MMRCA 2.0 - Updates and Discussions

[Picdelamirand-oil]

We learned that the government of India has decided not to limit the tender for the air force to only single engine fighter, and so we end up again with a MMRCA style competition.

I chose an article that announces this government decision to initialize this topic.

Indian Air Force wants fighter jet deal worth Rs 1.25L cr to be fast-tracked

Aginst the backdrop of dwindling fighter squadrons, the Indian Air Force (IAF) feels that its requirement for more than 100 combat aircraft expected to be worth over Rs 1.25 lakh crore should be procured through a government-to-government (G2G) deal to avoid further time delays due to the complex acquisition process involved in it.

The IAF wants the inter-governmental deal as the Defence ministry is of the view that it should not proceed with the single-engine fighter aircraft programme, and initiate a global programme where all fighter aircraft manufacturers would be invited through a competitive tender and the winner would be chosen after extensive trials.

"The IAF wants the acquisition procedure for acquiring the new aircraft to be completed in the shortest possible time and that will be possible only if they are allowed to go for a government-to-government deal with a foreign country.

Even a G2G deal would take four years for the first plane to be delivered, and this would be the only way to end the vicious circle of delays," government sources told Mail Today.

"If the government decides to buy planes through a tender route, it would take a minimum of eight to nine years as at least five years would be required to select a vendor, and then another three would be required for the delivery," they said.

The 36 Rafale planes, which will start getting inducted from next year, were also acquired through an inter-governmental deal with France in 2016.

In the past, the IAF suffered major delays in fulfiling its requirements by going through the normal acquisition process as the UPA's plan to buy 126 medium multi-role combat aircraft dragged on for 10 years due to fears of corruption, and ultimately was scrapped by the NDA government.

On the reasons for not backing the single-engine aircraft programme where 114 planes were to be manufactured indigenously in partnership with either USA or Sweden, sources said there were allegations of favouritism and wrongdoings even before the deal was initiated.

Now, the government is mulling to start a tender afresh, inviting all the major vendors. But the IAF, wants a quick solution to its aircraft strength in view of the phasing out of the MiG-21s and other planes.

"IAF will have 32 Fighter Squadrons and 39 Helicopter Units by 2020," the Defence Ministry had stated in Parliament. The force is finding it difficult to arrest the falling squadron strength due to delays in the induction of the indigenously manufactured LCA Tejas planes.

"10 squadrons of IAF equipped with MiG-21 and MiG-27 aircraft are scheduled to retire by 2024 on completion of their Total Technical Life," the government said.

Due to lack of inductions in the force, the Su-30MKI has become the mainstay as 11-12 squadrons would be deployed by 2020.

Indian Air Force wants fighter jet deal worth Rs 1.25L cr to be fast-tracked

 

[Picdelamirand-oil]

How much is 1.25 L cr in $ or €?

 

[Parthu]

How much is 1.25 L cr in $ or €?

About $ 19.3 billion
or € 15.7 billion

 

[Pundrick]

BHAAD ME JAAYE MMRCA 2.0

Been following this mess since decades and still no concrete progress. And they are coming up with new tender.

 

[Picdelamirand-oil]

Boeing makes a pitch for F/A-18s to India
Boeing’s Leanne Caret on the aviation firm’s plans to pursue an upcoming multi-billion dollar fighter jet programme, Make in India and the defence ecosystem in the country

New Delhi: Pitching its F/A-18 Super Hornet to India’s air force and navy, US military contractor Boeing Co. has said the twin-engine fighter plane is cheaper to operate than a single-engine jet, citing a US government study.

In an interview, Boeing Defence Space and Security chief executive Leanne Caret, speaks about the company’s plans to pursue an upcoming multi-billion dollar fighter programme, Make in India opportunities and the defence ecosystem in the country. Edited excerpts:

What brings you here?

I have been doing business in India for almost a decade. There’s incredible talent here and I have always had a general mindset that as a global firm, we need to have that global reach and that local presence, and need to provide that uncompromising service to our customers around the world. I am so excited by all the incredible progress we have made here in India not only in the products and services that we provide but also in how we have a localized workforce of more than 1,500 and we are continuing to grow every day.

Tata Boeing Aerospace (TBAL) inaugurated its facility in Hyderabad today. What is this joint venture (JV) all about?

When you talk about being a global firm and especially if you are US-based, many times it means you are exporting outside the US. However, we believe that a win abroad is a win at home. So this partnership is really critical and as we have looked at future opportunities…just thinking through the lens of exporting the goods wasn’t going to be good enough.

It’s about making sure we take full advantage of the talent and capability here in India. So, the JV is just a series of steps we have taken over the years…One of the first outputs of TBAL will be the Apache fuselage that will be provided to the global market space. It won’t be just for customers here in India but for all our customers.

But Indian customers are also going to get the real benefits of having that product made here. So, it’s a pretty exciting time and we will build upon that. There are the IAF Apaches and the army Apaches… both will benefit from this JV on day one.

India is looking at building war planes locally under the ‘Make in India’ plan and the IAF has been asked to come up with its requirements. Will you build F/A-18s here?

We believe the F/A-18 provides great capability to the Indian government. We believe it’s a viable candidate in the competition. We obviously need to wait for procurement to begin and for the government to decide whether they are going to have a two-phased competition or a single competition. Boeing will respond appropriately. What we have always committed to from day one is that we are looking to put significant work content here in India, and the actual requirement of fighters will determine the final outcome.

In a scenario where India is keen to go for F/A-18s, will you consider setting up a factory in the country and also export?

We are assessing all options. It goes back again to what is the quantity. If you are talking about a small quantity of aircraft—because they have not come out with the official number—it will dictate what is affordable, because whatever we do has to be affordable.

I met many of the services today. The number one comment across the service branches—army, navy and IAF—was ‘we need affordable’. And making certain we do the right thing that provides best value for money is our focus, and how we can best do that, is where our intent will be.

What is your sense of the Indian requirement for fighters? What will be a good number to set up a production line here?

This is one of those where it is important for the customer to lead. It is important they put out their requirement and then we respond in kind. They have had numerous requests for information on capability and different things that we have responded to.

But I very much respect the process the government is going through in terms of what is the capability they need and how do they best want to fulfil that—and then we will respond appropriately.

What makes you feel the F/A-18 is a viable platform for India, considering that Boeing was knocked out of an earlier competition?

I am not going to go back to the outcome of that competition. The US Navy continues to show great confidence in the F/A-18, and we are moving forward with an upgrade and continue to put modernization efforts into it, called the Block 3.

You know about the recent announcement by Kuwait to buy additional planes. This is a viable capability that continues to prove itself in conflicts, and is a great strategy in terms of a fleet mix for a number of countries. For that reason, and based on how the air force and navy operate their fleet, we think the capabilities are a good fit and look forward to the competition.

How different is the F/A-18 you are offering now from what was offered a decade ago?

It once again goes back to what the customer’s requirements are. If we wanted to push just a point solution, that would be one conversation….rather, Boeing prides itself on a close relationship with customers by listening to them and responding appropriately to bring forward affordable solutions to meet their capability needs. That’s really what is at the heart of our strategy.

The defence sector ecosystem in India is work in progress. Your comments on the strengths and weaknesses?

Talent here is most important and India is recognized for having amazing technology and innovation. This is something that as a global company we really want to take full advantage of, and make it part of the fabric of what we do.

I think that is a win-win for the country as well, because when you have firms like Boeing and others that see this type of capability and talent, and we can invest in these projects together…it helps by definition in creating that ecosystem. There is no lack of expertise and talent here and we want to take full advantage of that.

India has ordered 36 Rafale fighter jets and there’s buzz about the F-35 stealth fighters being offered to the IAF. And you are offering F/A-18. What do you make of it?

Each country has its own needs and will determine its own fleet mix and how they operate. I think it will be inappropriate of anyone in the industry to say what that fleet mix should be like.

That again goes back to our fundamental belief that we want to listen to what the customer wants. There is a multitude of products that they rely upon and how they wish to execute their missions during both peacetime and wartime. And what we want to make certain is… to allow them to get the best capability that they need in whatever mission they are serving.

Does the F/A-18 match the Rafale and F-35?

Let’s put it this way. My point continues to be that we need to know what the customer’s requirements are, and then we will put forward our best offer in support of that requirement.

If numbers make a good business case, would you be willing to set up a production line in the country? And have you done any math on what kind of production opportunities could arise from India for your other global customers?

We have clearly looked at a range of options. This conversation has been ongoing for a number of years and so quantities will dictate how we can provide the best value. It wouldn’t be the first time or the last time we have looked at opportunities to do more work for nations outside the principal location.

Going back to the example of TBAL, I think it gives you exactly the point, that we are not just building fuselages for Apaches here in India but are building fuselages for our worldwide supply.

And therefore, we have already put on the record and proven that we are willing to do that. Again, it is about the business case closing and making certain all the numbers work out.

Will Tata be the partner for other platforms too? Or are you exploring other options ?

Both. I am not going to divulge names of other companies we are having discussions with. What I will say is, we are continuing to look for ways to localize our presence. It is part of the commitment.

Are all agreements in place for unhindered transfer of technology? Or are there any barriers?

Some of the overarching technologies are at a government-to-government level, where parameters have been set when it comes to certain products and certain pieces of equipment.

There is a process that governments work together on to get the (technologies) released and those are done on a case-to-case basis, as requirements pop up. I think it’s a very cooperative process…And if for some reason some piece of equipment wasn’t approved, then what are alternative pieces providing similar capability…is all part of the process we work through.

Which bureaucracy is more difficult to deal with—Indian or US?

(Laughs.) We all have our plusses and minuses. I think we have been growing together.

When did you last fly in an F/A-18?

I flew in a Super Hornet last year. I didn’t pull as many Gs (G forces) as my contemporaries have pulled. Let’s just say, we flew around for quite a while and I flew upside down. It was the ride of a lifetime.

Boeing makes a pitch for F/A-18s to India

 

[Picdelamirand-oil]

India Upends Its Single-Engine Fighter Competition and Will Also Consider Twin-Engine Jets​

Lockheed Martin led the existing competition with its F-16IN Viper, but will now likely face Boeing's F/A-18 Super Hornet and France's Rafale.​

BY JOSEPH TREVITHICKFEBRUARY 22, 2018

India has reportedly halted its plans to purchase nearly 115 single-engine fighter jets in order to reassess its requirements and open the tender up to twin-engine designs. The decision will delay purchases of any aircraft for at least two more years and will have significant ramifications for Lockheed Martin, which increasingly appeared to be the favorite with its F-16IN Viperunder the existing terms, as well the Indian Air Force.

On Feb. 23, 2018, The Times of India first revealed the new course of action, citing anonymous sources, which Indian online outlet DefenseNews.in also reported afterwards. The competition, which could have been worth up $18 billion, has already been going on since 2016 with Lockheed Martin’s F-16IN, anadvanced India-specific version of the company’s F-16 Block 70, and Saab’s Gripen-E being the only two contenders. This tender followed another failed deal to purchase new fighters that had collapsed the year before.

“The original plan placed an unnecessary restriction on only single-engine fighters, which limited the competition to just two jets [the F-16IN and Gripen-E],” an unnamed individual told The Times. “The aim is to increase the contenders and avoid needless allegations later.”

Exactly what potential allegations this individual might have been referring to is unclear. But India has struggled to procure new fighter jets over the past two decades and Indian authorities are undoubtedly keen to avoid a repeat of the failed Medium Multi-Role Combat Aircraft competition, also known as the MMCRA or MCRA.

SAAB Saab's Gripen-E.

That tender, which could have been worth approximately $20 billion and formally began in 2007, had been open to all fighter jet designs, regardless of engine configuration. India picked France’s Dassault Rafale, a twin-engine fighter, as the winner, but the actual contract quickly became mired in disputes over local production or assembly of the planes and India finally backed out completely in 2015.

Reopening the tender to twin-engine fighters will almost certainly mean that many of the former MMRCA contenders will submit new offers. The most likely entrants will be American manufacturer Boeing with its F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, the Rafale, the Eurofighter Typhoon, and one or more Russian aircraft, such as the MiG-35 Fulcrum or Su-35 Flanker-E.

Broadening the competition would definitely make a certain amount of sense. After protracted negotiations, India is on track to acquire 36 Rafales for the country’s Air Force as part of limited, interim purchase. The first of those fighters are supposed to arrive some time in 2019, but the deal remains mired in controversy.

IAN HANNING/POOL/SIPA USA VIA AP A Dassault Rafale.

The Indian Navy is also in the market for new jets to embark on its upcoming fleet of new aircraft carriers. Super Hornet, Rafale, the MiG-29K, all twin-engine designs, as well as a single-engine navalized Gripen-E known as Sea Gripen, are presently competing for that contract.

In 2016, the service rejected a proposal to purchase a carrier-borne version of the notoriously under-performing indigenously developed Tejas fighter jet. It isalso reportedly increasingly unhappy with the performance of its existing Russian-made MiG-29Ks.

Having Air Force and Navy units flying the same aircraft, or similar variants with a high commonality between airframe components and mission systems, could help reduce logistics and other sustainment costs. It could potentially help offset any higher costs associated with operating a twin-engine versus a single engine design, as well.

Boeing and Dassault seem most poised to benefit from the changes to the competition's requirements. As noted already, India is already in talks to buy dozens of Rafales and the navalized version of aircraft has a well established service record of carrier operations with the French Navy.

AP The navalized Rafale M launches from the French aircraft carrier Charles de Gaulle.

In August 2017, Boeing also announced it had used simulations to demonstrate that the Super Hornet could operate from India’s existing and planned short-takeoff but arrested recovery (STOBAR) aircraft carriers, as well as its future catapult assisted takeoff but arrested recovery (CATOBAR) ships. At the time, the company’s Vice President of the Super Hornet Program, Dan Gillian also made it clear that any Indian aircraft would almost certainly benefit from the U.S. Navy Block III upgrade project.

The U.S. Navy’s aircraft will also have conformal fuel tanks to extend their range and free up space for additional under wing stores, modernized electronic warfare countermeasures, and improved avionics and larger digital cockpit displays. The final iterations might also have certain stealthy components, including an enclosed, aerodynamic weapons pod.

This could make the jets particularly attractive to India, which is reportedly interested in joining the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program, but has not yet gotten approval from the U.S. government. Indian authorities are also reportedly close to scrapping a joint fifth generation fighter project with Russia over the disappointing progress of the Su-57 stealth fighter, also known as the T-50 or PAK FA.

BOEING An artist's conception of a F/A-18F Block III Super Hornet with the conformal fuel tanks and other improvements.

The biggest challenge for any competitor, as it has long been, will be meeting the Indian government’s requirements for technology transfer and industrial cooperation. For India, the fighter deal is as much about improving its domestic defense industrial capacity as it is about acquiring modern aircraft.

This rebooted competition could upend the partnerships that both Lockheed Martin and Saab had announced with local firms as part of their bids for the existing contract. In June 2017, Lockheed Martin had announced a particularly attractive arrangement with Indian industrial consortium Tata, stating that if its F-16IN won it would establish a shared production line in the country to make the jets for the Indian Air Force and use that assembly line to build additional aircraft for export elsewhere. It was also considering working with Tata to build F-16 components even if the contract fell through, though.

But whatever happens and whatever benefits there are to be had from reframing the competition, the Indian Air Force is unlikely to be thrilled at the prospect of having to wait at least two more years for the jets. The service first identified a requirement for nearly 130 modern fighters in 2001.

Since then, India’s aging fleets of Soviet and other Cold War-era fighters and multi-role combat aircraft have only become less airworthy. The country’s press has dubbed the remaining MiG-21s and -27s in particular as “flying coffins” and “widow makers” due to regular crashes that often claim the lives of the pilots.

RAMJI VYAS/HINDUSTAN TIMES/SIPA VIA AP Indian firefighters hose down the wreckage of a MiG-27 after a crash in 2016.

Those planes are among the ones the Indian Air Force is most eager to replace. The country is investigating upgrade programs for other older types, includingthe Anglo-French Jaguar jet combat aircraft.

India’s Air Force is already well short of the total number of combat aircraft it says are necessary to maintain a credible defense against its most likely opponents, such as China, which continues to grow its own advanced military capabilities, and long-time regional rival Pakistan. The country’s Cabinet Committee on Security has laid out requirements for the service to have 42 squadrons of combat aircraft, but at present it only has 31. This is down from 33in 2017.

The purchases of foreign fighter jets could become even more important if the domestic Tejas project suffers any more delays or other setbacks. Hindustan Aeronautics Limited expects to receive a formal deal for more than 80 Tejas Mk 1A aircraft some time in 2018, but that version of the jet has yet to fly at all.

The Indian government will need to ensure this new competition leads to the delivery of actual planes if it wants to prevent the Air Force’s capabilities from slipping any further. Without the new fighters, a December 2017 report to the country’s parliament warned that the service could have just 16 squadrons of combat aircraft of any type by 2032.

India Upends Its Single-Engine Fighter Competition and Will Also Consider Twin-Engine Jets

 

[randomradio]

The fun thread again.

It's easily going to cross 1000 pages.

 

[Picdelamirand-oil]

No request made to US for F-35 fighter jet, says IAF chief B S Dhanoa
Sources also said that as the IAF is already down to 31 squadrons of fighter aircraft against an authorisation of 42, it is imperative to make the shortfall on an emergent basis. It would thus be best to go for a government-to-government deal to get the next set of fighters.

The Indian Air Force (IAF) has denied that it has shown explicit interest in procuring the American F-35 Lightning II aircraft for its depleting fighter fleet. The reports about IAF approaching Lockheed Martin for a classified briefing on the F-35 came amid news that the government has decided to scrap the proposal to make a single-engine foreign fighter in India.

“We have not officially asked for a briefing on the F-35 nor has any request been made to the Americans,” IAF Chief Air Chief Marshal BS Dhanoa told The Indian Express.

No request made to US for F-35 fighter jet, says IAF chief B S Dhanoa

 

[screambowl]

MMRCA 2 = single engine
there is no question of going for rafale any more.

 

[dadeechi]

MMRCA 2 = single engine
there is no question of going for rafale any more.

Additional Rafales is surely going to happen. It is a question of when than if.

The fight is between FGFA vs. F-35.

 

[screambowl]

Additional Rafales is surely going to happen. It is a question of when than if.

The fight is between FGFA vs. F-35.

How on earth FGFA and F-35 are included in Medium fighters? They are stealth bombers and multi role fighter. For that we can have different thread.

India needs 4.5 Gen right away to fill it's depleting SQNs.

In any case Rafales are not coming any more. The cost spend on rafales would be higher. And in that cost you can have 2 SQN of Gripen and LCA with F414. Both Single engine. And rest can be used either for FGFA or AMCA. India will not get any TOT no matter how much India tries.

 

[dadeechi]

How on earth FGFA and F-35 are included in Medium fighters? They are stealth bombers and multi role fighter. For that we can have different thread.

Are you saying F-35 and B2 have the same role?

India needs 4.5 Gen right away to fill it's depleting SQNs.

Why does India need 4th gen fighters when 5th Generation is the trend.

In any case Rafales are not coming any more. The cost spend on rafales would be higher. And in that cost you can have 2 SQN of Gripen and LCA with F414. Both Single engine. And rest can be used either for FGFA or AMCA. India will not get any TOT no matter how much India tries.

The cost of next two squadrons of Rafales would definitely going to be cheaper than the first two squadrons of Gripen.

 

[screambowl]

Why does India need 4th gen fighters when 5th Generation is the trend.

5th gen is not coming anytime soon before 2030 and by the time you will be left with 24 SQN against planned 42.
Secondly, India has no technology to develop stealth. You will have to depend on foreign partners And only after 2030 when FGFA comes, India will be able to grasp this technology from the manufacturing process and retrofit it in AMCA whose design is till not frozen.

What are you going to do till 2030?

The cost of next two squadrons of Rafales would definitely going to be cheaper than the first two squadrons of Gripen.

IAF is interested in single engine to minimize fuel consumption. You also need to see the operating cost not just buying price.

I am of opinion, instal f414 on LCA, put some better avionics and bring it to 4.5 gen category. This can be done.
The combo sorties with Mig29 and Su30 with LCA will fill the gap in terms of air superiority and capability.

Are you saying F-35 and B2 have the same role

Read my post again and this time read carefully please.

 

[Ankit Kumar]

How on earth FGFA and F-35 are included in Medium fighters? They are stealth bombers and multi role fighter. For that we can have different thread.

India needs 4.5 Gen right away to fill it's depleting SQNs.

In any case Rafales are not coming any more. The cost spend on rafales would be higher. And in that cost you can have 2 SQN of Gripen and LCA with F414. Both Single engine. And rest can be used either for FGFA or AMCA. India will not get any TOT no matter how much India tries.

A Rafale is not more than 10 million USD more costly than either Gripen E/F or Block 70 upfront. So drop the cost point.

 

[screambowl]

A Rafale is not more than 10 million USD more costly than either Gripen E/F or Block 70 upfront. So drop the cost point.

operating cost. fuel consumption as compared to single eng vs dbl eng?
we already have rafales, su, mig29 as dbl eng fighter for long duration ops and navy

i am only saying is either get all 126 rafales and bring lca to 4.5 gen or get all jas39. and concentrate on amca. why?? because you need tot. in any case u r not getting tot for f16 deal.

 

[Ankit Kumar]

operating cost. fuel consumption as compared to single eng vs dbl eng?
we already have rafales, su, mig29 as dbl eng fighter for long duration ops and navy

i am only saying is either get all 126 rafales and bring lca to 4.5 gen or get all jas39. and concentrate on amca. why?? because you need tot. in any case u r not getting tot for f16 deal.

Its not just the operating costs, it's Capability, Operational independence and Costs.

As for ToT, the closest thing we will ever get from the west, is what we are getting through Rafale deal.

As for Gripen, 70%+ of its parts by value have their origins in 3rd countries, not in Sweden.

 

[suryakiran]

Additional Rafales is surely going to happen. It is a question of when than if.

The fight is between FGFA vs. F-35.

Have said this before and am saying this again, while everyone was talking about how F-16 is a given and what not. Rafale is going to come in more than 200 numbers. LCA in all its marks will cover the lower end of the spectrum. The Su-30s will get replaced by the FGFA in the post 2025 scenario. There is no room for the F-35 in any scenario no matter how the Americans try to spin it. Wait for the full effect of what has happened between France and India to come out. The Americans cannot match what is on offer. Not by a long shot.

The only place where the F-35 MAY see any kind of acceptance is the Navy. That too only once the LPDs are approved.

 

[Picdelamirand-oil]

operating cost. fuel consumption as compared to single eng vs dbl eng?

The single-engine or twin-engine criterion is not relevant for evaluating the cost in operation. For example if we compare an F-35 and an F-15 we have two aircraft roughly comparable in weight and thrust. F-35 is single-engine and F-15 is twin-engine, yet it is likely that the operating cost of F-35 is not lower than that of F-15.
A more interesting criterion is the mass: the French DGA studied this subject and determined that, all things being equal, the cost of operation was proportional to the empty weight.

 

[Bali78]

Have said this before and am saying this again, while everyone was talking about how F-16 is a given and what not. Rafale is going to come in more than 200 numbers. LCA in all its marks will cover the lower end of the spectrum. The Su-30s will get replaced by the FGFA in the post 2025 scenario. There is no room for the F-35 in any scenario no matter how the Americans try to spin it. Wait for the full effect of what has happened between France and India to come out. The Americans cannot match what is on offer. Not by a long shot.

The only place where the F-35 MAY see any kind of acceptance is the Navy. That too only once the LPDs are approved.

Su-30s will not be replaced. But Super Sukhois will complement the MKIed version of Su-57. If India goes for EMALs, then 2-3 sqds of F-35 will come as "Dahej ka mall" . I really don't know why people in India are so fascinated about F-35. In US, in spite of all the marketing gimmicks, F-35 program is considered as the biggest blunder in US military history and it's still continued because it's too big to fail !!

 

[Pundrick]

By The Way, who is paying for the Chai-Paani of these foreign company in India during meeting?

Have said this before and am saying this again, while everyone was talking about how F-16 is a given and what not. Rafale is going to come in more than 200 numbers. LCA in all its marks will cover the lower end of the spectrum. The Su-30s will get replaced by the FGFA in the post 2025 scenario. There is no room for the F-35 in any scenario no matter how the Americans try to spin it. Wait for the full effect of what has happened between France and India to come out. The Americans cannot match what is on offer. Not by a long shot.

The only place where the F-35 MAY see any kind of acceptance is the Navy. That too only once the LPDs are approved.

I think you didn't follow the MMRCA deal during 2012-2014 phase. If you had then you would have known that "RAFALE IS TOO EXPENSIVE".

Out total capital expenditure for whole ARMED FORCES is roughly $ 13.5-14 billion for financial year 2018-19. And IAF will hardly get 2.5-3 billion, now tell me how is IAF supposed to pay for Rafale which is about to cost them 20-25 billion for 120-130 jets over the period of a decade.

At most Rafale number will be increased to 36+36=72, AT MOST, otherwise 36 will be dead end. LCA MK1A & then MK2 is the way to go. Even FGFA looks expensive deal to me at the moment.