MMRCA 2.0 - Updates and Discussions

[Picdelamirand-oil]

The snapshot is not visible the address is the following:
http://indiandefence.com/attachments/su-30-mki-cpfh-png.5709/
You have to be logged to Indian defense to see it.

 

[randomradio]

So let's look at the price aspect. The Indians newspaper announce that the contract will be worth more than $20 billion with a price of planes around $100 million and additional purchases around $100 million as well. It is a rough estimate that sets the orders of magnitude, but we know how to estimate better.

If we refer to the 36 Rafale sales contract, we know that a Rafale C was sold for € 91.7 million and a Rafale B for € 94 million, which makes an average of 92 million to simplify.

Has India paid more for the Rafales?
And Parikrama tells us that if a Rafale is worth 100 A F-16/Gripen is worth 80 without the necessary customizations and 85-90 with these customizations. That puts us at € 80.5 million for the typical single engine.

Now we can make the price for 114 planes

Rafale

• Aircraft prices 114*92 = 10488
• Price of two Bases: 1800
• Price of changes specific to India on aircraft: 0 because already paid by the 36 Rafale contract.
• Price of weapons: 2000
• Performance price Based logistic : 1115
• Total: €15403 Million

Single Engine

• Aircraft prices 114*80.5 = 9177
• Price of three bases: 2700 (Unlike the Rafale, there are not two bases already equipped for only 36 Aircraft)
• Price of the changes specific to India on aircraft: 1700 (it is the development of these specific solutions the recurring cost has been integrated into the price of the aircraft)
• Price of weapons: 2000
• Performance price Based logistic : 1115
• Total: € 16692 Million

So given IAF's opposition to these aircraft, the fact that they are more expensive does not give them any chance of winning.

For the SU-35s it is the cost per flight hour that limits its chances. For the SU-30 family in India, we would have a cost per flight hour of around $12,000 while the Rafale would be in the same conditions around $4125

It's very bad because it's a snapshot of an Indian show called Aero India. But we can still read

• SU 30 MKI: 12000 USD
• and Mirage 2000: 3000 USD.

This is interesting because there is another source from the National Assembly that says that the CPFH of the Rafale is 11000 € and the CPFH of the Mirage 2000 is 8000 €. Normally the CPFH depends on the size of the fleet, its maturity, conditions etc.

But 11000 and 8000 are linked to the same conditions so if the CPFH of the Mirage 2000 is $3000 in India, we can expect that the CPFH of the Rafale in India is 3000*11000/8000= $ 4125.

The difference with CPFH in France is mainly due to the difference in labour costs.

So we would have:

Mirage 2000: $3000
Rafale: $4125
SU 30 MKI: $12,000

If the operational life of the aircraft is 7500 hours, this makes $31 million for the Rafale and $90 million for the SU-35, i.e. 59 million difference per aircraft or 6726 million for 114 aircraft, which seems irremediable.

Single engine aircraft won't even be seriously considered and won't make the shortlist. So I wouldn't be worried about it. The MCA will be duplicating the capabilities of the Gripen. The F-16 is not even worthy of being in the list.

IMHO, even the Su-35 won't make the cut for tech specs even with an AESA radar. The Mig-35 is also not exactly up to par either.

SH with 120KN engines is a dark horse, but it will still fall short in most performance related parameters. And it's avionics may not even be competitive with F3R.

Rafale will have to beat the Typhoon again. And with the 10% cost advantage for T1, it won't be a problem outbidding the Typhoon.

 

[suryakiran]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1050024446616956929

Welcome back buddy

 

[Sancho]

HAL or SPM, it's nothing that affects the choice of the aircraft itself...

And the usual distractions when caught with false informations, but it's good that you declined the Mod position, nobody can confuse you now as a credible source.

So let's look at the price aspect.

No thank you, there is no point in debating around speculations and made up points. You don't know how many air bases IAF will place the 114 fighters to, you don't know the ISE costs for other fighters, which can be far lower than for Rafale, just as you don't know the cost for weapons either (MICA IR far costlier than Iris-T/Asraam for example).

What we do know is, that IAF wants to make up numbers by using the limit budget they now have. That's why they stated priority for SE MMRCAs, since the procurement and operational cost is considerably lower, than for twin engine Rafales. Even French Air force is still mainly using single engine Mirage fighters, although advanced Rafales are available.
Except for the F18, that has low flyaway and operational costs, none of the TE fighters will be able to compete with SEs on costs. So for Rafale and EF techs and performance is the only hope to justify the costs.

Btw, any pics or info's on the first flight of the first Indian airframe on French forums yet? There were reports about the flight happening yesterday, but couldn't find anything yet.

 

[randomradio]

And the usual distractions when caught with false informations, but it's good that you declined the Mod position, nobody can confuse you now as a credible source.

There's no use in using personal attacks to hide your ignorance though. Readers are not stupid.

 

[randomradio]

That's why they stated priority for SE MMRCAs

SE MMRCA is dead. MCA has replaced it. The IAF will be buying 200+ MCAs in lieu of the Gripen/F-16 tender.

That's why the MMRCA contest was opened to TE MMRCAs now.

 

[Sancho]

There's no use in using personal attacks to hide your ignorance though. Readers are not stupid.

Was not meant as a personal attack, just pointed to the fact that on the old forum, your title as a mod, gave your claims at least some credibility. And I do hope that readers will take your claims now, the way they should be taken.

 

[randomradio]

Was not meant as a personal attack, just pointed to the fact that on the old forum, your title as a mod, gave your claims at least some credibility. And I do hope that readers will take your claims now, the way they should be taken.

Nobody gets credibility simply because their avatar names have a different colour. It's all up to the words of the member that gives credibility. People are not stupid enough to look at baubles and determine if someone is credible or not.

Just because you become a mod here today doesn't mean you have suddenly gained knowledge. Man, you are so ignorant about everything, it's actually become funny.

 

[Sancho]

Adani is setting up first facilities in the aviation field

https://twitter.com/x/status/1052504664627994624

 

[Sancho]

A few weeks old, but interesting.

Saab Achieves 50% Of Its Goals Under Gripen E ToT Programme
25 Sep 2018

...According to General Márcio Bruno Bonotto, "So far, all our expectations have been met. Everything is going as per schedule. 50% of the technology transfer initiatives have been completed. This demonstrates the confidence that FAB and Saab have in each other."

In 2016, Saab and Embraer inaugurated GDDN in Gavião Peixoto, in the state of São Paulo. GDDN is responsible for providing the development environment and simulators required to undertake the fighter development work.

This year in May, Saab unveiled a 5,000-square-meter facility for its future Gripen fighter jet aerostructures plant: Saab Aeronáutica Montagens (SAM). SAM will be responsible for the development of aerostructures for the Brazilian Gripen fighter. The parts that will be developed here include the tail cone, aerodynamic brakes, wing box, front fuselage for the single-seat and two-seat versions and the rear fuselage for the single-seat version of the aircraft...

Saab Achieves 50% Of Its Goals Under Gripen E ToT Programme - Gripen

 

[turkish]

A few weeks old, but interesting.


Saab Achieves 50% Of Its Goals Under Gripen E ToT Programme - Gripen

Good to see you here. !

 

[Sancho]

Good to see you here. !

OT, but looking forward to talk to you about the Turkish aviation projects. If there is an appropriate thread, please tag me. Lots of interesting news and developments these days over there. I'm jealous and worried at the same time.

 

[Ashwin]

And the usual distractions when caught with false informations, but it's good that you declined the Mod position, nobody can confuse you now as a credible source.



No thank you, there is no point in debating around speculations and made up points. You don't know how many air bases IAF will place the 114 fighters to, you don't know the ISE costs for other fighters, which can be far lower than for Rafale, just as you don't know the cost for weapons either (MICA IR far costlier than Iris-T/Asraam for example).

What we do know is, that IAF wants to make up numbers by using the limit budget they now have. That's why they stated priority for SE MMRCAs, since the procurement and operational cost is considerably lower, than for twin engine Rafales. Even French Air force is still mainly using single engine Mirage fighters, although advanced Rafales are available.
Except for the F18, that has low flyaway and operational costs, none of the TE fighters will be able to compete with SEs on costs. So for Rafale and EF techs and performance is the only hope to justify the costs.

Btw, any pics or info's on the first flight of the first Indian airframe on French forums yet? There were reports about the flight happening yesterday, but couldn't find anything yet.

But, his basic point stands. Since we have already paid for customization, infra, and limited localization. Follow-on planes will be cheaper. Be it procurement or operation. Value for money would be higher than F-16V or Gripen E. Also, the additional headaches of another plane in the fleet brings with it.

 

[Sancho]

But, his basic point stands. Since we have already paid for customization, infra, and limited localization. Follow-on planes will be cheaper. Be it procurement or operation. Value for money would be higher than F-16V or Gripen E. Also, the additional headaches of another plane in the fleet brings with it.

No it doesn't, because we are not talking about a follow on order, that is meant to provide fighters for the same 2 bases anymore.
Only if we buy 36 additional Rafales for the same already planned bases, no additional infrastructure costs would be applied. But if we make an MMRCA Rafale deal for 114 fighters now, we also will place them at other air bases around the country, like it was the case all along => additional costs. The only cost, that won't be added again, are the costs for ISE. But then again...

The EF has

HMS
Litening
Towed Decoy

already integrated, has higher thrust and useses the same family of RWR in the upgraded Mig 29s too (reportedly Rafales RWR get replaced for some reason, lets see if thats true). I'm still waiting to see if we get IRST with the Rafales and if we paid extra for it as well, because that also is already available for the EF.

The same is the case for other contenders, that doesn't have the same capability gaps as Rafale, so the ISE costs for other fighters can be lower, than what we already paid with the Rafale deal.

Value for money is highly debatable, because it depends on different factors. What are the needed capabilities, what budget is available, what industrial advantages can you get in return. Even the EF, that is considered as the costliest option, can offer the most value for the money, if everything is included.
During MMRCA, I still maintain that the Rafale proposal was the best overall choice for India. Today too many things have changed and the Rafale order itself, opens up alternative approaches, because strategic deep strikes, are not necessarily required.

 

[Sancho]

Something to consider

During MMRCA, the main advantages of Rafale were,

- deep strike capability (which we don't anymore in MMRCA 2.0, because of the 36 Rafale deal)

- passive detection and EW (where it lost, rather than added performance today, compared to the competition)

- AASMs advanced capabilities (that we apparently don't need, or replace with Israeli systems)

- versatility in different roles (still the overall best, but lost the edge in certain roles).

- independence (Egypt shows, that that sales pitch was not true)

 

[TARGET]

I feel it may split into 2 parts 72 F16 and 36 Rafale due to cost and USA\Tata lobby ,but will take another 3 to 4 Year’s to decide and also depends on our economy .

 

[Ashwin]

No it doesn't, because we are not talking about a follow on order, that is meant to provide fighters for the same 2 bases anymore.
Only if we buy 36 additional Rafales for the same already planned bases, no additional infrastructure costs would be applied. But if we make an MMRCA Rafale deal for 114 fighters now, we also will place them at other air bases around the country, like it was the case all along => additional costs. The only cost, that won't be added again, are the costs for ISE. But then again...

The EF has

HMS
Litening
Towed Decoy

already integrated, has higher thrust and useses the same family of RWR in the upgraded Mig 29s too (reportedly Rafales RWR get replaced for some reason, lets see if thats true). I'm still waiting to see if we get IRST with the Rafales and if we paid extra for it as well, because that also is already available for the EF.

The same is the case for other contenders, that doesn't have the same capability gaps as Rafale, so the ISE costs for other fighters can be lower, than what we already paid with the Rafale deal.

Value for money is highly debatable, because it depends on different factors. What are the needed capabilities, what budget is available, what industrial advantages can you get in return. Even the EF, that is considered as the costliest option, can offer the most value for the money, if the everything is included.
During MMRCA, I still maintain that the Rafale proposal was the best overall choice for India. Today too many things have changed and the Rafale order itself, opens up alternative approaches, because strategic deep strikes, are not necessarily required.

Follow on in the sense its same airplane. No additional training, huge logistical savings, in the long run, common weapon, tactics, maintenance localisation in scale.

You are only quoting 3-4 India specific upgrades while ignoring 10 others. We paid a gigantic amount to get those. Any new figher would need some level of customization. Anything of that sort I would call a waste because we already did it for a fighter already getting ready to enter service.

EF is a no go for this race. It cost higher in vanilla, to begin with. The point of this whole process is to get a cheaper rafale (even if its not rafale) not EFT.

 

[randomradio]

Something to consider

During MMRCA, the main advantages of Rafale were,

- deep strike capability (which we don't anymore in MMRCA 2.0, because of the 36 Rafale deal)

- passive detection and EW (where it lost, rather than added performance today, compared to the competition)

- AASMs advanced capabilities (that we apparently don't need, or replace with Israeli systems)

- versatility in different roles (still the overall best, but lost the edge in certain roles).

- independence (Egypt shows, that that sales pitch was not true)

No, the main advantage for Rafale is that it was capable enough to get shortlisted after having been tested on 643 parameters.

 

[Sancho]

Follow on in the sense its same airplane. No additional training, huge logistical savings, in the long run, common weapon, tactics, maintenance localisation in scale.

Now you are talking about having different types of MMRCAs, not specific advantages of Rafale. Yes more types = more logistical burden, wasn't IAFs prefered choice, but might end up as a necessity.

Besides, when you look at the weapon pack of Rafale, the only weapon that is Rafale specific are MICA and Scalp (strategic). Meteor would be standard for EF or Gripen, Asraam and Iris-T have even cost advantages over MICA IR. Other than that, SPICE seems to be added as a standard PGM.

You are only quoting 3-4 India specific upgrades while ignoring 10 others. We paid a gigantic amount to get those. Any new figher would need some level of customization. Anything of that sort I would call a waste because we already did it for a fighter already getting ready to enter service.

Yes we paid much, because Rafale lacks many things, that are standard today on the market. That's why ISE for other fighters can be cheaper.

EF is a no go for this race. It cost higher in vanilla, to begin with. The point of this whole process is to get a cheaper rafale (even if its not rafale) not EFT.

Well, from what we know now, it's questionable if Rafale wasn L1 and as said, the ISE might had been cheaper too, but I don't expect it to win either unless BAE/UK had taken the lead.

 

[Sancho]

You are only quoting 3-4 India specific upgrades while ignoring 10 others.

The link you gave mentions 8 or 9

1) low band jammer,
2) towed decoy system,
3) upgraded engine,
4) additional modes in the radar
5) higher resolution in the Front Sector Optronics (IRST)
6) new Israeli satellite communications system.
7) helmet mounted sight... involved making this compatible with the Meteor and Scalp missiles
8) Modular Data Processing Unit” (MDPU)

Also reported:
9) Litening pod
10) integration of SPICE PGMs (possibly others)
11) RWRs mentioned in other sources
12) IFF and data links

2, 3, 5, 7, 9, are fure sure not necessary for EF, others hard to say without specifics.