Year of the Rafale

[Reinhardt]

Egypt 24
India 36
Qatar 24


all of them confirmed, on the shelves purchases without bothering for technology transfer, and in all three cases, definite possibility of follow-up deals...


All that nicely explained in US Forbes magazine :
Winners And Losers In The Changing Arab Gulf Fighter Market - Forbes (http://www.forbes.com/sites/richardaboulafia/2015/04/27/winners-and-losers-in-the-changing-arab-gulf-fighter-market/)


So... who is next ? There might be again some surprises in the coming months (Paris Air Show next month)


The Bordeaux factory of Dassault Aviation is geared for 30+ fighters a month, anyway...

[NutLoose]

It makes you wonder what BAe would be geared up for production wise in case of war.
We would probably still be in the inquiry stage as to permitting the extra traffic flows to the plant, or developing the new enlarged menu for the works canteen.

[Fox3WheresMyBanana]

The Canadians may be next, if there's a change in Government later this year.

[Davef68]

The Rafale production line was scheduled to close in 2018 without these - I wonder how cheaply they have sold these?

[dat581]

If past performance of the French in such matters is anything to go by they would be very cheap. Some crazy ideas were run at the Australian government in the late 1970's to land a deal for the Mirage 2000. Thankfully cooler heads prevailed and the Hornet was perchased. That may be almost 40 years ago but I doubt much has changed with the French.

[BEagle]

A French purchase would suit Canada very well, particularly les Quebecois:

watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=cC1f2e6Kk7c

[AtomKraft]

At least the Rafale is a proper aircraft.

Not like the F-35, which is more like a conjoined services clusterfcuk...

A deserving winner.

[glad rag]

If past performance of the French in such matters is anything to go by they would be very cheap. Some crazy ideas were run at the Australian government in the late 1970's to land a deal for the Mirage 2000. Thankfully cooler heads prevailed and the Hornet was perchased. That may be almost 40 years ago but I doubt much has changed with the French.

Congrats for buying the more expensive & inferior aircraft! :ok:


vive la différence

[Fox3WheresMyBanana]

The French are offering an assembly deal to the Canadians, which is highly attractive in my view.
Fundamentally, Canada needs a twin-engined aircraft.
Nothing will happen until after the Federal Election, which is due by 19th October, and is currently a three horse race,with two of said horses likely to not buy F-35.

[Breguet33]

The Rafale production line was scheduled to close in 2018 without these

Not true. The fifth tranche has been confirmed by the MoD last year keeping the line busy until 2025 with 11 per month rate for the french orders. These new orders could postpone even further the shutdown of the line, but an increase in production has been decided to fulfill these international orders (Qatar, India & Egypt ones).

I wonder how cheaply they have sold these?

Nothing is ever cheap with Dassault products. Everyone knows that.

If you are looking for reasons of this incredible outcome for the Rafale program, you can start looking at the current foreign policy being considered by the White House.

[NITRO104]

So... who is next ?
No one, until French banks recover from previous 'sales'. :)

[Breguet33]

No one, until French banks get money to fund those 'sales'.

Cheikh Tamim Al Thani does need a bank loan to buy Rafales.

The question is here: why do Gulf countries favor french equiment over US-supplied aircraft or Typhoon? What happened to the Typhoon? The thing was supposed to steal France-UAE deal for 60 units two years ago?

[AtomKraft]

The UK should get 'em to use ont' carriers.

Mind you, mind be something missing......:sad:

What use is an aircraft catapult likely to ever be on an aircraft carrier anyway?
Or arresting gear?

Nah. No use at all.

Best to save a few quid eh?

[recceguy]

1. a production line of combat aircraft, running on government orders and MoD budgets, is by obligation always running with typically 3 years ahead, to the contrary of Airbus or Boeing factories. So that was bringing us to 2018, as pointed by a poster above - before the three recent orders. To make everybody wonder, the line of the F16 should close as soon as 2016 - as UAE deal does appear stalled (thanks US Policy in Middle-East) and Iraqi aircraft will NEVER be delivered.... :ugh:

2. why speculate about passed fighters deal with the RAAF ? they have no threat down south, so they can buy any type of aircraft they want, it's not conclusive... :rolleyes:

3. joking about French banks ? because of course british deals for Typhoons have always been a model of profitability ? .... :cool:

[halloweene]

So much bitterness from fanboys... Hilarious.

[Stanwell]

Are there any objective comparisons showing:

a. How the Mirage 2000 stacked up against the F/A18 and
b. How Rafale compares with Typhoon?

[Fox3WheresMyBanana]

Seen HUD video of a Mirage 2000 guns tracking an F-16 pulling 9G. The M2000 was pulling 11.2G, stable. Eye-watering stuff.

[halloweene]

You have a link?

[Fox3WheresMyBanana]

Sorry. During a debrief at TLP, 1992. Youtube not invented so nothing kept; maybe kept by the French. EC1/2 Cigognes IIRC.

[dat581]

My point was to show how crazy the French will get to sell their aircraft no matter how unsuitable it was for the Air Force in question.

[FoxtrotAlpha18]

RAAF test pilots rated the M2000 as one of the nicest aircraft they had ever flown during the selection process c.1979-1981. Other contenders were F-18L, F/A-18A and F-16A.

Trouble is, Australia had been burned by the French in refusing to support a Mirage IIIO deployment to SE Asia in the 60s, plus the M2000 was considered a little under-developed at the time.

The Hornet was the logical choice, as F-18L remained unsold to anyone despite its sparkling performance, and F-16A had no BVR AAM and they kept crashing.

Check out the book Hornets Down Under (McLaughlin 2005) and its sequel, Hornet Country (Moclair & McLaughlin 2014) for a great summary by the lead RAAF evaluation test pilot, WGCDR (later AVM) Bob Richardson.

[Rufus Shinra]

Still better than the Brits getting in a lot of corruption to sell the Saudis a plane designed to intercept Soviet bombers and barely able to do anything more even 25 years after the end of the Cold War. :)

[Reinhardt]

Thanks FoxtrotAlpha18 for the informative post.

Both Mirage 2000 and F16 were a little bit under-developed at the end of the 70s - although the F16 had of course a couple of years lead.
Subsequent versions of both aircraft were more mature - F16C, 2000-5...

"Australia had been burned by the French in refusing to support a Mirage IIIO deployment to SE Asia in the 60s"
What a strange and new story - could we know a little bit more about it ? Why would a strong AF like the Australian one need support from a European one to deploy fighters to SE Asia (Butterworth I presume ?) They were not mature enough to move along by themselves ?

It's also true that Canada might join end of this year, let's wait and see. They should just cut the umbilical chord from US (Avro Canada CF-105 Arrow ...) Also please don't say "to please the French" because... french-speaking Canadians are not French ! (or next time I chat with an American, I will say : " oh I met one of your fellow citizens from Sydney" ....)
There might be also another terrific N°4 contract in the pipeline, and this time promise we will run onto the ceiling !

[LowObservable]

Dassault also claims that it buys more from Canada today than LockMart does, which is quite credible since the Falcon 2000, 7X and 8X are all P&WC-powered.

Rufus - I didn't know that the Tornado F3 was on offer.

[rjtjrt]

Reinhardt
There is still memory (and caution) in the Australian Defence Department of the French due to their action in related to the ban on continuing to supply DEFA 30mm ammunition to Australia during the Vietnam war.
Plenty of maturity in the RAAF then, but naive trust in the French that is unlikely to be repeated.
Also involved in other bans at the same time were Swiss, Swedish and UK governments (Porter aircraft parts, Carl Gustav, and 1000lb bombs for Canberra aircraft). All of which left a memory in Australia.
US since then seen as a much more reliable supplier (and ally) than Europe, in our context.

[Rufus Shinra]

Rufus - I didn't know that the Tornado F3 was on offer.
You know perfectly well what I'm talking about. :) But, heh, guess sticking a few bombs for photo shoots doesn't make a plane multirole. Good thing the Tornado is still flying, though.

So, heh, talking about the French selling inadequate planes to other air forces is a bit of a laugh. Because then there would be the Austrian Air Force, stuck with Typhoons as expensive as the latest versions but with massively limited capabilities. I was just pointing out to dat581 that the pot should watch out around the kettle.

[HeliHenri]

rjtjrt

Plenty of maturity in the RAAF then, but naive trust in the French that is unlikely to be repeated.
Also involved in other bans at the same time were Swiss, Swedish and UK governments.
All of which left a memory in Australia..

Hawk 127 / PC9 / 330 MRT / Tiger / MRH 90 / AS350 / EC135 ;)

RAAF chose the F18 because it was the most suitable aircraft for their needs, not because of events 20 years old at the time.

P.S : So I suppose that with such a good memory to which you reffer, Australia doesn't do business and has not a link with Vietnam and China (the first one killing your boys and the second one providing the weapons to the first one 50 years ago). :rolleyes:
.

[dat581]

Tiger and MRH90 were mistakes and none of the others have a combat role except maybe the Hawk 127. Can't see Britain holding back anything we wanted short of nuclear weapons these days.

[Reinhardt]

Tigers, NH 90.... beautiful machines which give a lot of satisfaction to many other countries. Of course it's not american - what a disappointment if you have been watching Hollywood movies since your early childhood
- and there is the Airbus 330 tanker...
- and the HMAS Success, a Durance-class tanker (same as French Navy, which has 5 of the type) (also exported to Saudi Arabia) ....
- and the submarines Scorpene, which might come down South before the end of the year (offered by a country with nuclear submarines, both attack and missiles-launchers - to the contrary of Japan and Germany)
The Australian MOD was visiting France two weeks ago :
Dcns Welcomes Australian Defence Minister To Cherbourg Shipyards | DCNS Group (http://en.dcnsgroup.com/news/dcns-welcomes-australian-defence-minister-to-cherbourg-shipyards/)
But with US Marines now based in Darwin (!) I'm not surprised of the bias displayed by a vocal minority on this thread.

[rh200]

But with US Marines now based in Darwin (!) I'm not surprised of the bias displayed by a vocal minority on this thread.

Yaaawwwn:suspect:

and the submarines Scorpene, which might come down South before the end of the year

Unlikely, but possible, not sure where the bookies have the odds but I'm guessing the Japs almost have it in the bag.


There are many reasons for defense procurement, one of them politics, sad but true. Our whole defense revolves around partnership with the Yanks, a fact of life. As such there will always be a modulation in what we get that, in relation to what lubes the relationship.

Continuity of supply is a potential problem that is taken very seriously.

[andrewn]

seems to me that Rafale has done its talking on the pitch, so to speak, and is getting the recognition it deserves.

Not doubting there may be other factors at play, but I doubt any of these countries would knowingly buy an inferior product....

As for end of production timing I suspect that Typhoon is the one now facing the more serious issues?

[rjtjrt]

Henri and Reinhardt
Whatever! No interest in debating this with you two.

[Jimlad1]

Fascinating how this thread is bringing out some brand new posters who have an identical posting style to a well known lunatic drench rafale troll who usually gets banned very quickly indeed.

The French have had to put some interesting deals in place to support this and I suspect called in a lot of favours to make these decisions happen.

Typhoon remains credible in a number of competitions, but rafale will have a boost from recent developments. But medium term good luck to the French affording a new design to replace it...

[dat581]

Well the American aircraft the RAAF have bought recently have worked straight out of the box with no problems. F/A-18F and C-17 have insignificant changes such as the altimeter adjustment reads in millibars instead of inches of mercury and the MH-60R looks to be going the same way. Can't say the same for MRH90, Tiger or A330 Tankers.

[rjtjrt]

The French have produced some wonderful aircraft over time. I have no arguement with the manufacturers, just with past politicians.
Let us hope newer politicians have more integrity, although that is an oxymoron for nearly all the worlds politicians.

[Rufus Shinra]

Fascinating how this thread is bringing out some brand new posters who have an identical posting style to a well known lunatic drench rafale troll who usually gets banned very quickly indeed.
Cute accusations. Pointing out the other planes' flaws is now called trolling? Must explain the mindset of some people around. But, please, I am clearly a sockpuppet, it must explain everything. Of course. :D

The French have had to put some interesting deals in place to support this and I suspect called in a lot of favours to make these decisions happen.
Well, less corruption than in the Saudi situation, that's for sure. At least we don't need our prime minister to tell the guys investigating the accusations to drop them.

Typhoon remains credible in a number of competitions, but rafale will have a boost from recent developments. But medium term good luck to the French affording a new design to replace it...
Typhoon will remain credible only if its upgrades actually go through and it catches up to the Rafale. Depends on the political will of its manufacturers.

[jindabyne]

Rufus,

Not the political will of its manufacturers - rather that of participating Governments, especially the UK.

[Rufus Shinra]

Rufus,

Not the political will of its manufacturers - rather that of participating Governments, especially the UK.
Apologies, that's what I meant by "manufacturers": manufacturer countries. I should have been more clear.

I have nothing against the engineers in charge of the Typhoon: they've been held back by idiotic management and bad political choices (both through political incompetence of the EF partners unwilling to spend the required money to keep the plane really competitive and geostrategical bad luck, which made the primary Typhoon mission moot while giving Rafale a lot more chances to shine).

One of the big problems, IMO, to the Typhoon is that the program did not have a single, well-established leader. Without it, everyone wants to save money while getting the whole package (I'm looking at you, Germany, ordering a lot of planes to get the industrial kickbacks and then cancelling tons of orders). And as for exports, the cacophony of these four countries isn't helping either. A good example is Iraq. When your average tinpot dictator with some cash looks at 2003, he sees that the Frogs (I'm French, so please, mods, don't kick me for that derogatory term) did their utmost to save Saddam's behind, both for practical reasons and because he was a good customer. The EF partners? Divided on the issue, each with different foreign military sales policies that are much more likely to end up with an embargo, and so on.

If the Brits had put their foot down when the French left, and said, "OK, now, Germany, Spain and Italy, I'm the leader here and what I say goes", it might not have been very cordial, but at least, there would be some visibility.

[Lonewolf_50]

Reinhardt:
NH 90 might not be the best example to support your position. Beyond the extended development time, the current frustrations of some NH-90 users (see the Germans) takes the shine off. But they are still in service, so that's a plus.

[Jimlad1]

I am not accusing rufous of direct sockpuppetry. However as always with rafale threads, I do find it a wonderful coincidence how the moment it is discussed, we so often get a range of new posters turn up using a peculiar form of syntax and grammar, determined to bash the typhoon, big up the rafale and generally be fairly unpleasant towards the Brits and others.

While I am not saying rufus himself is the troll in question (likely just poor timing on his part), it is peculiar how so many posters are brand new and only on this thread, and now so many have the identikit sneering tone of the troll known as Thunder/Gilles/Sampiax/Gn/GoGo eat who has a hatred of the UK bordering on psychotic and who is banned from just about every aviation forum going.

Just saying...

[Vilters]

Well, what do they have to buy?

What is on the market today?
------------------------------------------
F-15; F-18; F-16, all American, all from a previous generation.
And getting the tattoo of becoming an American slave buyer does not go well in that area.

F-35 ; Yep, still in testing mode.
And Israel controls who might, perhaps, if possible, eventually, with reduced capability, get it in that erea. Order now to get in line for a ? ? ? delivery date. Best friends go first.

Typhoon? Too expensive, not all around, UK, no firm leadership.
Buy and the participating countries can start "the next battle" of "who gets the profit", and "who gets to build what".
Way, and I say WAY too many subcontractors for steady and guaranteed supply of parts if anything happens in the area.

Who do you negociate with? Thousands of procedures in a dozen of languages, and when all is said and done, => Come the politicians.

Rafale? Also older generation, no customes and construction line close to closing. So we can be sure the frensh put the Rafale in "Promotion".
Buy one and get one for free.
(Plus a VIP visit to the Moulins Rouge".)

What else can one buy?

Russian? OK, you can fly the first week, from the second week on, you can start to cannibalise to get at least some back in the air.

Chinese? That are Chinese airframes, with Russian engines. Can you read "double trouble"?


Sweeds Gryphen. Aj, that tooth hurts. They already have a victim in Brasil.
Too small a production, 50% is US technology, no chain, logistical nightmare, and what has it proven till now??? All we hear is not so good at all.

=> Rafale it will be.

[Lonewolf_50]

F-15; F-18; F-16, all American, all from a previous generation. And getting the tattoo of becoming an American slave buyer does not go well in that area.
What is that all about?
Rafale? Also older generation, no customes and construction line close to closing. So we can be sure the frensh put the Rafale in "Promotion". Buy one and get one for free. (Plus a VIP visit to the Moulins Rouge".)
If it works for selling cars, it can work for selling planes. Maybe it's the best deal at present time.
Is it your opinion that it is currently a 'buyer's market" these days?

[Courtney Mil]

Rafale? Also older generation, no customes and construction line close to closing. So we can be sure the frensh put the Rafale in "Promotion".
Buy one and get one for free.
(Plus a VIP visit to the Moulins Rouge".)

I wouldn't agree with that bit of your analysis, which is mostly spot on. The Rafale production line is alive and kicking and is still ready to ramp-up output for new orders. As things stand it has enough orders to keep it going for a few years yet; I don't think they'll have a problem extending it further to meet additional demand.

When you say it's older generation, it's still a relatively new, current and relevant aircraft. There is some capacity for growth, but as it is it's still the active generation. We've a long way to go until F-35 reaches maturity, no?

Typhoon deserves the same status, but as you say, the consortium thing will always come back to haunt it when it comes to new sales. That's not to say that it should be a worthy contender.

[BEagle]

It's probably only a minor point but Rafale refuels at about 3 times the abysmally slow rate of the TypHoon, as was noted by the RCAF during the Libyan campaign. Thus when flying CAP, more Typhoons than Rafales would be needed as their off-station time would be significantly greater.

Whereas the F-35A cannot refuel from any Canadian tanker in its current form. And if the Canadians were to specify an unique version with a probe, they would have to pour yet more money into the Lockheed black hole of F-35 development costs.....

More significantly, either Rafale or F/A-18E/F offers twin-engine safety, which over the icy wastes of Northern Canada must surely be more of a consideration than 'stealth'?

[rolling20]

Here is the pricing: France Offers 25% Discount to India on 36 Rafale Jet Deal: Economic Times
This apparently is a further discount off the original price. The whole deal is not expected to exceed $8bn, with the objective to pay a little over $200m per aircraft. It also comes with a package of maintenance, spares and pilot/technician training included.
They were offered 20% off the Eurofighter.

[TBM-Legend]

The Charlie model has a probe. I guess plumbing a fleet of RCAF birds shouldn't be too difficult.

[Davef68]

Whatever else you may think of the French and Rafale, there is no doubt they know how to sell aeroplanes. Previous generations of Mirage show that.

[Hempy]

Bang for your buck on Gen 4.5 imo says either F/A-18E or Rafael. F-15SE close third. The difference is in the logistical support..spares etc. I'd trust the Americans over the French in that regard tbh. The Americans know the value of a dollar full stop. The French seem to get selectively ideological occasionally...

[Courtney Mil]

The Charlie model has a probe. I guess plumbing a fleet of RCAF birds shouldn't be too difficult.


I'm not sure that's necessarily the case. Just off the top of my head (maybe through it), it would require the plumbing, controls and indicators, significant fuselage modification, hydraulic actuators, relocation of equipment in that area and all the changes associated with that. The C-model refuelling equipment would not necessarily fit into the A without a degree of redesign.

All the above would necessitate changes to manufacture, retooling and separate assembly areas. Then you've got testing and certification of the installation and re-evaluating the RCS. All that for how many airframes?

Maybe the refuelling system could be redesigned, but it could well be expensive, time-consuming (in a program that's already late and over-budget) and may come with other penalties. I'm not sure LM or the JPO would have much appetite for it at the moment. I can imagine the U.S. response being something like, "You've come all this way, why do you want to start major changes to the program now?"

[BEagle]

Indeed, Courtney. Even using the -B model AAR system in the -A would require extensive design work, plus a number of clearance flights due to the different aerodynamics of the -A and -B......

The cost of which would undoubtedly be dumped on Canada.

Nope. Rafale would be a much better and more cost-effective solution. Neither would it require those outrageously expensive $600K helmets, presumably tailored for each F-35A pilot...:rolleyes:

[PhilipG]

I have never understood a number of things about the F35 project, one of them is why have a stealth plane as an interceptor?

As regards Canada's requirements I would have thought that the C with a longer range, more robust landing gear and the appropriate type of AAR system would be better and indeed most probably cheaper in the long run solution.

[melmothtw]

The C does not have a significantly longer range than the A . It carries more fuel, but is heavier and draggier for it.

According to Jane's, the C has a radius-of-operation of 600 n miles (1,111 km; 690 miles), while that of the A is 590 n miles (1,092 km; 679 miles). If you're interested, the B's comes in at 450 n miles (833 km; 517 miles).

Both the A and C have the same payload also (8,165 kg [18,000 lb]) - it's 6,804 kg (15,000 lb) for the B, and both have the provision for six underwing stores-points.

Assuming they're ever cleared for the full envelope, then the A is cleared to +9g, while the C is cleared to +7g (+7g for the B).

The more robust landing gear etc is nice, but is the extra weight offset by any tangible operational benefit? I'm not sure that it is.

Add in the increased price tag of the C, and the only benefit that I can see Canada deriving from such a buy is the hose-and-probe refuelling system.

[Martin the Martian]

On the subject of probes, how is it that the French seem to be unable to design an IFR probe into their aircraft? With the exception of the SuE and the Jaguar, all of their jets have that ungainly bent pole on the nose.

[Reinhardt]

Yes, Super-Etendard, Jaguar and also Mirage F1 (South Africa and Lybia versions) have the extendable/retractable probe.
A very nice design, which did entailed quite a few nicknames ...
Unfortunately, it does require some space in the nose, with the associated mechanism, to the expense of a radar or range-finders
Moreover, there is always the remote possibility that this thing would not extend, somewhere over the ocean or an african desert - although to my knowledge (I flew all the above-mentioned aircraft) it never happened
Tunnel testing did show the drag penalty to be minimal even non-existent, even in supersonic - M2.2...
And everybody do like it in fact - "first batches" Mirage F1 without it did seem unbalanced for sure
Some F1 (Iraq) had a probe tip slightly longer than the others, if loking closely (jokes, again...)

[LowObservable]

I suspect that you could write BEagle a check for a couple of boom-equipped A330-MRTTs for less than what LockMart would charge you to put a probe on an F-35A.

The fixed vs. retractable probe is interesting because chronologically the French went from fixed to retractable to fixed. The F1 probe is a bit cumbersome, I must say. They presumably worked out the drag and RCS issues.

Philip G - You need the stealth aircraft to do air defense, because you just spent all your money on stealth aircraft and can't afford another one for air defense.

[Hempy]

One assumes that the external stores will give the F-35 a big enough RCS to let the inbounds know you are coming to get them anyway :rolleyes:

[BEagle]

Low Observablewrote: I suspect that you could write BEagle a check for a couple of boom-equipped A330-MRTTs for less than what LockMart would charge you to put a probe on an F-35A.

You can write me as many cheques as you wish, but I have absolutely no connection with the A330MRTT programme. But I Know A Man Who Does and I'm sure that he would certainly be happy to oblige.

Although later models had fixed probes, the early Buccaneer had a retractable AAR probe. Zipping along in his mighty white beast one day, some naval aviator spotted an unusual switch and decided to try it - whereupon with much mechanical complaint a probe suddenly appeared in front of him, before it gave up the unequal struggle with aerodynamic forces.....:\

A later naval aviator was so impressed by the new (fixed) probe on his grey banana jet that he decided to give it a try. Finding himself a tanker he made contact successfully, on came the green light on the pod and 'fuel flows' was called by the tanker crew. But our hero's trusty Looker reported that none of the fuel tanks appeared to be taking fuel, so they gave it up as a bad job and thundered off back whence they came, intending to raise a snag after landing.....

In best naval tradition, after it was parked the wings were folded and the airbrake opened. However, when some unwitting matelot tried to fold the radome, it was rather reluctant to move at first - but then did so only to shower him in several hundred pounds of fuel.....

It seems that contractor A installed the probes, but contractor B did the pipework - and only contractor A had done his part of the mod programme. The moral of the story being that sailors shouldn't just stick things into other things when the mood takes them......:ooh:

[LowObservable]

I think that's quite enough about sailors and concealed probes, unless we want this to degenerate into another B****s St***t thread. :=

[Schiller]

The problem with the retractable probes on the early Mk I was not that they didn't work - they extended and retracted fine - but that they were too short. As you approached the basket it rode up in the slipstream over the nose. The only person who ever achieved contact ('Punchy' Doust?) chased the basket all the way round before making contact inverted, which, for some reason, wasn't considered satisfactory.

When you extended the thing, an elaborate system of doors opened, the probe emerged and the doors closed behind it. In the days of the Great White Detergent anti-flash paint jobs, a Bucc was sent down to somewhere crabby to stand in a line of similarly painted V-thingies for the benefit of a team of senior NATO chaps to look at. The crew extended the probe to show the aircraft had one. After the senior honchos had passed, an RN Captain was left standing, staring at the probe.The looker asked him if he had any questions.

''Yes. I can see the aircraft has a probe. But how on earth does it retract and extend?''

''Well'' explained the looker helpfully, ''it's a bit like the Duchess of Argyle reaching inside someones Y-fronts.''

The Captain looked at him coldly for a moment.

''She's a cousin of mine, as it happens''

The looker was left contemplating the possible ruin of his career.

(I doubt if anyone under the age of 70 will understand)

[LowObservable]

I am under 70 and currently incapacitated with mirth. I think it's the combination of esoteric aircraft lore and technology with the workings of the British class system and an apocalyptic social pratfall.

[sitigeltfel]

Sixtythree and sniggering. ;)

[BBadanov]

ROFL, LMAO, at 66 never heard of her !!!


But, this excerpt is definitely suitable for the Bucc Aircrew Association Newsletter...

[ORAC]

Ooops. Bit more haggling needed over the warranty terms for the main order required then? Government needs to poke Dassault with a sharp stick? :hmm:

India, France Yet To Sign Deal on Rafale (http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/air-space/air-force/2015/05/06/india-france-rafale-air-force-purchase-agreement-modi-le-drian/70902524/)

NEW DELHI — India and France did not sign any type of agreement for the purchase of 36 Rafale fighter aircraft for the Indian Air Force during the Wednesday visit of French Defense Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian here. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, during a visit to France, announced April 10 an offer to buy 36 Rafale fighters on a government-to- government basis and analysts were expecting an agreement to be signed during Le Drian's visit.

An Indian Defence Ministry statement says, "Joint Statement issued during Prime Minister's visit to France, inter-alia, included acquisition of 36 Rafale jets in fly away condition, through an Inter-Governmental Agreement. To follow-up on the subject, Le Drian, the Defense Minister of France and Manohar Parrikar, the Defense Minister of India, met today at New Delhi to decide on the way forward in this regard." On what happens next, the release says, "The two Defense Ministers discussed modalities in order to reach an early conclusion of an Inter-Governmental Agreement on the subject. The two sides decided to set up teams to work out the details in a time bound manner."

The fate of the 2007 request for proposals (RFP), which had a provision to buy 18 Rafales directly and another 108 made in India, is still not known.No MoD official would comment whether there would be Indian-made Rafales or whether the RFP would be canceled.

"The ambiguity over the India-made Rafale persists but the Indian Air Force will have to decide early how to acquire the additional fighters to shore up the dwindling fighter aircraft strength. We were expecting some clarity on the India-made Rafale," says Bhim Singh, retired Indian Air Force Wing commander.

[NITRO104]

The fate of the 2007 request for proposals (RFP), which had a provision to buy 18 Rafales directly and another 108 made in India, is still not known.No MoD official would comment whether there would be Indian-made Rafales or whether the RFP would be canceled.

The funny part would be if India bought 36 'French-priced' Rafales that Dassault actually manufactured in India, only after they cancelled MRCA.

[peter we]

Any idea of the price the Eurofighter, as the joint winner of the MMRCA competition, is been offered at?

[Reinhardt]

"joint winner" .....

The Eurofighter finished second, and the Rafale was penultimate

[Rufus Shinra]

Any idea of the price the Eurofighter, as the joint winner of the MMRCA competition, is been offered at?
The Typhoon was not a "joint winner". It was deemed technologically acceptable, but kicked out for reasons of price.

[peter we]

for reasons of price

A price Dassualt have refused to honour. Subsequent calculations have show that the Rafale was more expensive than the Eurofighter.


The Rafale not did 'win', hence the failure to sign a contract, it won the right to continue negotiations. Both it and the EF were joint winners of the technical competition

[Courtney Mil]

Peter_WE, what subsequent calculations?

I am a great supporter of the Typhoon, eventually, and I used to be the desk officer at the Air Warfare Centre for Eurofighter, but I'm not sure how Rafale could be more expensive than Typhoon.

Some links/articles/proof would be useful to support a claim like that.

[Rufus Shinra]

Peter_WE, what subsequent calculations?

I am a great supporter of the Typhoon, eventually, and I used to be the desk officer at the Air Warfare Centre for Eurofighter, but I'm not sure how Rafale could be more expensive than Typhoon.

Some links/articles/proof would be useful to support a claim like that.
The prices increased because India was overoptimistic with relation to its manufacturing capabilities. IIRC, their government realized at the end that to build an advanced plane, they would need an extremely expensive overhaul of HAL and its contractors.

Which would have happened whether they would have built the Rafale or the more expensive Typhoon.

[ORAC]

Easy come, easy go.....

Minister: India To Buy Only 36 French Rafale Jets (http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/air-space/strike/2015/05/31/minister-india-buy-french-rafale-fighter-jets/28262277/)

NEW DELHI — India will only buy 36 Rafale fighter jets as they are "way too expensive", the defense minister said Sunday, dashing lingering French hopes of a larger deal that has been years in the making. Defense Minister Manohar Parrikar said the previous government's plans to buy 126 of the fighter jets from French firm Dassault were "economically unviable and not required."

"We are not buying the rest. We are only buying the ... 36," Parrikar told the Press Trust of India (PTI) news agency.

During a visit to France in April, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi announced that New Delhi was ordering 36 of the "ready to fly" planes. The deal — estimated to be worth €5 billion ($5.5 billion) — followed tortuous years-long negotiations on buying the jets. But the purchase agreement fell a long way short of previous proposals for India to buy 126. Frustrating negotiations for that deal stalled over costs and assembly guarantees.

Parrikar has since played down expectations of a larger deal, but his comments on Sunday were some of his strongest yet, saying buying more of the jets would blow the defense ministry's procurement budget.

"I also feel like having a BMW and Mercedes. But I don't because I can't afford it. First I can't afford it and second I don't need it," Parrikar told PTI......

[Speedywheels]

"Way too expensive". Begs the question - compared with what?

Are the Indians just frustrated that Dassault/French Government haven't buckled under the 126 aircraft carrot? Probably.

India were originally specifying equipment for their own needs to be incorporated onto Rafale and this work was being carried out by Dassault to provide the capability. I presume all that effort is now surplus to requirements if the deal is now based on an 'off-the-shelf' solution. Interesting to know if this work was being funded by Dassault because I can't believe India were providing any monetary investment to create bespoke capability.

I'm guessing that Dassault think they have got the best deal here - 36 aircraft built to a specification that they already know, all produced in France and they don't have to deal with HAL and any other potential Indian companies in the supply chain.

Mange tout

[Courtney Mil]

SpeedyWheels,

Good points. There is also the possibility that this move by India is an attempt to put more pressure on Dassault to offer further concessions. But, given that things move very slowly in Indian red-tape, we won't know about that for a long time.

[Danny42C]

Courtney Mil,

A look at regle's (RIP) post on "Gaining a RAF Pilots's Brevet in WWII" (Page 35, # 692) may be of interest.

D.

[hunterboy]

Welcome to India! I wouldn't be surprised if the French end up paying the Indians at this rate!

[Courtney Mil]

Thank you for the link, Danny. I see what you mean. And the best thread on the forum, if I may say so.

[peter we]

"Way too expensive". Begs the question - compared with what?

ummm..

Aero India 2015: BAE Systems in talks to weaponise India's Hawks - IHS Jane's 360 (http://www.janes.com/article/49101/aero-india-2015-bae-systems-in-talks-to-weaponise-india-s-hawks)

They already have an establish production line

[Courtney Mil]

I'm not sure you can compare an armed trainer with the likes of Rafale of Typhoon, both of which also have production lines. Maybe I misunderstood you.

[peter we]

They are not comparable but it would appear the IAF are up to .. something. The production line is in India, which fits their Made in India Policy and reliably has been very good compared to the MIG-21 and SU-30

The timing is interesting, maybe its a negotiating tactic

[Courtney Mil]

The timing is interesting, maybe its a negotiating tactic

My earlier point exactly.

There is also the possibility that this move by India is an attempt to put more pressure on Dassault to offer further concessions.

[EAP86]

The Indians still have a Jaguar production line. Perhaps with a bigger wing and an engine with more thrust? ;)

On a more relevant note, the latest events don't surprise me. The Indian's biggest problem isn't the rampant bureaucracy, its the lack of hard currency. Unless Dassault could come up with a way of turning Rupees into hard currency or reducing the need for it, there were always going to be problems. Even their own internal design efforts have stumbled on this issue. Their technological ability might not be top drawer in some areas but its quite a bit better than some european countries we could mention. Inevitably some aspects have to be bought in.

EAP

[Courtney Mil]

But I thought India's growth was still up around 7%, 7th largest in the world. A member of the G20 and part of the BRIC economies - although that seems to have gone horribly wrong. But, anyway, the economy may not be what it was staring to do some years back, bi put it is still huge. A labour force of some half a billion and a GDP of 2.5 trillion dollars.

The issue, of course, is about money. Isn't it for everyone and always? But India wants to be a big force in the world and protect themselves and they will need to buy into some modern fighters to do that. (And a lot of other things, obviously).

The thing that makes me wonder is that they are going ahead with a buy of 36, whilst threatening to cancel (or not sign up to) the rest. What use could just 36 jets be to an entire sub-continent? If they really decided they couldn't afford it, they'd have ducked out of the whole deal.

[Danny42C]

Courtney Mil,

I'm a simple soul, but perhaps one reason may be that they're not "the whole subcontinent". Their "Clear and Present Danger" is always Pakistan, with whom they have fought four wars since Independence.

The 36 might come in handy, with that in mind.

Danny.

[Like This - Do That]

Schiller, thank you. Under 70 and laughing hard. :D

[EAP86]

Economic health is one thing, access to currencies in which Dassault is prepared to be paid is quite another. The rupee has an official exchange rate but that is set by the government, not a market. Dassault would be lucky to trade rupees at 10 to 20% of the official rate which is some discount. India has lots of calls on its supplies of hard currencies for commodities such as oil and other goods their own resources can't supply and the IAF has to take their turn in the queue.

EAP

[Danny42C]

Of course, in the bad old days of the Raj, when they were so cruelly exploited by the imperialist, they had a stable exchange rate (fully convertible) of just Rs14/£.

They can only dream of that now. :rolleyes:

D.

[Courtney Mil]

Danny, of course you are right. It's a big reduction from the 126 they seemed to think they needed, but EAP's answer about currency clearly explains that. Thank you, both.

[HeliHenri]

How did they pay their recent purchases of C17 / P8 / C130 / PC7 / 145 AEWCS etc ...

[EAP86]

HH damn good question however I've no idea about the details in any of those cases. I would expect the reality to be a series of tailored deals combining a mix of bank credit, government export credit guarantees, offset agreements, overseas 'aid', a little creative accounting plus a bit of real cash. Even FMS deals can be eased if the US wants to extend their influence or just prop up home industry. The Indians (and others) are past masters at these sorts of arrangements and I wouldn't expect a full exposition of the terms in the near future.

Its said that BAES took 15 years to get the Indians to sign up to Hawk and for all that time technical support on various matters was used to keep the Indians interested. Profit on the sale of the platform was probably more a number on a page rather than anything substantial. The Indians will have got their money's worth.

Before anyone mentions it, while it may be commonly suspected, bribes hardly get a look in with these deals as the complexity prevents individuals having any sort of real decision making power.

EAP

[Speedywheels]

As the Rafale deal in India continues to drag its feet, with open comments from the French that it may never happen, it appears Finmeccanica have managed to get over the line with the sale of 28 Eurofighter aircraft to Kuwait.

http://wap.business-standard.com/article/economy-policy/india-may-not-buy-rafale-build-f16s-supply-to-pak-taunts-french-official-116031700447_1.html
The Aviationist » Finmeccanica signs contract to supply 28 Eurofighter Typhoons to Kuwait (http://theaviationist.com/2016/04/05/28-eurofighter-typhoons-for-kuwait/)

[Speedywheels]

http://http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/At-long-last-India-close-to-deal-with-France-to-buy-36-Rafale-fighter-jets-for-Rs-60000-crore/articleshow/51846326.cms

Finally, it looks like the Indians are going to put pen to paper :D