Indian M-MRCA Requirement

I am not surprised, although I thought it might be one of these and the Super Hornet in the final cut.

Maybe the Libya campaign now becomes a sales pitch for these two planes?

Rafale makes good sense for India I think - carrier capable already, good experience with Mirage 2000. But maybe India is concerned about being the only export customer, fewer future upgrade options 'off the shelf' etc. which favours Typhoon.

An interesting choice. Makes me feel like it is 1985!
 
I'm not surprised as India has bought plenty of European aircraft in the past, the Mirage series and the Jaguar for instance. Also, they might still be wary of buying American after what happened with the F404 engines that were originally to be sold to India being denied before. Also, there are reports that India may be looking at SH's for it's carriers.
 
I've highlighted an interesting little tibbit

Only Dassault, Eurofighter left in IAF fighter selection

Ajai Shukla / New Delhi April 29, 2011, 0:39 IST


India’s keenly watched purchase of 126 medium multi-role combat aircraft (MMRCA) for some Rs 42,000 crore ($9.5 billion) has entered its final leg. Yesterday, four of the six vendors were officially ruled out of the fray after the Ministry of Defence (MoD) wrote to them, providing full details about how their fighters had failed to meet the specifications laid down by the Indian Air Force (IAF). Just two vendors did not receive letters of rejection: France’s Dassault Aviation and the European consortium, Eurofighter GmbH.

The aircraft that the MoD ruled out of contention include Boeing’s F/A-18 Super Hornet; Lockheed Martin’s F-16IN Super Viper; the Russian MiG-35; and the Swedish Gripen NG. Each of these failed to meet several of the over 600 parameters evaluated by the IAF. The Gripen, for example, though highly rated in flying performance, was rejected because the IAF was not convinced that its airborne radar would be delivered in time.

Neither Dassault nor Eurofighter have been officially informed that they have been down-selected, or that they are the only two vendors remaining in contention. But both are assuming their aircraft met the IAF’s requirements during the technical evaluation and field trials. And, that one of them — the lower bidder, going by India’s defence procurement regulations — will be awarded the contract.

“We’re not yet popping the champagne or handing out bonuses,” said an executive from one of the vendors still in contention. “We haven’t heard anything yet from the MoD, so any celebration would be premature.”

What is clear, though, is the disappointment amongst the losers, each of which had spent millions of dollars in putting their fighters through the MoD’s rigorous selection process and supporting their bids from newly-opened offices in Delhi. The United States government, which has applied sustained political pressure from President Obama downwards, has declared that it is “deeply disappointed by this news”.

Indicating that Washington has not yet given up hope, US Ambassador Tim Roemer stated today, “I have been personally assured at the highest levels of the Indian government that the procurement process for this aircraft has been and will be transparent and fair. I am extremely confident that the Boeing F/A 18IN and Lockheed-Martin F-16IN would provide the IAF an unbeatable platform with proven technologies at a competitive price.”

The Boeing Company, also “disappointed with this outcome”, stated, “Our next step is to request and receive a debrief from the IAF. Once we have reviewed the details, we will make a decision concerning our possible options, always keeping in mind the impact to the IAF.”

The MoD’s tender (officially termed a Request for Proposal, or RfP) asks for 126 fighters, with the first 18 to be supplied in flyaway condition within three years of signing the contract, and the balance to be progressively built in India through transfer of technology. But most aviation experts predict the IAF’s growing requirements will lead to at least 200 MMRCAs being eventually inducted into service.

The down-selection of the Eurofighter and Rafale points to the Indian military’s growing financial muscle. Going by publicly available figures of previous purchases of these aircraft, the Eurofighter and Rafale are easily the two most expensive of the six that were being considered. Critics point to the fact that the Rafale has not been bought by any air force besides France. Of the four countries that developed the Eurofighter, three — the UK, Italy and Spain — have decided to go in for the F-35 being developed by the US, rather than increase their fleet of Eurofighters.

Nevertheless, the IAF’s dwindling fighter fleet — now down to 32 squadrons from an authorised 39.5 squadrons, each squadron having 18 fighters – has forced the MoD to go ahead with the MMRCA purchase. The indigenously developed Tejas Light Combat Aircraft (LCA), entering production now, will only be inducted in significant numbers after 2016. The IAF has been meeting the shortfall by buying more Su-30MKIs from Russia, even as Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd’s production line has failed to meet schedules.

Meanwhile, the IAF has pressured the MoD to expedite the MMRCA purchase. At the Aero India 2011 air show in Bangalore, in February, IAF boss Air Chief Marshal P V Naik declared that he expected the MMRCA contract to be signed by this September, a day after Defence Minister A K Antony had set a deadline of March 2012.

In the next step in the MMRCA procurement, which is expected any day, the MoD will ask Eurofighter GmbH and Dassault for fresh commercial bids that will remain valid for the next two years. The two companies will also be asked to finalise their offset proposals. Then the commercial bids will be opened to decide the winner. Finally, an MoD-instituted cost negotiation committee will negotiate a final cost with the winning company.


http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/only-dassault-eurofighter-left-in-iaf-fighter-selection/433894/
 
I think the selection is primarily driven by a combination of potential restrictions (mainly impacting US sourced equipment), offsets and the desire to go with twin engines (not saying I agree with this, but still...). Therefore the breakdown of the original contenders would be:

  • Rafale - twin engine, good offsets offered, minimal restrictions potential
  • Typhoon - twin engine, good offsets offered, minimal restrictions potential
  • Gripen - single engine (thus not viewed favourably), reasonable offsets offered, possible restrictions potential (remember F414 derivative engine)
  • Super Hornet - twin engine, potentially restricted offsets offered, definite restrictions potential
  • F-16 - single engine (thus not viewed favourably), potentially restricted offsets offered, definite restrictions potential + never a realistic contender given Pakistan already has them
  • MiG-35 - twin engine, good offsets offered (though potentially no real gain over existing MiG-29 deal), minimal (if any) restrictions potential

Regards,

Greg
 
I think the selection is driven primarily by the fact that f-16 and f-18 are both in the later stages of their lives, with replacement already flying. Hence there must be question of how much support for further development will these aircraft receive from their country of origin? Russia has lived off of soviet foundation for a long time, but there has to be questions about just how much longer can russia afford to keep developing mig-29 while also funding su-27 family and t-50. Swedish resources are not on par with USA, Russia, Europe or France. So that leaves Europe and France, both of whose offerings are still in early stages of their lives, with no replacement or serious internal competitor on the horizon, and are thus assured of on-going development support from robust aviation industries of the countries of their origins.
 
chuck4 said:
I think the selection is driven primarily by the fact that f-16 and f-18 are both in the later stages of their lives

I don't think I would classify the Super Hornet as being in the latter stage of its life. In fact, if one wanted to play first flight dates (for all that is worth), both the rafale and the Typhoon flew before the Super Hornet.

Regards,

Greg
 
GTX said:
chuck4 said:
I think the selection is driven primarily by the fact that f-16 and f-18 are both in the later stages of their lives

I don't think I would classify the Super Hornet as being in the latter stage of its life. In fact, if one wanted to play first flight dates (for all that is worth), both the rafale and the Typhoon flew before the Super Hornet.

Regards,

Greg

Super hornet is still part of hornet family, which overall is in latter stages of its life.
 
chuck4 said:
Super hornet is still part of hornet family, which overall is in latter stages of its life.

Actually its part of the Northrop Talon family which was designed in the 1950s which makes it positively ancient by such semantic reckoning.

The F/A-18E/ Block II Super Hornet (current production) uses a vehicle system designed in the 1990s and a mission system designed in the 2000s. The Typhoon and Rafale use vehicle and mission systems designed in the 1980s. The US Navy Super Hornet has a planned upgrade pathway until 2040 something. In addition Boeing have been talking about a range of further block changes for further new production. Plus it has generated an the EA-18G electronic attack platform.

While the F/A-18C/D might be considered in its twilight years the E/F/G will be in service for a least 30 more years and several more block upgrades. There is no question as to how much upgrade support the Super Hornet will get from its parent country. On the other hand there is serious concern about the future of the European defence industry to be funded to do anything other than maintain the Typhoon and Rafale in service.
 
GTX said:
I think the selection is primarily driven by a combination of potential restrictions (mainly impacting US sourced equipment), offsets and the desire to go with twin engines (not saying I agree with this, but still...). Therefore the breakdown of the original contenders would be:

  • Rafale - twin engine, good offsets offered, minimal restrictions potential
  • Typhoon - twin engine, good offsets offered, minimal restrictions potential
  • Gripen - single engine (thus not viewed favourably), reasonable offsets offered, possible restrictions potential (remember F414 derivative engine)
  • Super Hornet - twin engine, potentially restricted offsets offered, definite restrictions potential
  • F-16 - single engine (thus not viewed favourably), potentially restricted offsets offered, definite restrictions potential + never a realistic contender given Pakistan already has them
  • MiG-35 - twin engine, good offsets offered (though potentially no real gain over existing MiG-29 deal), minimal (if any) restrictions potential

Regards,

Greg

Couple of other considerations:

F-16 is flown by Pakistan. Would India really want to buy a version of a "Pakistani" aircraft?

Gripen suffers because India has made it clear it wants to use this program as a way to form more strategic relations ships with the supplier. This would tend to favor Rafale and Typhoon--what can Sweden offer in this factor?

MiGF-35. Without this purchase, it's not likely the MiG-35 will enter production, making it risky.

This is ironic because it was Boeing' aggressive bid including the AESA, that convinced India to modify their requirements making AESA a go/no go factor.
 
F-14D said:
F-16 is flown by Pakistan. Would India really want to buy a version of a "Pakistani" aircraft?

Err...which is kinda what I said...
 
Fianlly ... the race is over and the Rafale has won !

http://theaviationist.com/2012/01/31/mmrca-rafale/

Congrats to Dassault and the IAF ... let's see how that contract will proceed.

Deino
 
AWESOME !!! I'm so glad that the Rafale is gaining a new lease on life. It truly deserves it!
 
Hopefully it will finally reduce the procurement costs and thus enable other countries to purchase it. Usual strategy applied by Dassault in the past, but then it was cheap single engine fighter. It was never used in case of two engined medium fighter. In any case, congrats!
 
Well, at least France can rest easy in that they've finally secured an export order. I was beginning to think the Rafale project was doomed.
 
http://rafalenews.blogspot.com/

Merde ! At least we managed to sell the Rafale abroad. Merde, merde, merde, c'est le pied !!! Wooouhooouuu !!
 
after this source http://www.spiegel.de/wirtschaft/unternehmen/0,1518,812598,00.html
won Dassault with "little" help of french president Nicolas Sarkozy, who during visit in Neu Delhi last november

promoted the Rafale and inaugurating for a constant seat of India in the UN security council and for an unlimited acces of India to [french] nuclear technology.

After the source was also this reasoned for decision
Dassaut build the fist 18 Rafale in France, the rest 108 aircraft are build in India, whit numerous transfer's of technology..

by the way
any news from Switzerland and Great Britain about there Rafale offer?
 
The news last night on French national TV made it pretty clear that the negociation of major armament contracts was now in the hands of the heads of state, and that, yes, Sarkozy played a major rôle in obtaining that market. One important step was to make India the guest country at the 14th of July ceremonies in 2009, when some Indian troops marched down the Champs-Elysées as part of the annual military demonstration.

I find it sad that state heads have become VRPs for the armament industries, but let's see it this way: it has always existed. It's just that nowadays they don't even try to conceal it anymore.
 
I must admit that I am surprised since I would have thought the Typhoon had the upper hand. I wonder what was offered to get Rafale over the line? Talk about a reprieve from execution.
 
GTX said:
I must admit that I am surprised since I would have thought the Typhoon had the upper hand. I wonder what was offered to get Rafale over the line?

Money (lower price)
 
.. or "good" old relations. Maybe they can make politicians vulnerable ? ::)
 
London's MMRCA Fall Out
Posted by Robert Wall at 2/1/2012 8:56 AM CST

Source:
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/defense/index.jsp?plckController=Blog&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&newspaperUserId=27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7&plckPostId=Blog%3a27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7Post%3a6323d80b-6f1c-46bd-9eab-0ef3690cbdc4&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest

To no surprise, the decision by India to name the Dassault Aviation Rafale as the lowest cost bidder in its MMRCA fighter competition over the Eurofighter Typhoon is not going down well in London.

Although Germany led the Indian Eurofighter campaign, the disappointment among British political, military and industrial players is palpable. Speaking in the House of Commons today, David Davis, a conservative MP, expressed his dismay at the outcome particularly “given the fact that we give many many times more aid to India than France ever did.”

David Cameron, who lobbied for Eurofighter along with German chancellor Angela Merkel concedes that “the decision is obviously disappointing.”

However, he's holding out hope. “They have not yet awarded the contract,” he says, adding that "I will do everything I can, as I have already, to encourage the Indians to look at Typhoon because I think it is such a good aircraft."

He tries to assure Davis that job losses in the U.K. are not expected as a result.

As to competitive landscape, Cameron says Typhoon is “a superb aircraft with far better capabilities than Rafale" (or Rafael as Cameron calls it).
 
Indian Take Out
Posted by Bill Sweetman at 1/31/2012 10:10 AM CST

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/defense/index.jsp?plckController=Blog&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&newspaperUserId=27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7&plckPostId=Blog%3a27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7Post%3a54b4d937-b035-4455-a004-fe18c055278d&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest

India's decision in favor of the Dassault Rafale is a big deal. Not only is a 126-fighter order the biggest single sale in sight for a long time, but -- as long as the deal is closed and executed successfully -- it is a huge boost for the Rafale at a point where the fighter business is in flux, and after two notable setbacks for the French industry late last year.

Those setbacks were the United Arab Emirates' announcement at the Dubai air show that it was unhappy with the terms of the Rafale deal offered by France, and Switzerland's choice of the Gripen. The India win makes the latter look like small potatoes, while a signed-and-sealed deal with India covers many of the upgrades that were bones of contention in the protracted UAE negotiation.

For the same reason, Rafale's chances in Brazil have probably improved. But this could be a case of "be careful what you wish for". As I noted in last June's DTI:

The (India) program will be doing several things simultaneously: co-developing improvements such as an active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar and Meteor AAM integration; dealing with the obsolescence issues that are inevitable in long aircraft development cycles; transferring technology and launching joint indigenous production; and transplanting a very complex all-digital aircraft into the Indian air force, all on a tight timescale. If Rafale wins, and is also successful in Brazil, Dassault and its partners – Safran and Thales – will be doing much the same thing, 9,000 miles from India.

And, might I add, in an entirely different linguistic, cultural, political and economic environment. Bonne chance avec ca.

The win also follows the Libya campaign, where both the Typhoon and the Rafale were used. However, while the Typhoon was only multi-role thanks to a non-definitive, somewhat-MacGyvered targeting pod and weapon fit, Rafale had two variants of the fully integrated Sagem Hammer stand-off guided bomb (six of which can be carried on two pylons), with a third on the way, and provided near-real-time intelligence with the Areos long range oblique photography reconnaissance pod.

The decision is a big disappointment for Eurofighter, where my impression was that many people felt that they were headed for an India win, after Rafale's discomfiture in the UAE. And while Typhoon will still have more orders than Rafale in total, Eurofighter now has to return to persuading its sometimes ragged formation of partners -- two of them representing the I and S of PIGS -- to continue to fund the Captor-E active electronically scanned array radar and the rest of its multi-role evolution.

And if the Joint Strike Fighter plan to take over the rest of the world does not stay on track, what happens to European fighter aircraft could be very important well into the 2020s.
 
I find it hard to disagree with the Rafale News blog (http://rafalenews.blogspot.com/) statement: I
would like to congratulate the Rafale team which despite many disapointments during the last 10 years, has never stopped believing in the Rafale(s) potential. Their tenacity has finally paid off.
The Indian decision is the reward of more than 20 years of very hard work done by some of the most talented aerospace technicians, engineers and pilots in the world.Today's victory is even more valuable as the MMRCA contest was probably one of the most challenging of the decade because of the extensive technical evaluation brilliantly performed by the Indian Air Force between 2008 and 2010"
This is not to put down the hard work of the Eurofighter team too. Making the shortlist was a major achievement. Indian acquisitions are long, hard slogs (Hawk was 20 years!) and it must be terribly disappointing to all at EADS and BAE who have worked hard. I am proud to know, and have worked with, many great engineers in BAE and hope this does not affect UK aerospace jobs.

However, David Davis's comments about aid make me ashamed to be British. 'We feed your babies, buy our planes'? Pathetic. Especially from a man with a BAE factory in his constituency who should be able to make the case for the product, not for pity.
 
I wholeheartedly agree with Harrier's last sentence above. The "palpable disappointment" as voiced by the British politicians doesn't just amount to saying: "We have a privileged relationship with you guys, so stick with us." What is "palpable" there too is that the former largest colonialist power still considers to some extent that the former colonies and Commonwealth countries are its natural extensions. From this viewpoint I'm glad that India is sending a clear message to the U.K. that it is simply one among several bidders, and that no preference will be given to the former colonial power.
 
And it seems the Indians may have a sense of irony with the date:

http://www.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/7621573/the-mod-wastes-another-opportunity.thtml

Exports cannot be used as a substitute for domestic support. If a nation wants a defence industry it is perverse to expect foreign countries to pay for it. MMRCA is supposed to bolster India's industry, and perhaps it will effectively see the 'export' of the whole of Rafale (much like Jaguar and Hawk). But governments can't hide their cuts in domestic support behind a facade of exports. I expect India will get the blame for the next set of BAE job losses, when in truth the effective loss of Tranche 3B Typhoon will be.
 
Well, one of Rafale's export problems in the past was lack of faith that the Government really stood behind the plane and would be moving forward with enhancing its capabilities. It wasn't that long ago that the French gov't indicated that any Rafale exports would not benefit form lower costs through a higher production rate; the delivery rate for French Rafales would simply be reduced by the amount of export Rafales being bought in any given year. It seems they've now gotten more with the program.

On a personal note, the Rafale is one beautiful aircraft. Now if only its refueling probe was retractable, it'd be positively Gorgeous!

On another note, if you're going to make a complaint, however legitimate, about a poster's spelling it'll be more effective if you get the names right. I've met both Bill Sweetman and Bill Gunston, and they really don't look that much alike. ;)
 
F-14D said:
On another note, if you're going to make a complaint, however legitimate, about a poster's spelling it'll be more effective if you get the names right. I've met both Bill Sweetman and Bill Gunston, and they really don't look that much alike. ;)

Exactly. Plus he wrote "Cameroon" instead of Cameron...
 
The Swiss going with the Gripen makes sense - they do share the Swedish obsession with neutrality, after all.

Politics aside, it sounds like the Indians had a very, very good idea of what they were looking for when they made their choice. Sounds like a knife-edge decision with politics tipping the balance.

Why the US ever thought it had a chance with derivatives of the F-16 and -18 is beyond me. Obama can apply all the pressure he wants and be as disappointed as he likes, but the fact remains that the other choices are simply better. The F-35 might one day get off the ground in big numbers and the F-22 may be the best fighter in the world, but the US has erred greatly in fielding two aircraft that it either dares not sell abroad or can only sell to very, very, very close friends. The Yanks should have been fielding a Typhoon equivalent. The best is the enemy of good enough.
 
pathology_doc said:
The Swiss going with the Gripen makes sense - they do share the Swedish obsession with neutrality, after all.

Politics aside, it sounds like the Indians had a very, very good idea of what they were looking for when they made their choice. Sounds like a knife-edge decision with politics tipping the balance.

Why the US ever thought it had a chance with derivatives of the F-16 and -18 is beyond me. Obama can apply all the pressure he wants and be as disappointed as he likes, but the fact remains that the other choices are simply better. The F-35 might one day get off the ground in big numbers and the F-22 may be the best fighter in the world, but the US has erred greatly in fielding two aircraft that it either dares not sell abroad or can only sell to very, very, very close friends. The Yanks should have been fielding a Typhoon equivalent. The best is the enemy of good enough.


Let's give India proper credit. Once they were down to Typhoon and Rafale, it looks like either a/c would meet their needs. At this point India said it would go with the least cost alternative. France for a change came in with an apparently aggressive price bid and India did just what it said it would. Although politics is always a factor, don't really see at this point that it tipped the decision.

As far as why the US bid what it did, what else did we have? F-22 was going out of production, US Congress would not let it be sold abroad and it didn't have the strike capabilities India wanted. Besides, India wanted to partner with Russia on an a/c of that class. F-35 was simply too far out for their needs. F-15, SE notwithstanding, is pretty much at the end of its economical upgrade path, so that left the F-16 and F/A-18E/F (whew! That's a long designator!), neither of which could meet India's maneuverability requirements, among other things. Plus, India wants to form industrial partnerships with Europe, they've been upfront about that (personally, I think they should have dropped Tejas and gone with Gripen NG, but they didn't ask me). We don't really have a Typhoon equivalent, so you bid what you got.
 
Rafale International weapons options

Source:
http://sobchak.files.wordpress.com/2012/01/rafaleweaponsposter.jpg
 

Attachments

  • rafaleweaponsposter.jpg
    rafaleweaponsposter.jpg
    492.6 KB · Views: 1,113
Looks like what decided India is that the A2G capabilities of the Rafale are, as of today, much more advanced than those of the Typhoon. During the Lybia campaign it were the Tornado that bore the brunt of bombing, not the Typhoons. It looks like the IAF has plenty of interceptors under his belt, the MRCA emphasis is more on a multirole aircraft.
It is no insult to the Typhoon to note that, akin to the F-22, it is first and foremost an interceptor. After all, when it was conceived, lots of A2G Tornados were rolling out of the production line.
 
Ah how I miss those weapon loadout diagrams/posters. I can never seem to find them anymore.

I'm guessing another reason the Gripen NG was a no-go was because it could have been viewed as a threat to the HAL Tejas.

Was that Super Hornet upgrade "roadmap" revealed prior to or after the F/A-18IN had been dropped from the competition? If high-altitude and high-speed flight performance were a concern that lead to the F/A-18IN being dropped, I would have expected them to go with the Eurofighter.

F-14D you mentioned the F-15SE in your post but did Boeing consider offering any sort of F-15 variant? It seems to me like it would have been a bit too big and heavy for MMRCA.
 
F-14D said:
France for a change came in with an apparently aggressive price bid and India did just what it said it would. Although politics is always a factor, don't really see at this point that it tipped the decision.

Well, the politics of affordability then.
 
Colonial-Marine said:
Ah how I miss those weapon loadout diagrams/posters. I can never seem to find them anymore.

I'm guessing another reason the Gripen NG was a no-go was because it could have been viewed as a threat to the HAL Tejas.

Was that Super Hornet upgrade "roadmap" revealed prior to or after the F/A-18IN had been dropped from the competition? If high-altitude and high-speed flight performance were a concern that lead to the F/A-18IN being dropped, I would have expected them to go with the Eurofighter.

F-14D you mentioned the F-15SE in your post but did Boeing consider offering any sort of F-15 variant? It seems to me like it would have been a bit too big and heavy for MMRCA.

Loadout diagrams like this drawing or this copyrighted one?

Regarding F-15, Boeing probably feels there's more growth and therefore sales potential in the -18 than the -15. It seems the -15 is of the most interest to existing Eagle operators and even they don't want to fork over the money necessary to develop the SE.

The -18E/F suffered in performance in comparison to the other entrants. The problem with the "roadmap" is that there was nothing that would indicate it was actually in development. for example, where the funding would come from for the F414 EPE. Typhoon had this problem to a lesser extent. They said they were going to get more strike capability and an AESA, but Rafale could show they had full strike capability. Similarly, while Eurofighter could say that once they settled on which AESA for sure it would have more performance than Rafale's (bigger antenna and the ability to stare off boresight), Dassault could point to the fact that AESA equipped Rafales would actually be coming off the line next year.

Regarding Gripen, I'm sure that played into it, national pride and all, but also a big part of this competition was that India openly said this would be a foundation for technological and industrial collaboration over a wide range of projects. Sweden simply doesn't have as much to offer in that arena as does France or the Eurofighter consortium.
 

Attachments

  • typhoonstores.gif
    typhoonstores.gif
    17.5 KB · Views: 863
  • typhoonloadout.jpg
    typhoonloadout.jpg
    99.4 KB · Views: 874
The Times of India reports Rafale was 22-25% cheaper than Typhoon in life-cycle costs and even more in acquisition costs. They also say there is no chance for a Typhoon comeback and that 63 more Rafales may be ordered in addition to the initial 126:

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/IAF-fighter-deal-Rafale-much-cheaper-than-Typhoon-govt-rules-out-review/articleshow/11830845.cms

It does strike me that India may be building Rafale long after France has stopped doing so, rather like the SEPECAT Jaguar or the BAe Hawk lines continue in India. In effect, its not just an export order for aircraft, it may be a full 'programme export'.
 
Brazil next for Rafale?

"Rousseff Leaning Strongly Towards Rafale"
Posted by Christina Mackenzie at 2/13/2012 2:03 AM CST

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/defense/index.jsp?plckController=Blog&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&newspaperUserId=27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7&plckPostId=Blog%3a27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7Post%3a2f5f99e7-b850-4028-a530-b3b23e073479&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest

Brazil's last doubts over the Rafale combat aircraft have been lifted by India's choice of the French-designed plane, but Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff says she will not make any official announcements until after the French presidential election (held in two-rounds, the first on April 22, the final run-off on May 6) so that no political mileage can be got out of the deal.

Brazilian government sources told Reuters, on condition of anonymity, that Rousseff and her main advisors are now convinced that the offer made by Dassault Aviation to meet Brazil's tender for 36 aircraft is better than Boeing's with its F-18 or Saab's with the Gripen. “The India deal changed everything,” one of the sources said. “With India's decision, it's now very likely the Rafale will be the winner here,” the sources added.

Like India, Brazil eventually wants to build the Rafale domestically and therefore the sale comes with a large chunk of technology transfer.

Brazilian Defense Minister Celso Amorim paid a visit last week to his Indian counterpart and was able to consult non-confidential documents that show the path India took to reaching its decision to enter into exclusive negotiations with Dassault for 126 Rafales.

But the sources said that were these to fail, then Rousseff would have another think.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom