Rafale DH/EH of Indian Air Force : News and Discussions

[randomradio]

All of them were non compliant. But DA used its outstanding sources with Italian waitress and offered some unprecedented finacial benefits to the family which resulted in Rafale being declared L1. This fact has been proven correct based on the ISE cost we had to pay for each Rafale. Compared to Rafale, EFT needed lesser amount of ISE and that would have resulted in a cost for EFT lower than final price of Rafale with ISE.

Can't compare costs like that. ISE costs are separate from the tender costs since tender asks specifically for technologies that put all contenders on even ground. For example, the tender won't ask for a 16-hour data recording capability, so all competitors will be judged for prices that allow the typical 10 hours or 8 hours. Then you add 16 hours when negotiations come up.

Also most of the ISE mainly involves integration of foreign systems which the OEM has no control over. If the Rafale needs something the Typhoon already has, it works the other way round as well. If the tender was built around much more strict specifications, then it's unlikely either jet would have been shortlisted.

 

[suryakiran]

Which industrialist with close ties to RaGa are you hinting at?

This would have become like Maruti and Sanjay Gandhi. Replace Maruti with DA-Indian partner (Offset India Solutions) and Sanjay Gandhi with Robert Vadra.

Not industrialist. Just a fixer. Sanjay Bhandari.

 

[randomradio]

There was a simple solution to this muck-up. Tell DA to setup technical and financial guidelines. Get Indian companies to bid for setting up the process. Decide on the Indian partner and roll the Rafale out.

But then if this could work, I would be the PM of the country.

That's exactly how's it's gonna work now. All the OEMs get to choose their partners based on their own guidelines. That's how DA chose Ambani. Multiple companies bid to become DA's partner and Ambani won (Mukesh). And after Mukesh and Anil fix, the partner automatically became Anil.

SPM is a mix of govt's and OEM's choices. So, in SPM, the govt decides the Indian companies that are capable of delivering the product, and then the OEM chooses their preferred company.

It works the other way round as well, where Indian companies can tie up with OEMs of their choice based on their own guidelines and offer products under IDDM.

In all three, the govt only interferes in the SPM, since SPM is about developing critical capabilities for strategic programs.

I'm looking forward to you becoming the PM now.

 

[vstol Jockey]

Can't compare costs like that. ISE costs are separate from the tender costs since tender asks specifically for technologies that put all contenders on even ground. For example, the tender won't ask for a 16-hour data recording capability, so all competitors will be judged for prices that allow the typical 10 hours or 8 hours. Then you add 16 hours when negotiations come up.

Also most of the ISE mainly involves integration of foreign systems which the OEM has no control over. If the Rafale needs something the Typhoon already has, it works the other way round as well. If the tender was built around much more strict specifications, then it's unlikely either jet would have been shortlisted.

EFT had IRST and two way data link with Meteor which Rafale did not have and these changes came under ISE. But EFT does not have AESA till date.

 

[Bali78]

Who is this external monitor again?

Please read the first line of the document you shared.

 

[randomradio]

EFT had IRST and two way data link with Meteor which Rafale did not have and these changes came under ISE. But EFT does not have AESA till date.

EFT can't perform SEAD/DEAD due to its inferior EW suite, can't perform air superiority due to not having an AESA radar or can't perform advanced recce anywhere close to the Rafale can. How would you judge those capabilities financially?

Even with all these inferior capabilities, even if you consider ISE, the LCC cost will still be lower for Rafale due to its lack of need for overhauls. I bet all those expensive contracts countries are signing up for the Typhoon do not include the cost of overhaul. Even without considering overhauls, the Rafale deals are all cheaper than Typhoon, so you can imagine once the overhaul cost is added to the list.

During MMRCA they found out the cost of the Typhoon was 25% more in LCC when compared to the Rafale. That's a massive amount. At least $75M per jet. No matter how much more ISE you add to the aircraft, it won't come up to 75M per jet.

It's actually impossible for any twin engine aircraft in the world to be cheaper than the Rafale when full LCC costs are calculated.

The only things I can think of on the Typhoon that do not need ISE are the additional jammers (which are going to be inferior anyway), the IRST, helmet, Litening pod and towed decoy. Everything else, like Israeli comm and weapons, and Indian weapons etc would be common. So are you really saying just those 4 or 5 items would have cost $75M per jet?

I'd say that $75M covers the cost of the 3 or 4 overhauls it requires. Perhaps I'm being generous here.

If you recall, EF also did their best claiming the Rafales actually cost $150M at the minimum in flyaway cost, in order to boost the chances of their ridiculous €138M per jet flyaway they had offered to India. But what was the cost of the deal we signed in the end for a much smaller number of merely 36? It was $105M per jet, plus it was far more advanced than what was part of MMRCA.

IIRC, at the end of the negotiations, each Rafale was €115M per jet during MMRCA (€14.5B for 126). And EFT's price that was originally €138M (€17.5B) was scaled down to €111M with their 20% discount, which brought it down to below Rafale's MMRCA price (likely by removing many technologies and push it to ISE, like the IRST, Litening pod, towed decoy, helmet, ECM etc). Then Dassault should have reduced their €115M price to €90-95M or so for GTG. With the addition of ISE, it was raised to €95M. So that's just €2 or 3M per jet as ISE. @Picdelamirand-oil @halloweene, what do you think of the prices here?

 

[Ashwin]

Please read the first line of the document you shared.

I know. Was wondering who these useful idiots are.

 

[Ashwin]

1. No procurement is completely compliant. Ever.

Correct, while non-compliant and incomplete documents are different things. It's inappropriate to call an incomplete party the L1. Which is the fundamental problem. Which drove MMRCA to a brick wall.

Can't compare costs like that. ISE costs are separate from the tender costs since tender asks specifically for technologies that put all contenders on even ground.

incorrect. DA failed in 14 ASQR items. Its part of the requirement to qualify for the advanced stages of the tender. Half of those can be given waiver but shortcomings still remain. They didn't give these benifits to LCA why should Rafale get it?

ISE costs also matter when for example EF is offered with IRST and Rafale is not. Which inflates the ISE costs.

 

[A Person]

How much would an ISE cost for the Typhoon to get some actually useful range when carrying a recce pod?

 

[vstol Jockey]

Correct, while non-compliant and incomplete documents are different things. It's inappropriate to call an incomplete party the L1. Which is the fundamental problem. Which drove MMRCA to a brick wall.

incorrect. DA failed in 14 ASQR items. Its part of the requirement to qualify for the advanced stages of the tender. Half of those can be given waiver but shortcomings still remain. They didn't give these benifits to LCA why should Rafale get it?

ISE costs also matter when for example EF is offered with IRST and Rafale is not. Which inflates the ISE costs.

EFT also had towed decoy which is now part of ISE for Rafale.

 

[randomradio]

incorrect. DA failed in 14 ASQR items. Its part of the requirement to qualify for the advanced stages of the tender. Half of those can be given waiver but shortcomings still remain. They didn't give these benifits to LCA why should Rafale get it?

Merely 14 is impressive for a wishlist. LCA failed in 53, out of which 20 were waived permanently, and none of these were part of a wishlist.

ISE costs also matter when for example EF is offered with IRST and Rafale is not. Which inflates the ISE costs.

So I suppose you believe Rafale with IRST will become more expensive than EFT then.

 

[AbRaj]

Correct, while non-compliant and incomplete documents are different things. It's inappropriate to call an incomplete party the L1. Which is the fundamental problem. Which drove MMRCA to a brick wall.

incorrect. DA failed in 14 ASQR items. Its part of the requirement to qualify for the advanced stages of the tender. Half of those can be given waiver but shortcomings still remain. They didn't give these benifits to LCA why should Rafale get it?

ISE costs also matter when for example EF is offered with IRST and Rafale is not. Which inflates the ISE costs.

Looks like M2000 saga all over again. We screwed again and French helped us screwing ourselves

 

[Ashwin]

Merely 14 is impressive for a wishlist. LCA failed in 53, out of which 20 were waived permanently, and none of these were part of a wishlist.

Air Staff Qualitative Requirements (ASQR) is not a wishlist. As the name says it's a requirement.

Yet, LCA was not ordered with these shortcomings but you want Rafale to.

Every shortcoming of rafale is not required but everything with LCA is. Sounds legit.

o I suppose you believe Rafale with IRST will become more expensive than EFT then.

How do you quantify that without having data from both sides? I dont have that imagination power unlike you.

 

[Picdelamirand-oil]

Air Staff Qualitative Requirements (ASQR) is not a wishlist. As the name says it's a requirement.

Yet, LCA was not ordered with these shortcomings but you want Rafale to.

Every shortcoming of rafale is not required but everything with LCA. Sounds legit.


How do you quantify that without having data from both sides? I dont have that imagination power unlike you.

Fortunately the Indians in charge of selecting a plane had enough imagination to choose the right plane. And anyway all this discussion is useless since the MMRCA has been cancelled. The contract for 36 Rafale was an initiative of Modi in the framework of a strategic agreement according to criteria that are not known.

 

[randomradio]

Air Staff Qualitative Requirements (ASQR) is not a wishlist. As the name says it's a requirement.

Yet, LCA was not ordered with these shortcomings but you want Rafale to.

Every shortcoming of rafale is not required but everything with LCA is. Sounds legit.

ASQR in a tender is a wishlist, all contenders are not expected to meet every point. ASQR in a development program is not, the jet is expected to meet every point since the developer and the force create the ASQR based on reality.

How do you quantify that without having data from both sides? I dont have that imagination power unlike you.

Don't need data for it, it's just common sense.

 

[suryakiran]

Correct, while non-compliant and incomplete documents are different things. It's inappropriate to call an incomplete party the L1. Which is the fundamental problem. Which drove MMRCA to a brick wall.

While you are correct in due process, practically it is impossible in a government procurement process for the end user agency to get all data. Let me try and explain with a simpler one.

Requirement for a STP (sewer treatment plant). Technical specifications get defined on what will be the MLD(throughput). Now, with just this data it is impossible to respond. But response is expected. Before submission there is a query answering session. During this session, they try and answer all your queries. These answers give rise to new queries. Hence, assumptions are made. But few decisions related to actual costs cannot be answered unless you do an actual ground study. Best of luck getting all the data you want.

Hence, when anything is submitted it is always ceteris paribus. Any deviation is extra and will result in over runs.
Now, were all the documents submitted. Yes.
Were all technical documents submitted. Relevant ones were.
Are there changes to technical documents during project finalisation. Definitely.
How are these changed. Every change needs to be approved by the Jr Engineer and Chief Engineer.
Are more documents submitted. Yes.

Now tell me, if all documents are to be collected, then all data needs to be available. If assumptions are made at the data level, then assumptions are made at the quotation level too.

Who are the biggest pains in the neck in all this? The auditors. Why? Because zero practical knowledge.

 

[Ashwin]

While you are correct in due process, practically it is impossible in a government procurement process for the end user agency to get all data. Let me try and explain with a simpler one.

Requirement for a STP (sewer treatment plant). Technical specifications get defined on what will be the MLD(throughput). Now, with just this data it is impossible to respond. But response is expected. Before submission there is a query answering session. During this session, they try and answer all your queries. These answers give rise to new queries. Hence, assumptions are made. But few decisions related to actual costs cannot be answered unless you do an actual ground study. Best of luck getting all the data you want.

Hence, when anything is submitted it is always ceteris paribus. Any deviation is extra and will result in over runs.
Now, were all the documents submitted. Yes.
Were all technical documents submitted. Relevant ones were.
Are there changes to technical documents during project finalisation. Definitely.
How are these changed. Every change needs to be approved by the Jr Engineer and Chief Engineer.
Are more documents submitted. Yes.

Now tell me, if all documents are to be collected, then all data needs to be available. If assumptions are made at the data level, then assumptions are made at the quotation level too.

Who are the biggest pains in the neck in all this? The auditors. Why? Because zero practical knowledge.

No one is expecting all data to be accurate. But there should be comparable data. Or else how would you judge which party has the lowest quote ie, L1?

Auditor's job is to check if all due processes are followed. If there are shortcomings in ASQR it should be waivered by RM, I there is an unexpected change in quoted price it should be cleared by MoF etc. That is how checks and balances are built in the system. Auditor is not required to have practical knowledge. As in MMRCA they saw DA failed to meet 14 criteria's in the ASQR. They noted only half of them were given waiver. When and if this goes to the judiciary they will be doing the same thing. Are they required to have all the practical knowledge? No.

 

[Sathya]

Let's not forget the 33 jets we are signing up with Russia. At least the 83 Tejas and 33 Mig-29/MKI are assured. You can consider the Phalcons as assured as well. And you can expect to see a lease for refuellers during this term. The C-295 contract is coming up for a signature as well.

MRFA and LCA Mk2 are for the next govt to decide on. Plus it can't be funded with our current finances.

Any info regarding Radar and avionics package for Mig 29 and also Su 30 ?

 

[Lolwa]

Any info regarding Radar and avionics package for Mig 29 and also Su 30 ?

Mig 29 will have aesa fga 29 or fga 35 a lot of mig 35 components will be used.
The su 30 still no info. But I think IAF will decide our mki upgrade based on the 12 so most probably fga50/uttam radar and al41 with khibiny ecm.

 

[Sathya]

Mig 29 will have aesa fga 29 or fga 35 a lot of mig 35 components will be used.
The su 30 still no info. But I think IAF will decide our mki upgrade based on the 12 so most probably fga50/uttam radar and al41 with khibiny ecm.

Upgrading them won't delay things?
And also raise the cost?

That's why I feel Rafale next tranche is best suited.

If we delay more time, we might have do
Additional ISE to Rafale.

My guesstimate 3 billion $ for mig + Su with modifications.

While F3R second tranche would cost 4.5 billion $

It would be better to go for additional rafale.

However if buying Migs + Sukhoi with integration of Indian mission computers ( uttam - maybe or not ) paving way for all Mig and Sukhoi to get Indian weapons.. Overall it improves our force sustainable level.

Then it's definitely a good deal.