TooCool_12fI don’t believe in God, I believe in me…
(John Lennon :p )
TooCool_12fwhat is pretty certain is that the price per aircraft for an extension order should be much lower than the initial order. One thing that inflates the price as well is the offsets requirement… if you sell it but have to reinvest half of the money received back into India, obviously, you need a higher price to start with as the half that you can keep won’t pay price you need..
TooCool_12fOn Migs you’re limited by the FoV of the missile seeker (basically, front hemisphere). With the more modern systems it is the onboard computer that allows you to lock on any target whose whereabouts are know to it.. In the Rafale’s case, you have your tactical situation that is managed through all sensors of the aircraft, with the addition to what other Rafales around can see and communicate to your system, allowing you to lock on targest even behind your 3-9 o’clock line.. something the older russian systems can’t do
TooCool_12fthe Ej-200 and the M53 are still quite different as far as size and weight go… if you put one EJ-200 you’d need to add dead weight around it or lengthen the fuselage significantly of compensate for the reduction of weight in the rear part..
it is 1m shorter, 33% lighter and gives slightly less thrust than the M53-P2… in the end, not worth the hassle
TooCool_12fthing is, you put HAL and Reliance on the same level, but they are not.. HAL is a national firm, Reliance a private one
and, in any case, HAL was an impossible partner in Rafale deal as seen in MMRCA
TooCool_12fAirbus is a european, or one could say international company
But their business is international… and most of all, it is in private sector.
Defense is national by definition. While in France you have Dassault who has, pretty much, eaten all competition, you can’t go much further as every country (because they all are separate countries) wants to protect its own “national defense sector industry” and has its own policy, thus, its own specific needs.
Now, talking about Reliance, why regression? It’s the answer to a need expressed by the GoI. They want Rafales, Dassault brings them Rafales. They want 51% offsets.. Dassault provides the offsets they asked for. It’s not because others were there before that everything has to go through them… if they can win markets, good for them, if not, their problem. IF you want to move on, you need competition, without competition (with a monopoly of one actor), you only get stagnation or even regression as there’s no stimulation that will make them move forward.
TooCool_12fA video that sharply reminds this is not a sport for all , certainly not for me. Driving a car at night in heavy rains with poor lights and incoming traffic with beams on is almost a walk in the park in comparison. Hats off to the navy pilots.
it’s sure that flying from a carrier isn’t easy, and even more than that by night.. however, one should remember that a camera has much less dynamic (span between the lightest and darkest thing it can record at the same time) than the human eye, so, while you only see black background as it’s too dark for the camera that records also the light of the HUD symbols), the pilot does see the carrier lights (and quite well wince there’s no other lights around in the darkness of the night).
Anyway, nice to see video , thanks TomcatViP 🙂
TooCool_12fCAN you stop with the anti-fr thingy stupido, I am fr. So go the hell please yourself on another criptic way away from me. thanks in advance.
Well, you being french seems quite in line with the so frequent bashing of the Rafale one sees even here.. You spend your time posting against it no matter what, so what’s your problem? You live in Corbeil and had problems with your ex-Maire and Senator?
Man, I’m an immigrant here and look more “french” than you…
TooCool_12fOn the defence front, local corporations merged to form national/regional champions like BAE, Thales, Finmeccanica, EADS, but parochial concerns ensured that the European industry as a whole remained fragmented, leading to extensive duplication of effort and smaller economies of scale, which in turn resulted in an overall lack of competitiveness against US products.. such as the F-35, and the F-16 before that.
One more time: Europe as a country does not exist, period.
While liners compete on global scale and uniting into a single big multinational company still avoided monopoly as there’s Boeing to compete with, in defense, every country (UK, Germany, Belgium, Spain, France and so on, NOT Europe) has its own policy. The “would-be partnership” that gave the Typhoon, still can’t compete with a “single national product” be it price wise or on the development as it was delayed by for internal political reasons of different partners (the “I want my share and don’t want to pay for others” syndrome). Not to speak about countries that buy fighters from outside EU instead of buying “local”. You want to compare to the USA? do you imagine one second Texas, or any other US state buying the Rafale or the Typhoon for their Air National Guard? The european countries operating fighters like the F-18 or F-16, and still buying some today are there to prove, if need be, that they are European only when they can pull some profit from it but otherwise couldn’t give a damn about Europe
TooCool_12fYou clearly don’t get the purpose of a local partner & offset requirements (“if they fail to deliver, then..”). Its to create & further local industrial capabilities, generate employment and lower the forex burden on the state. Its NOT to ensure that the product is delivered on time or to spec. If that had been only concern – no offset requirements would have been specified.
Whether the actual localization was commensurate with the offset value, whether the further fragmentation of the private defence sector was beneficial to the country, whether Reliance’s actions to secure that partnership were above board, aren’t questions that get answered just because the Rafale deliveries are on schedule. And you may blithely dismiss it as mud-slinging but Reliance has a certain (and well deserved) reputation that will inevitably generate adverse publicity (as does Dassault for that matter).
I don’t limit “they deliver” on Rafales sold to IAF.. I speak in general… they announced that the production facilities they build will participate in producing the Rafale, but also parts for the Falcon series of bizjets, which means also benefit to export their production in the future. And even if they were there “only for Rafale”, it is work for a number of years to come and, as you say “they create” industrial capabilities, not just give some work to the already existing ones.
Now about “fragmentation” being beneficial.. if you look at what happens elsewhere, the producers are eaten one after another by the stronger ones, so in the end, you have more or less a monopoly which is all but beneficial to the country… Just look at the F-35 development in the USA… it should’ve been legally terminated years ago and it’s still there…. why? mostly because they had good lobbying teams but also because they are pretty much alone on the market… who else could propose an alternative? Boeing?
Like it or not, they create and, once more, how about judging them on the final result rather than continuously bashing them with zero solid argument for that?
TooCool_12f@ maurobaggio
to illustrate your post, view from above, some 2-300km south from Gällivare
[ATTACH=CONFIG]257488[/ATTACH]
TooCool_12fIf they had zero problems, good for them, and..?
Dassault partnered with Reliance. They (Dassault) produce world class bizjets and fighters, so I’d say they DO know what they are doing.. rather than continuously questioning “did they do the right choice?”, or “why not somebody else?” how about some anonymous armchair would-be-specialists consider that these guys know what they are doing? If they fail to deliver, then one can say “they messed up”, until then, that constant baseless attacks are just blowing hot air
TooCool_12fSo you’re saying that none of the other experienced engineering companies (that are functioning as subcontractors for the likes of Airbus, Boeing, Lockheed Martin, IAI, Samsung Techwin, Dornier etc.) were capable of following Dassault’s directions to execute the offsets? And only Reliance could really do the job because it had no experience at all? One has to wonder what kind of arrangement this is that Dassault has worked out with Reliance.
as I just answered TomcatViP, it is always easier to make things from scratch your way if you want them to be done precisely that way rather than ask someone to change
TooCool_12fPoor Indians, how miserable should they feel to not be That great (read Fr). So why did Dassault commit to the Mmrca and offer local prof and a ToT package if None in India CAN do better than follow orders? Si much muddy background in all That. I am wonderring how the Rafale team CAN let such smelly verbiage flow in their name Without ever publishing a single denial.
Poor us having to read through your non-stop paranoïd anti-french nonsense.. We’re talking about HAL that’s doing things that do not meet the standards from Dassault, but not only them:
https://www.thequint.com/news/india/rafale-deal-dassault-us-envoy-unhappy-hal-quality-control
During MMRCA; the costs went through the roof once HAL’s ways came into the picture… strange, huh?
The question asked was “why would Reliance be good partner?” the answer is simple: it’s easier to set up a production chain from the scratch that replicates the original from Dassault than to try to make somebody else change his own ways to do things and that goes, as I said, for ANY company
TooCool_12fNo, unusable.. it’s made to fly fast. If it has to remain with the bombers, it means flying subsonically, where it gives away its best advantage.. and if it has to accelerate to its “combat speed”, the pilot would have to swim back to Russia 😉
Sign In
