Dassault Rafale, tender | News & Discussions

[sancho]

$90 million is the fly away cost which according to you mean the parts cost and the assemble cost around $90 million?.. if you think so .. you are wrong... a fly away cost will include development cost also

No they won't, that is the cost to produce the fighter including radar, engines and all avionics for French forces. France already paid the development costs of the fighter an the techs beforehand, adding them to the flyway cost again would mean they have to pay the same costs twice!

Also:

The total program cost for the state is 39.6 billion euros (financial conditions as at 1 January 2008) which brings the unit cost per aircraft (excluding development) from 64 to 70 million depending versions

Google Translate


Mirage upgrade is a different story, but you should keep in mind that techs developed and produced in Europe, or in Euro are obviously more expensive than Russian counterparts.
I explained it often enough in the dedicated threads, that the there is once no cheaper alternative to the upgrade and secondly the costs speculated in the media not reliable, because they vary too much. Also, we pay more and get more in return as well, because we know that the French/European techs and arms offers more quality and reliability compared to Russians. IAF knows very well why they insist for nearly a decade now to get either more Mirage 2000s.

 

[rockstarIN]

^^ Why can't we just add ELTA 2032 + Pyton-5+derby instead of going to french. those technologies are as good as french systems.

I think French will allow the same if we give MMRCA to them.

 

[sancho]

^^ Why can't we just add ELTA 2032 + Pyton-5+derby instead of going to french. those technologies are as good as french systems.

I think French will allow the same if we give MMRCA to them.

Nobody said they wouldn't but we have to split the upgrade into a French part (overhaul of the airframe...) and an Israeli (radar and avionics), which would increase the costs again and would delay things. For an upgrade of just 50 fighters it's simply not worth it.

 

[kingdurgaking]

No they won't, that is the cost to produce the fighter including radar, engines and all avionics for French forces. France already paid the development costs of the fighter an the techs beforehand, adding them to the flyway cost again would mean they have to pay the same costs twice!

Also:

Google Translate


Mirage upgrade is a different story, but you should keep in mind that techs developed and produced in Europe, or in Euro are obviously more expensive than Russian counterparts.
I explained it often enough in the dedicated threads, that the there is once no cheaper alternative to the upgrade and secondly the costs speculated in the media not reliable, because they vary too much. Also, we pay more and get more in return as well, because we know that the French/European techs and arms offers more quality and reliability compared to Russians. IAF knows very well why they insist for nearly a decade now to get either more Mirage 2000s.

So dassault wont sell it to 64 - 70 million unless French government is ready to eat the loss... I dont think any country would do it .. it will be just wasting the tax payers money.. which a government will be not able to justify under the name of security... an Export is generaly done to increase the prospect.. if 60-70 million is the cost then the selling price w.r.t MMRCA will be definitely more adding to this there is offset clause of 50% i bet no way they are going to sell there aircraft for 60-70 million it will be definitely over 90 or even 100 million...

 

[sancho]

So dassault wont sell it to 64 - 70 million unless French government is ready to eat the loss... I dont think any country would do it .. it will be just wasting the tax payers money.. which a government will be not able to justify under the name of security... an Export is generaly done to increase the prospect.. if 60-70 million is the cost then the selling price w.r.t MMRCA will be definitely more adding to this there is offset clause of 50% i bet no way they are going to sell there aircraft for 60-70 million it will be definitely over 90 or even 100 million...

As I said, reports from Brazil suggested that their last offer was without development costs and the prospect there is for up to 100 fighters, while our minimum requirement is higher than that. Wining such a big deal, would bring way more money in return for France and their companies, because it's a deal that goes on for 30 to 40 years.

Btw:

Europe asks Korea to join Eurofighter program

A multination consortium in Europe has invited Korea to join its high-end jet production project in an apparent attempt to win what would be Korea’s biggest arms-procurement deal...

Europe asks Korea to join Eurofighter program


So after India, Japan and Turkey, they now begging S. Korea to join, just shows how desperate they are to find a customer that not only takes over their orders, but also funds the upgrades. Not to mention that any other nation that joins, would be one more that we have to negotiate with!

 

[kingdurgaking]

As I said, reports from Brazil suggested that their last offer was without development costs and the prospect there is for up to 100 fighters, while our minimum requirement is higher than that. Wining such a big deal, would bring way more money in return for France and their companies, because it's a deal that goes on for 30 to 40 years.

Sancho... That is wrong to say if the product runs for 30-40 years the manufacture will get the money in return (this is not a bank interest scheme)... If you buy a product and you go in AMC... you will have resource and the money will also need in things like manufacturing , transportation etc etc (the customer will not be stupid enough to pay more for the spare parts he will choose the alternate ways that is why customer spends lot of money initially to train the ground staff for maintenance).. For 30-40 years the product will give employment opportunity to the vendor but not the returns.. with avionics the value get absolute in a 5-10 years.. so the manufacture will not be stupid enough or the country will not be stupid enough to have a loss.. because the money they get in profit by selling there fighter plane to other countries will be invested back in developing or evolving the technologies further.. if you say France is taking all the risk by eating the development cost... India is not worried yes India benifits if France goes in loss.. but do you think France will really go in loss .. how will the government will answer to the Investment of the tax payers money? France if they get into this vicious circle they will have recession soon and secondly economy or trading doesn't work this way

secondly Reports from Brazil is from Dassualt?.. Other reports we cant take it as baseline.. We have to see the clause what is fly away price w.r.t to Dassault.. Terms varies with vendors.. For sure.. Development cost will be added ... If not we get the best deal.. No other country will give us this opportunity.. any way Euro 65 million is too much a fly away cost....

 

[rockstarIN]

New glide missile to arm Eurofighter Typhoon

ÜRNBERG, GERMANY (BNS): Germany’s Diehl Defence and Israel’s Rafael Advanced Defense Systems are designing a new glide missile that will be fitted on Eurofighter Typhoon fighter jets.

The new PILUM air-to-surface missile with short to medium range has been unveiled for the first time at the Paris Air Show last month.

The new weapon is a derivative of the Diehl-designed HOSBO precision-guided bomb that has been specifically designed for Eurofighter Typhoon fighters.

The PILUM missile will use the HOSBO airframe, guidance and control section as well as the aircraft interface of the glide weapon in combination with the unique “scene-matching technology” of Rafael’s SPICE airborne system, Diehl said.

The missile will use GPS/INS guidance system and would be fitted with dual-band seeker that will help in tracking down moving enemy targets.

The PILUM missile will be used against ships, enemy radar positions as well as air defence systems.

“This solution meets operational requirements such as close-in air support, aerial sealing off, air-based anti-ship engagement as well as suppressing and eliminating the adversary’s air defence,” the German defence firm said.

Developed by the European consortium led by Germany, UK, Italy and Spain, the Eurofighter Typhoon multi-role combat planes are presently operational in six countries.

 

[houshanghai]

http://player.youku.com/player.php/sid/XODgwMDA2OA==/v.swf

Typhoons videos

 

[sancho]

Sancho... That is wrong to say if the product runs for 30-40 years the manufacture will get the money in return (this is not a bank interest scheme)...

Why? The initial cost of MMRCA is estimated at around $12 billion, but's that's just the start! The total costs of the procurement is expected to cross the $35 billions over the planed life cycle, because of the additional spare, weapons, upgrade sales that are necessary. So if Dassault don't included the development costs into such big sales like for India, UAE, or Brazil to fix the deal, the outcome over the lifecycle is way higher, than loosing this opportunity and just taking smaller sales like Kuwait, or Qatar, where they can divert the development costs again.
That's even very normal in such deals, the higher the numbers you order, the higher the reductions of cost. But as I said, even if parts of the development costs would be included, the Rafale would still be cheaper per unit, than if India has to fund all these upgrades for EF alone and if they would offer a partnership, the we would get the same flyaway cost anyway.

secondly Reports from Brazil is from Dassualt?...

No, Brazilian media reports about the competition and the outcome of their trials.

any way Euro 65 million is too much a fly away cost....

I guess IAF/MoD don't think so, otherwise they wouldn't have shortlisted the 2 fighters that are the most expensive one, not to mention that the EF is even more expensive. Cost is always realative, because it is important to see what you get in return!
European aircrafts are more costly then Russian, or US counterparts, because they offer more quality and reliability than the Russians, or less restrictions and more industrial benefits than the US. So by paying more, we for their arms and techs, we also get more in return and that's something that we learn from most of the competitions:

MMRCA: Rafale/EF shortlisted over Russian and US fighters
LUH: EC Fennec won the competition over Russian and US helicopters before and is the favourite now again
Tanker: A330 MRTT won the competition over Russian aircrafts
Trainer: HAWK and Pilatus as it seems, over Russian, or US
VIP helicopter: EH 101 won over US helicopter

 

[kingdurgaking]

Why? The initial cost of MMRCA is estimated at around $12 billion, but's that's just the start! The total costs of the procurement is expected to cross the $35 billions over the planed life cycle, because of the additional spare, weapons, upgrade sales that are necessary. So if Dassault don't included the development costs into such big sales like for India, UAE, or Brazil to fix the deal, the outcome over the lifecycle is way higher, than loosing this opportunity and just taking smaller sales like Kuwait, or Qatar, where they can divert the development costs again.
That's even very normal in such deals, the higher the numbers you order, the higher the reductions of cost. But as I said, even if parts of the development costs would be included, the Rafale would still be cheaper per unit, than if India has to fund all these upgrades for EF alone and if they would offer a partnership, the we would get the same flyaway cost anyway.

Man... I will tell you business doesnt work that way.. You are giving a new business model ( a loss model)... If you telling about lifecycle cost which the government is considering the deciding factor.. Dassault will not be in a posistion to increase the lifecycle cost to cover the development cost(where EFT will become a clear winner) and give India a fly away cost and this will be a loss only to dassault on long term..let me explain you how the business is.... consider the 100 dollar they are investing today will double in 3 year(interest kept at high rate to double in 3 years) if they selling it today(with profit invested back so simple interest gets applied).. If the business is deciding to get the 100 dollar back over 3 years the inflation will eat 18 dollars back(for inflatation rate kept at 6) and secondly the profit they get every year will be very less which means some one(Dassault or french government) has to borrow to do the investment.. where dassault will tend to loose another 20-30 dollars over the interest(interest kept at high rate equalizing the profit interest)... the net will be nothing but a loss for dassault... this when you do it in circle over years.. Dassault will have to declare bankruptcy one day... That is why every vendor declare upfront payment and delivery payment..

Which is why i asked you who is going to bare the loss?.. French government (no way) thats why they are exporting there product.. If french government eats loss there is no need for them to export just like F-22 which US did... which means French government is not ready to eat loss.. Dassault also cant bear loss if they have to continue the business.. so as i said.. Development cost will be added to the product.. either you are wrong to quote 60 million euros doesnt contain development cost or the price is more which the MoD knows...

Secondly Quwait and Quatar are not fools to pay more if the same is given to Brazil.. they will surely look for some other product...

No, Brazilian media reports about the competition and the outcome of their trials.

Media reports cant be trusted dear.. it is not true always.. just like our Media which is still predicting and predicting

 

[sancho]

@ kingdurgaking

You are thinking about it way too difficult and take to account that there is a steady interest in the product, but that exactly is not the case. Dassault has no exports so far, the EF looks even worse, because of the high cost increases, or the budget cuts of the partners. If they don't get an order soon, the production will end in 2015. Now do you really think, they would rather loose such a big competition, only for some extra millions? UKL is selling 3 year old EFs to low costs and is trying to get rid of the T3 orders as well, which means the EF consortium can not get back any development costs from Oman, or Rumania, that might buy these. Does it meant they won't sell it now? The UK is desperate to save some money on the one side (EF), to spend it on the other side (F35), just like the EF consortium is desperate to win any further deals, to secure at least the production line for some more years. So even when they take a calculated loss at the development costs, they will benefit from any further deal!


Can you explain this once more?:

Dassault will not be in a posistion to increase the lifecycle cost to cover the development cost(where EFT will become a clear winner) and give India a fly away cost and this will be a loss only to dassault on long term

Why should Dassault increase the lifecycle costs?

 

[luckyyy]

Development cost will be added to the product.. either you are wrong to quote 60 million euros doesnt contain development cost or the price is more which the MoD knows...

rightly said ,

Development cost is surly added to the cost , the total fly away cost of a aircraft is :

the development cost / total extimated number of aircrafts to be produce + production cost of each aircraft...

but the production cost could be altered as 50% of the product will be from coming indian companies ..

with 50% domestic components the end cost of both could be very same..

also the lifycycle cost includes the cost of weapons too ,these 126 fighters will be needing a huge numbers of missiles , bombs and additional weaponery....
not only the aircraft but the ToT on weaponery could also be a deciding fector as we have seen in resent perchase of spike missiles ..

 

[kingdurgaking]

@ kingdurgaking
You are thinking about it way too difficult and take to account that there is a steady interest in the product, but that exactly is not the case. Dassault has no exports so far, the EF looks even worse, because of the high cost increases, or the budget cuts of the partners. If they don't get an order soon, the production will end in 2015. Now do you really think, they would rather loose such a big competition, only for some extra millions? UKL is selling 3 year old EFs to low costs and is trying to get rid of the T3 orders as well, which means the EF consortium can not get back any development costs from Oman, or Rumania, that might buy these. Does it meant they won't sell it now? The UK is desperate to save some money on the one side (EF), to spend it on the other side (F35), just like the EF consortium is desperate to win any further deals, to secure at least the production line for some more years. So even when they take a calculated loss at the development costs, they will benefit from any further deal!

Can you explain this once more?:

Why should Dassault increase the lifecycle costs?

First of all UK is selling there 3 year old to others not EADS... which means UK has already paid to EADS... and the report is saying it is a win-win situation because the orders they have placed will be diverted to Oman(which means new planes will go to RAF and older planes go to Oman).. so as to avoid the penalty charges failing to order the aircraft.. and it makes sense for them to sell at lower price because it is a used one and not a brand new piece.. Either way there seems to be a profit for them.. If you look at the number crunching game that they would have submitted to there MoD you will understand it.. So no way EADS has incurred loss nor UK because they have escaped the penalty which seems more than what they have sold to Oman...

Secondly Man you are not understanding.. Just for the production line to run for one more decade(which is not going to happen incase of MMRCA).. will they be ready to loose billions? no way.. Dassault is not in a position to loose millions in Mirage2K upgrade.. thats why they have clear indication saying.. either you give this money or buy Rafale... The cost clearly shows the development cost is added in the MLU which has creep-ed the upgrade to exorbitant level .. which means development cost will be added to MMRCA but will be less because of the CAP orders inconsideration .. so eighter Euro 65 million includes development cost or the cost of the plane will be more.. secondly you have to understand that MMRCA has a strict DPP ... they have to invest back 50% back into India.. If you are telling they will sell there Plane only at fly away cost.. they have to still setup the industry base and transfer the technology to India.. which will cost them more... they will not have any penny saved .. secondly there assembly will only manufacture 18 aircraft and incremently the full scale production will start in India ..in 3-4 years down the lane.. Most of the raw-material manufacturing will happen in India only... except some critical technology ... so where are they saving it?..

 

[sancho]

First of all UK is selling there 3 year old to others not EADS... which means UK has already paid to EADS... and the report is saying it is a win-win situation because the orders they have placed will be diverted to Oman(which means new planes will go to RAF and older planes go to Oman).. so as to avoid the penalty charges failing to order the aircraft...
...So no way EADS has incurred loss nor UK because they have escaped the penalty which seems more than what they have sold to Oman...

RAF is selling their fighters, but so far is not has not ordered new once to replace them and so far it's also not clear if Oman will take the old once, or some new once of the initial T3B order of the RAF. Either way, that deal will bring the UK, no development costs in return, because they will be sold for the costs that the RAF would paid, or would pay, most likely even less!
The point is, there will be no new orders, where development costs could be added and even hardly 3 year old EFs will be sold for low costs, because RAF can't afford to upgrade, or maintain them. UK will loose a lot of money for sure and they can just reduce it, by diverting the T3B orders to other customers.
Btw, EADS is just a part of the consortium, not the EF manufacturer.

Dassault is not in a position to loose millions in Mirage2K upgrade.. thats why they have clear indication saying.. either you give this money or buy Rafale...

They don't have to, they know IAF loves the Mirage and wants to upgrade it and at the same time they are offering it's successor, which has a lot of fans in the Indian forces as well. There is simply no real need for them to give us a low cost upgrade. That has nothing to do with development costs, but with the fact that they prefer to sell us new fighters where they can keep benefiting for the next 30 to 40 years, instead of a simple upgrade for older Mirage for just 10 years.
That's also a reason why they didn't kept the Mirage productionline open and offered the Rafale later, because they new their chances in India are quit good. Not to mention that if we take Rafale instead of the Mirage upgrade, MMRCA is decided as well, because IAF would not add another fighter, that's why Dassault is offering 40 Rafales since 2008.
It's simply a business trick, to sell us the latest fighter and make more profit, but has nothing to do with development costs.

secondly you have to understand that MMRCA has a strict DPP ... they have to invest back 50% back into India.. If you are telling they will sell there Plane only at fly away cost.. they have to still setup the industry base and transfer the technology to India.. which will cost them more... they will not have any penny saved...

I highly doubt that we will see 50% offsets, that just the benchmark MoD placed to negotiate with the vendors, but be it Dassault, the EF consortium, or Boeing officials, they all said that this is not feasable. On the other side the French actually don't have to build up that much completelly new, because they already have several JV running with Indian counterparts in that regard. Samtel alone could provide the display, HMS and as it seems IRST of Rafale, not to forget that the Kaveri - Snecma, or Shakti engine deal for LUH are fields where offsets will be placed for sure, to GTRE and HAL. I also hope for Thales as a co-development partner for Tejas AESA, in case ELTA is not available, which then would be diverted to LRDE again.

I never said that they are selling Rafale only at flyaway cost, I said they might do it for the same flyaway cost they have and don't development costs on it. The systemcost, which includes training, spares and even some weapons would be way higher of course.

secondly there assembly will only manufacture 18 aircraft and incremently the full scale production will start in India ..in 3-4 years down the lane.. Most of the raw-material manufacturing will happen in India only... except some critical technology ... so where are they saving it?..

The 18 fighters will be fully produced in France, but even after that they will produce a lot of parts that will be assembled in India only. Look at MKI for example, the licence production started in 2004 I think, but the first fully produced MKI made by HAL came out only in 2010 only. So don't expect that the MMRCAs will be fully produced directly when the licence production starts. It will take years till HAL, or other Indian suppliers will have absorbed the ToT and production routines, to provide us with all the parts.

 

[Abingdonboy]

Any idea where the N-MMRCA is at? Or are IN waiting for results of IAF MMRCA or induction of Vikramditya so IN can their own needs? ie STOBAR or CATBAR as if it is STOBAR then N-EFT, N-Gripen an Mig-29k (possibly F-35B) are contenders if CATBAR then SH, RAFELE-M and F-35C are contenders.