domains. As mentioned the Indian government took sufficiently notice of those event to revise the exclusive monopole of HAL.
The initial MMRCA deal is water under the bridge. I was merely expressing my opinion on what could have caused the deal to be canned.
On the monopoly of HAL. The Indian govt has privatization of the defence sector in mind. Its not only for HAL but for shipyards as well. But its a transitional process and cant be done overnight.
When the MMRCA was being negotiated, Indian MoD wanted a Su30mki kind of arrangement with Dassault. 18 flyaway and 108 + 96 options made in India by HAL.
Theres not much into it. Reliance industries had no locus standii as far as that deal was concerned.
Too bad things didnt work out.
It is all a matter of conditions, if it is contractually tied to Dassault responsibility as part of the fly away condition, it is not the same setting nor price. If that was such a casual matter ,they would certainly choose to integrate weapons themselves outside the initial acquisition contract, as with Sukhoi. Apparently that is not the option selected.Beside, there are other elements in the price make up that we do not know about, so it is purely speculative.
Yes for now its purely speculative. Wish the price difference weren’t as big a 3 billion USD. The IAF does like the Rafale and would like to induct it but at a reasonable cost.
I dont see Dassault or the Indian MoD budging to the extent of 3 billion to be honest.
Maybe Rafale just isn’t destined for the IAF !
niravBAE has had problems with HAL, on the assembly of Hawks. BAE has been very unhappy about the behaviour & performance of HAL.
So what happened ? How come there are Hawks still coming out of HALs line ? Why is it that BAE and HAL are collaborating to weaponize the Hawk for light attack ?
Problems happen. But they have to be fixed. BAE thankfully wasn’t silly enough to ask for a non entity to be handed over licensed production because of issues with HAL.
I do not think it is comical, but rather dramatic. HAL monopoly and being pre-selected gave them way too much weight into dictating their conditions. HAL being state owned made it impossible for Dassault to have any form of control over their doings nor allowed any business plan beyond MMRCA. Compared to other actors that were willing to invest ,willing to build a joint venture.In the case it was in production of heavily automated first grade composite parts. This do not require experience in assembling airplanes, and the level of competence compared to manual labor intensive HAL process was about the same for anybody. Zero that is.
Seem to me the Indian government reached the logical conclusion after that, that HAL monopoly had to cease and have subsequently opened up to private entities the fighter plane market.
I’ll tell you why its comical.
Its akin to India negotiating the Rafale deal with France but insisting that Renault instead of Dassault do the transfer of technology. Its THAT stupid, asking for anyone else than HAL being the company they deal with.
You got it right : “One wonders what exactly are the bells and whistles asked by India”.
Re-design and testing of airframe to accommodate new specific demands is not cheap, that makes the 4 billion flyaway a thing of the past, as Dassault warned upfront when confronted to thoses. Third party HMD integration is neither cheap if commitment fell on Dassault to guarantee it. Guarantee yet, if true, of 90% availability at all time with penalties is unheard off and would have a significant impact on price. So for all those extra , MOD has only 10 billions to spend, Dassault estimate their demands to 13 billion, if the figure is to be believed. That is what you get when the technical and price discussion are conducted totally separately, it is not like Dassault did not warned the demands made were exploding the budget, it just got ignored at the time because this was not that committee responsibility.
In the end I doubt IAF is pleased, they had made their due diligence to select the airframe required in conformity with the process.Now thanks to the MOD , once again, they won’t get any of it ending up with substitutes they did not select or will ultimately get less and way longer after what was expected years ago. They would swallow what come their way, out of any other choices, but no they won’t be pleased and will certainly feel robbed by their MOD.
While i agree that addition/integration of third party weaponry adds to increase in costs, it is being portrayed as its going to be the first time ever in the history of aviation that such things are going to be attempted.
The Indians already have experience of integrating 3rd party stuff on their Sukhois and didn’t have to cough up big billions for adding a BVR AAM or an HMD or french avionics or Israeli EW gear on the Sukhoi.
niravThere was ways to make it a reality. But this would have implied strong decisions on several of the inadequate demands that resulted in dead lock. HAL latitude to dictate the production setup and partners for one was an aggravating factor. Leaving them to select a production process against best advises both led to production cost way beyond French made, and serious quality concerns ,resulting in Dassault refusal to hold responsibility on HAL behalf for HAL made airframes.
Now you take the same people and ,not so unsurprisingly, you get the same result of a dead lock from unrealistic demands for a constrained budget. Whether it is due to a lack of connection with reality, a will to push the envelop beyond reasonable to appear ,as tough negotiator or parties sabotaging deliberately the process, end game is the same once again.
Looking at the little we know on the setup, one can see several lost opportunities, be it a conjoint development of an HMD, setup of a competence center for weapon integration and maintenance… there are/was potential for the 50% offset to be beneficial both ends. Instead it seem to be one way and this surely reflects on the price.
Its almost comical for Dassault to think that it had latitude in selecting the manufacturing partner other than HAL. HAL has a long history of license manufacturing and for Dassault to suggest a tie up with a Pvt Indian player with zero experience of anything related to fighter jets is just ludicrous.
Sukhoi, MiG, BAE, Specat didnt have issues with HAL as far as licensed manufacturing/production is concerned.
What exactly was Dassaults problem ? IMO this intransigence on Dassaults part cost them the deal which was 126 confirmed jets + ~ 90 options.
Initial proposal was 36 airframes off the shelves ,at FAF price with 30% offset as of MMRCA. This was before requirement for an India specific custom made airframe ,integration of non NATO weapons, new HMD, 50% offset, 90% availability guarantee over unknown period, weapons of unknown number and type, and all the stuff we do not know about.
Dassault made its offer according to the demands and yes it won’t be selling at loss , this does not lead necessarily to Dassault being greedy and escalating margin beyond reasonable, or its service being particularly pricey. It could as well be the demands level being outrageously out of budget boundary as MMRCA was from the start.
I find it difficult to get convinced. Like OPIT mentioned earlier, cost of 36 flyway jets is close to 4 billion.
Thats a difference is 9 Billion as per Dassault and 6 Billion as per Indian MoD. They are ready to pay 10 Billion for the deal.
integration of non NATO weapons and about 36+spares HMD systems and an extra availability rate of tops 20% max cant really warrant a 3-3.5 Billion $ price differential !
Anyway im positive IAF wont be too unhappy if the 13 Billion deal gets canned. Nor would the MoD.
niravMisinformation.
The cost for 36 jets is said to be around $ 4 billion. Add-ons, ToT and specific stuff wanted by India make the remainder.
India just can’t get all bells and whistles for the price of naked aircrafts.
the deal for 36 jets involves no ToT.
Dassault had proposed basing the 36 in one base whereas IAF wanted 2bases.apart from that was the issue of offsets with India asking for 50% and France initially suggesting 30%.
One wonders what exactly are the bells and whistles asked by India that apart from 4 billion cost of 36 jets, Dassault quotes 9 billion dollars more !
niravIn all honesty the Indian government cannot afford an MRCA.
The MMRCA downselect listed the Rafale as L1 for 126 jets which was initially valued at ~ USD 10 Billion. Then figures ranging from 15-20 Billion dollars were bandied about as the eventual cost of the deal.
Now the G2G contract for 36 flyaway jets is being discussed with a price differential of 10 Billion from the Indian side and 13 Billion from the French side.
The decision for the 36 was taken to speed up delivery and get a better price.
Just because India can afford to pay 10 Billion for 36 jets doesnt mean it should just cough up another 3 Billion just like that.
One also wonders whats changed since the license manufacturing deal of 126 jets was cancelled. Commodity prices have crashed. Exchange rates are almost the same. Inflation in France is actually on a downtrend. So what explains the massive hike in price ?
The License manufacturing deal involved Transfer of Technology which was supposedly a cause of increased prices.
Taking a cue from the price France wants for a 36 jet deal of $ 13 Billion, 126 flyaway jets would cost ~ 45 Billion dollars !! 😮
Dassault has acted real stupid in this whole ordeal. From wanting to tie up with Reliance industries for manufacture of rafale in India, guys who havent even manufactured a bicycle of their own rather than HAL which has churned out hundreds of fighters till date including some 200 Su30mkis.
The “deal” for the 36 jets looks increasingly doubtful and I hope it is cancelled. The cancellation could very well push India and US closer via the F18 super hornets being discussed for manufacture in India.
niravMaybe they want to set up a manufacturing line for the Mig 35?
BTW what makes you guys think that the Rafale couldn’t be one of the fighters selected for domestic production?
Nic
The whole point was to get a non Russian capability/jet. MiG 35 just wont happen.
As far as the Rafale is concerned, IF things had worked out with dassault @ price negotiations, we would have already seen Rafale getting inducted in IAF and setting up of the line @ HAL.
Now since that deal of 126 manufacture is scrapped for good, i really doubt if Rafale will see any production in India.
I actually have my doubts even about the 36 jets. Hope it gets cancelled as i dont think 36 of just one type will do the air force any good. And now with talk of another jet being manufactured in India, it could be a logistical nightmare w.r.t the number of types being eventually operated by the AF.
niravIAF AN 32 Dropping dumb bombs ..
niravIf China allegedly provided Pakistan with design of a working nuclear warhead and full ToT on multiple ballistic missiles, including post separation attitude correction system what is the issue with selling some fighter jets?
Are you saying Pakistans Nuclear weapons and missile capability is based on Chinese designs ? That Pakistan was NOT capable of manufacturing the nukes and Ballistic missiles ?
IF what you allege is true, the J10 must be one remarkable fighter, that the Chinese gave away nuke and missile designs to Pakistan but NOT the fighter jet.
Sign In
