Key.Aero Network
Register Free

Page 7 of 22 FirstFirst ... 3456789101117 ... LastLast
Results 181 to 210 of 636

Thread: MMRCA - has Rafale been illegally subsidised?

  1. #181
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Asia
    Posts
    4,889
    Optronique Secteur Frontal (OSF) for the Rafale aircraft (France), Airborne electro optic (EO) systems

    Type
    Airborne Electro Optic (EO) Infra-Red Search and Track System (IRSTS).

    Description
    Thales Optronics and SAGEM SA are co-operating for the development and manufacture of the TV and Infra-Red Search and Track System (IRSTS) for the Dassault Aviation Rafale ACT and ACM.The OSF (Optronique Secteur Frontal) is designed to aid covert missions, firing under jamming, visual identification and damage assessment in air-to-air, air-to-ground and air-to-sea operations and to provide navigation/piloting assistance. Key features include long-range Infra-Red (IR) passive detection, very low false alarm rates, high-definition CCD imagery, an eye-safe laser range-finder and very large Field of Regard (FoR), which may be supplemented by employing the seeker heads of Mica missiles fitted to the wingtip stations. The utilisation of separate optical assemblies for the IR and TV sensors facilitates multiple simultaneous search/identification/telemetry operation.The system is fully integrated with RBE2 radar and weapons system, with target hand-off from radar to OSF facilitating passive approach and engagement. Future improvements to the OSF includes enhancing the video system to a day/night camera.
    http://articles.janes.com/articles/J...ft-France.html

    But it is apparently being chopped

    There have, however, been increasingly critical comments about Rafale from members of the National Assembly's Finance and Defence Commissions, and there have been reports of disagreements between Dassault and DGA about cost increases and obsolescence. According to Defence Analysis (p.17, Vol 8.No.12 December 2005) Dassault have called the RBE2 radar 'fatally flawed' alleging that its range was "inadequate" and averring that the Rafale therefore relied on AWACS support to overcome this. The DGA also described Rafale's OSF ("Optronique Secteur Frontal") as "obsolescent" and production has been cut back to just 48 units, rather than the planned number, which was to have been sufficient to equip all F1 and F2 versions.
    http://www.electronicaviation.com/ai...ult_Rafale/819
    Last edited by obligatory; 18th February 2012 at 22:52.
    the missile will require about five times the G capability of the target to complete a successful intercept.
    -Robert L Shaw

  2. #182
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    3,416
    Oh come on you have found nothing better than an outdated article from 2006? There have been many more news since then which have been discussed here ad nauseum. OSF isn't going anywhere.

    Nic
    "allah akbar": NATO's new warcry.

  3. #183
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    2,344
    The €55m/£37m Typhoon UPC was the cost actually paid, including VAT, and averaged single- and two-seat prices.

    The Rafale UPCs you chaps quote were estimates, for the cheapest variant only, and they increased over time.

    In 2007:
    €52.8 Millions Euros for a Rafale C (44.1 without VAT)
    €56.6M for a Rafale B (47.3 without VAT)
    €60.8 M for the M (50.8 without VAT)

    In 2008:
    Unit cost (without R&D) between €64 and €70M.

    In 2010:
    €101 m.

  4. #184
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    4,893
    I found the same article afterwards, it looks like Rafale has been learning lessons from all of the competitions its been in. I dont understand the claim of supercruise for the Rafale, is it able to supercruise?

    What are the IAF getting? any details available?
    Wrinkles wrinkles my kingdom fallen to a wrinkle

  5. #185
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,237
    Quote Originally Posted by Jackonicko View Post
    The €55m/£37m Typhoon UPC was the cost actually paid, including VAT, and averaged single- and two-seat prices.

    The Rafale UPCs you chaps quote were estimates, for the cheapest variant only, and they increased over time.

    In 2007:
    €52.8 Millions Euros for a Rafale C (44.1 without VAT)
    €56.6M for a Rafale B (47.3 without VAT)
    €60.8 M for the M (50.8 without VAT)

    In 2008:
    Unit cost (without R&D) between €64 and €70M.

    In 2010:
    €101 m.
    Well I think we should listen to those who actually know what they are talking about.

    Italy buys its first three F-35s. With a shocking announcement: “a JSF will cost less than a Eurofighter Typhoon”

    I would like to point out that the Italian version isn't the more expansive one... The UK's variant is.

    If you want to compare the 2010 figure for the Rafale then you need to compare with the 2018 figure for the Typhoon. BTW, that's 32 years after the "multi-role since the beginning" and 11 years after the Eurofighter consortium actually signed on paper the multi-role attribute of the Typhoon (requiring a redesign of the airframe).

    If you really want to find illegal subsidy then look at the UK's "aid" to India that was supposed to "guarantee" the Typhoon success...
    “Nothing is impossible, the word itself says 'I'm possible'!”

  6. #186
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Near Paris (France)
    Posts
    1,456
    @Jackonicko

    Double standard, again...

    We have provided you an UPC according to the same formula as yours. What's wrong ?
    What is the little thing you don't understand about inflation, rising raw materials' costs, rising production cost due to lower production rate... 2012 is not 2004.

    And still, your interpretation of 101m is... intellectual laziness ? You carefully select what matters to you when you read my work... this is not laziness... it is dishonest.
    Last edited by TMor; 18th February 2012 at 23:29.
    Rafale news blog by Kovy :
    http://rafalenews.blogspot.com/

    The Rafale international forum :
    http://rafale.freeforums.org/

  7. #187
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,237
    Quote Originally Posted by matt View Post
    I found the same article afterwards, it looks like Rafale has been learning lessons from all of the competitions its been in. I dont understand the claim of supercruise for the Rafale, is it able to supercruise?

    What are the IAF getting? any details available?
    Rafale is said to be able to supercruise with 6 missiles and 1 supersonic ext tank at around Mach 1.3.

    The Typhoon has been in as much competitions as the Rafale. You only haven't heard as much because it's been disqualify almost from the beginning (i.e Brazil), while Rafale has made it to more finales, so noise has been made.

    The truth is that it's extremely hard for European aircraft industry to compete with the US and Russia. The US has economy of scale and a lot of political goodies and Russia usually sell cheap. So you will only see an opportunity with countries not willing to align themselves on the US, or with the money to buy high techs but the US isn't willing to sell.
    “Nothing is impossible, the word itself says 'I'm possible'!”

  8. #188
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    3,476
    Quote Originally Posted by TMor View Post
    Double standard, again...

    We have provided you an UPC according to the same formula as yours. What's wrong ?
    What is the little thing you don't understand about inflation, rising raw materials' costs, rising production cost due to lower production rate... 2012 is not 2004.

    And still, your interpretation of 101m is... intellectual laziness ? You carefully select what matters to you when you read my work... this is not laziness... it is dishonest.
    give it a rest, apparently there are those who are still upset over Jeanne d'Arc's period

  9. #189
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    4,893
    Quote Originally Posted by Mildave View Post
    Rafale is said to be able to supercruise with 6 missiles and 1 supersonic ext tank at around Mach 1.3.

    The Typhoon has been in as much competitions as the Rafale. You only haven't heard as much because it's been disqualify almost from the beginning (i.e Brazil), while Rafale has made it to more finales, so noise has been made.

    The truth is that it's extremely hard for European aircraft industry to compete with the US and Russia. The US has economy of scale and a lot of political goodies and Russia usually sell cheap. So you will only see an opportunity with countries not willing to align themselves on the US, or with the money to buy high techs but the US isn't willing to sell.
    but the report says that the Rafale was not able to show super cruise capabilities in other contests, i guess it can do it if people can claim it but it would be interesting to know which version of Rafale is on offer with the IAF.

    I have heard about the typhoon etc in the contests unfortunately the Typhoon is suffering from the short sigtedness of the EU. they worried to much about their own budgets and kept on cutting things out and down without thinking about export potential. If they had invested in the typhoon to get the full set of multirole capabilities they could have sold more typhoons and cut costs of purchasing typhoons themselves.. They shot themselves in the foot.
    Wrinkles wrinkles my kingdom fallen to a wrinkle

  10. #190
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,237
    I agree they shot themselves in the foot in more way than one.

    We don't know exactly what will be offered to India. We could say the AESA + Spectra for sure. Beyond that, everything is still to be negotiated, and I'm sure many will lobby to offer their products.

    However if India is willing to keep cost down then they will probably go for what is already integrated. That would be Mica IR + EM, AASM, Exocet, Scalp?, Meteor (currently in process)... I wouldn't be surprised if India was to field a strangely looking indigenous ASMP-A...
    “Nothing is impossible, the word itself says 'I'm possible'!”

  11. #191
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,237
    The 18 aircraft to be supplied in flyaway condition comprise 12 single- and six twin-seaters. They should be delivered within 48 months of the contract taking effect, with the complete weapons package. Of note, the MMRCA weapons and stores specification includes anti-radiation and anti-ship missiles, a reconnaissance pod and a buddy refueling pod.
    Link
    “Nothing is impossible, the word itself says 'I'm possible'!”

  12. #192
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    361
    The more I am reading this thread, the more I am getting confused. Anyway to paraphrase my understanding:-

    The procurement cost of Rafale & Typhoon are around US$ 200 million each if we include:-
    1. R&D
    2. Cost of Capital (or inflation)
    3. Depreciation (as it should include production line?)
    4. Profit
    5. VAT (?)
    6. Simulators
    7. Ground support, repair, maintenance “Capital equipment” (?)
    8. Associated equipment like pylons, drop tanks (??)
    9. Exclude spare parts

    Rafale & Typhoon will be around US$ 100 million if we exclude R&D and Cost of Capital but what about the rest 3 to 8 heads?

    Will the marginal cost of fly away unit of Rafale and Typhoon at present will be around US$ 80 if we exclude all 1 to 8 heads?

    Therefore the bare bone cost to India cannot be less than ~US$ 80 million + say cost of AESA?
    Last edited by Curious; 19th February 2012 at 05:19.

  13. #193
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    1,241
    Is the OSF really that defective? The MMRCA terms had included an IRST I believe, and I don't think the Rafale would have made the shortlist if it didn't have a working one.

    Even if the OSF doesn't work, wouldn't it be possible to integrate a third-party IRST with the Rafale? An OLS-UEM or maybe even PIRATE?

  14. #194
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    404
    Quote Originally Posted by Witcha View Post
    Is the OSF really that defective? The MMRCA terms had included an IRST I believe, and I don't think the Rafale would have made the shortlist if it didn't have a working one.

    Even if the OSF doesn't work, wouldn't it be possible to integrate a third-party IRST with the Rafale? An OLS-UEM or maybe even PIRATE?
    The OSF isnt defective as such, IIRC the OSF is not fitted to later Rafales and is becoming harder to keep operational because parts are obsolete. there was or is a replacement plan but this appears to be held up by the dreaded funding disease.
    DACT Proves nothing.

  15. #195
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,237
    Quote Originally Posted by Witcha View Post
    Is the OSF really that defective? The MMRCA terms had included an IRST I believe, and I don't think the Rafale would have made the shortlist if it didn't have a working one.

    Even if the OSF doesn't work, wouldn't it be possible to integrate a third-party IRST with the Rafale? An OLS-UEM or maybe even PIRATE?
    The FSO is a modular system that can be added to the Rafale at any time. Since the technologies involved are about to be upgraded, and since the FSO already produced can be swapped between aircraft, the French MoD decided it wasn't cost effective to produce the actual FSO for every single aircraft produced. Better to wait for the FSO-NG and save money.

    So only those aircraft that need it are equipped with it, while the rest are fitted with a dead weight to compensate IIRC. It's used a little bit like a pod.
    “Nothing is impossible, the word itself says 'I'm possible'!”

  16. #196
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    France
    Posts
    366
    Not exactly.

    As we know, the OSF is composed of two chanels, one TV/laser for long range identification/telemetry and one IR for search and track.
    The TV chanel is very satisfactory and the IR chanel isn't for obsolescence and reliability issues.

    When they passed the F3 order, they couldn't find an agreement with SAGEM on the price for a new IR way which solve those problems so the DGA passed the orded without the OSF.
    But they realialized how usefull the TV chanel was and the AdA can't do without it anymore.
    For the IR they can use Mica IR seaker even if it's not as good as a true IRST, but for the TV chanel, they need the OSF

    So the DGA passed an order for a new OSF during the Bourget 2009, this temporary OSF is called OSF IT, it has no IR chanel but the TV chanel wavelength goes down to the near IR. The order of OSF IT was for the new Rafale F3+ AND the retrofit of the previously ordered F3.

    A new OSF NG is on the way with a new IR chanel using new generation IR components that are just going out of laborataries, India may participate since Thales has a JV in India on those stuffs.
    Last edited by c-seven; 19th February 2012 at 07:41.

  17. #197
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    2,344
    Quote Originally Posted by TMor View Post
    @Jackonicko

    Double standard, again...

    We have provided you an UPC according to the same formula as yours. What's wrong ?
    What is the little thing you don't understand about inflation, rising raw materials' costs, rising production cost due to lower production rate... 2012 is not 2004.

    And still, your interpretation of 101m is... intellectual laziness ? You carefully select what matters to you when you read my work... this is not laziness... it is dishonest.

    TMor,

    Rather than getting hysterical about 'double standards' and 'intellectual dishonesty', take a deep breath and read what I actually wrote.

    In particular, read what I said in post 159.

    The whole point is that while Rafale fans have claimed for a decade that Rafale is significantly, dramatically cheaper than Typhoon, it isn't. The difference is small.

    And in fact Rafale seems to be marginally more expensive than Typhoon (10% on a unit programme basis, rather more on a unit production basis).

    Figures are difficult to compare, because the two nations assess and analyse costs differently (the UK is a relatively new convert to Resource Account Budgeting) and include different costs in what purport to be the same sort of price baseline.

    What we need is the production contract value for a batch of Rafales at around the same time as Tranche 2, but I suspect that such a figure does not exist, as the French roll in more than mere production into their contracts.

    The problem is that there is no direct comparison to the EF €55 m figure, which happens to be a very good and reliable unit production cost, actually paid.

    What comes closest for Rafale, I guess, would be an average figure based on the figures from 2007.

    €52.8 Millions Euros for a Rafale C (44.1 without VAT)
    €56.6M for a Rafale B (47.3 without VAT)
    €60.8 M for the M (50.8 without VAT)

    Such an average would still be imperfect and unreliable, and a slight under-estimate.

    The problem with those figures is that they had increased by €10-12 m (depending on variant) just one year later, while the contract cost paid for Tranche 2 was fixed, and therefore did not and could not increase.

    Nor do we have separate cost figures for a single-seat Typhoon and a two-seater.
    Last edited by Jackonicko; 19th February 2012 at 09:42.

  18. #198
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    2,344
    http://news.in.msn.com/exclusives/it...mentid=5857223

    Rafale deal flies into rough weather

    Two Defence Ministry officials have raised heckles in the path of India's biggest ever defence deal.

    The mother of India's defence deals, the Rs.62,000-crore contract for the medium multi-role combat aircraft (MMRCA) Rafale won by the French company Dassault, may become a bag of woes for the government.

    Rafale bagged the deal because it was declared as the lowest bidder after the evaluation of the commercial bids of all the participating companies.

    But highly placed sources said two senior officials of the defence ministry have questioned the methods adopted by the contract negotiation committee which concluded that Rafale was the lowest bidder.

    The two officials - additional financial advisor and a joint secretary in the ministry Prem Kumar Kataria, and finance manager (air) R.K. Arora - are members of the negotiation committee that comprises senior ministry officials and Indian Air Force (IAF) officers.

    The two officials noted that certain assumptions had been made about Rafale's bid to declare it as the lowest bidder, but no one had validated it. The officials initially refused to sign the minutes of the committee. They later signed after making their reservations known. They put written notes on the file on January 24, according to officials privy to the negotiations.

    Sources say Defence Minister A.K. Antony wants to steer clear of any controversy and has instructed that the committee should settle the issue internally.

    The ministry officials are particularly cagey in the wake of corruption scandals. "We don't want the ghost of Bofors to haunt us, so we want to make sure that all procedures are strictly followed," an official said on condition of anonymity.

    The process to acquire MMRCA was set in motion in 2001, when the IAF sent out its request for 126 jets. The defence ministry announced a formal request for proposal in 2007.

    First, the submitted proposals were technically evaluated to check for compliance with IAF's operational requirements. Then extensive field trials were conducted. Finally, the shortlisted vendors' commercial proposals were examined and compared.

    According to sources, while evaluating the commercial bids, a new system was followed that not only took into account the unit prices but also calculated the 'life cycle costs' - which takes into account the cost of maintenance and spares for the period, estimated at 40 years, the aircraft would remain operational. The sources said the whole formula was based on certain assumptions, which have now been questioned.

    The contract negotiation committee's report goes to the defence minister, who forwards it to the finance minister. Since the finance ministry will evaluate the MoD's recommendation, the objections made on the file could create a problem. The government, already facing a lot of heat over several corruption scandals, will not like to be questioned over the biggest defence purchase.

    However, these are early days and the signing of the contract is still a long way, as the defence minister said on Friday.

    Antony said: "It will have to pass through scrutiny in eight stages. After the negotiation committee, it will come to the ministry where there will be at least four stages of scrutiny by defence finance. Then it will go to independent monitors appointed by the CVC and then to the National Security Council secretariat and the finance ministry."

    He also ruled out a review of the deal, as urged by the British PM.
    I wonder what these assumptions were?

    I wonder whether the cost of local manufacture, using Reliance rather than HAL as local Prime, was perhaps deemed too optimistic by the two officials?

    Worth noting, however, that the rest of the committee signed without a murmur, and clearly accepted that Rafale was "the lowest bidder after the evaluation of the commercial bids of all the participating companies."

  19. #199
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    637
    Quote Originally Posted by Jackonicko View Post
    The problem with those figures is that they had increased by €10-12 m (depending on variant) just one year later, while the contract cost paid for Tranche 2 was fixed, and therefore did not and could not increase.
    The contract cost paid for Rafale F1, F2 and F3 was fixed too. But we're beyond that point, now, while the Typhoon still dreams about future capabilities that may never materialize. One thing is for sure, these capabilities won't come for free.
    You're playing unfair by comparing the costs of the latest Rafale batches to those of an austere and obsolescent Typhoon. That's ridiculous, you know it, so stop kidding.

  20. #200
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    4,893
    Quote Originally Posted by Jackonicko View Post
    http://news.in.msn.com/exclusives/it...mentid=5857223



    I wonder what these assumptions were?

    I wonder whether the cost of local manufacture, using Reliance rather than HAL as local Prime, was perhaps deemed too optimistic by the two officials?

    Worth noting, however, that the rest of the committee signed without a murmur, and clearly accepted that Rafale was "the lowest bidder after the evaluation of the commercial bids of all the participating companies."
    how were RIL chosen as primes? do they even have an notable engineering division?
    Wrinkles wrinkles my kingdom fallen to a wrinkle

  21. #201
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    2,344
    Quote Originally Posted by OPIT View Post
    You're playing unfair by comparing the costs of the latest Rafale batches to those of an austere and obsolescent Typhoon. That's ridiculous, you know it, so stop kidding.
    Unfair? Dry your eyes, Princess.

    What is ridiculous is the French characterisation of Typhoon as austere and obsolescent, and of Rafale as being some kind of fully formed and fully capable all round masterpiece.

    As of today, both aircraft enjoy advantages and disadvantages.

    Yes, Rafale's air-to-ground weapons integrations are several years ahead (and Rafale will always have wider multi-role capabilities than Typhoon), but since your priority was to replace Jaguar, that's hardly surprising. But Typhoon is catching up.

    Yes Rafale is closer to getting an operational AESA, but Typhoon is catching up and will have a vastly superior AESA when it does.

    But Typhoon's performance is superior and always will be, and Typhoon can supercruise with ease. Typhoon has a better MMI giving a lower pilot workload, and its advantage in this area will stretch further ahead when P1E enters service.

    Typhoon has a world-leading helmet, and a great IRST. Rafale has neither (save the handful of original and admittedly obsolete OSF sets).

    Stupid caricatures such as yours do not add to the debate.

  22. #202
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    46
    Quote Originally Posted by Jackonicko View Post
    http://news.in.msn.com/exclusives/it...mentid=5857223



    I wonder what these assumptions were?

    I wonder whether the cost of local manufacture, using Reliance rather than HAL as local Prime, was perhaps deemed too optimistic by the two officials?

    Worth noting, however, that the rest of the committee signed without a murmur, and clearly accepted that Rafale was "the lowest bidder after the evaluation of the commercial bids of all the participating companies."
    These are the kind of reports that happen on a really SLOW news day. I checked the channel which covered it and they had virtually nothing to add on that and the rest of the Indian media, which jump on to anything remotely sensational like a pack of piranhas on an injured swimmer, didn't bother.

    Unless Dassault/Indian government or whoever else has managed to bribe the whole Indian media, this is nothing but much ado over a routine bureaucratic procedure or 'file noting'.Which happens in any country (more so in India) with a remotely similar civilian-military decision making apparatus. Do you think that an alternate fighter proposal (Typhoon/Gripen/...) of similar proportions would have sailed smoothly without dissent or queries raised?

  23. #203
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Near Paris (France)
    Posts
    1,456
    Quote Originally Posted by Jackonicko View Post
    The whole point is that while Rafale fans have claimed for a decade that Rafale is significantly, dramatically cheaper than Typhoon, it isn't. The difference is small.
    Yes...

    And in fact Rafale seems to be marginally more expensive than Typhoon (10% on a unit programme basis, rather more on a unit production basis).
    No.

    Figures are difficult to compare, because the two nations assess and analyse costs differently (the UK is a relatively new convert to Resource Account Budgeting) and include different costs in what purport to be the same sort of price baseline.
    True.

    What we need is the production contract value for a batch of Rafales at around the same time as Tranche 2, but I suspect that such a figure does not exist, as the French roll in more than mere production into their contracts.
    True.
    But the 59 contract was signed in 2004, like the Tranche 2 for the Eurofighter.
    €3.1Bn (with VAT) for 59 Rafale, and I once found an hint that Thales was also paid for future (postF3) developments in this contract.
    VAT included, this means less than €53m each.
    (This is very close to the 1999 figure, where 48 Rafale F2 were ordered at €54M each)

    http://www.eurofighter.com/eurofight...e/history.html
    €13Bn for 236 Typhoon. Which VAT ? For all 4 partners ?
    €55M each.
    This is why I wrote "no", a bit earlier.

    The problem is that there is no direct comparison to the EF €55 m figure, which happens to be a very good and reliable unit production cost, actually paid.
    ...

    What comes closest for Rafale, I guess, would be an average figure based on the figures from 2007.
    Why 2007 when you have the numbers for 2004 ?

    In addition... You know that the whole production for 294 Rafale was to cost €20.8Bn in 2004 estimates. This is €5Bn more than what F3 costed at the same time, but the "quote production" (still don't know is the translation is OK) does include many other things (simulators, spares, maintenance means etc).
    2004 :
    contract UC : about 53M per Rafale
    UPC : €70.7M per Rafale

    When we are given a 101M UPC, in 2010, this is the quote production (forecast) divided by 286, and it has nothing to do with formerly quoted UPC. If the same amount of money is for simulators, spares etc, that's to say nearly 25%, then the comparable figure would be something like €75M (in 2010).


    Look at 1999 figures in my website :
    In 1999, the quote production included :
    • industrialization
    • Rafale C B M
    • Simulators
    • Spares
    • maintain means

    At the time, the production of the Rafale alone was 74% of the "quote production" (I mean the Rafale B C M + industrialization)

    In 2004, the contract value (53M per Rafale) for 294 would have been €15,5Bn, that's 75% of the total €20.8Bn (quote production again, check).

    In 2010, we are give the 101M for each Rafale. That the quote production divided by 286. If the Rafale alone are still 75% of the total, this makes a cost for each Rafale of €76M (with VAT).


    €52.8 Millions Euros for a Rafale C (44.1 without VAT)
    €56.6M for a Rafale B (47.3 without VAT)
    €60.8 M for the M (50.8 without VAT)

    Such an average would still be imperfect and unreliable, and a slight under-estimate.
    Why "underestimate" ? These are old figures to compare to old Eurofighter figures too.

    The problem with those figures is that they had increased by €10-12 m (depending on variant) just one year later, while the contract cost paid for Tranche 2 was fixed, and therefore did not and could not increase.
    Except that past the F3 contract signed in 2004, France entered the next phase for the Rafale (post F3, with AESA etc). Why comparing a 2008 price for Rafale to a 2004 price for Typhoon ?

    Why not comparing to the Tranche 3 contract ?

    €9Bn for 112 is 80M each.
    http://www.eurofighter.com/eurofight...e/history.html
    Rafale news blog by Kovy :
    http://rafalenews.blogspot.com/

    The Rafale international forum :
    http://rafale.freeforums.org/

  24. #204
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    796
    The typhoon is nowhere close to the rafale in terms of development. You are downplaying the difference JL.

    First it is still unclear if the typhoon will get all its necessary upgrades and weapon integrations. There is nothing firmly contracted toward a full capability yet. Only a vague horizon and uncertain will. The catch up argument doesn't work.

    With the loss of the Indian deal I bet the "uncertainty" will not diminish to say the least. The only hope would be Saudi Arabia but it seems clear that they won't go alone and are waiting an export customer.

    For the rafale everything is here : first rafale f3+ will be delivered this summer. You cannot even bring the lack of HMD argument as it is now contracted in the indian deal.

    As for the price you are completely deluded. Even if you say "marginally more expensive" you get far more capabilities with the rafale and you don't have to buy the F35 to balance typhoon lack of AtG capabilities.

    The rafale was cheaper in switzerland than the typhoon despite offering an AESA. That speak volume about the cost advantage the rafale offers.

  25. #205
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    42
    Quote Originally Posted by Jackonicko View Post
    But Typhoon is catching up.
    Is it?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jackonicko View Post
    Yes Rafale is closer to getting an operational AESA, but Typhoon is catching up
    Is it?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jon Lake in The Telegraph, 04 Feb 2012 View Post
    “It would have been true to say that it has better potential than the Rafale, but thanks to the cheeseparing of our Treasury, and the other Typhoon partner nations’ treasuries, that potential has not been realised yet.” ... “For the Indians it’s all about credibility,” said Mr Lake. “If they believe what the Typhoon consortium told them, then by 2018 Typhoon will do everything that Rafale does now. But they clearly don’t believe it, and I don’t blame them, given the programme’s history of delays and cost overruns.
    Oh dooh.
    Last edited by Breguet; 19th February 2012 at 12:05.

  26. #206
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    France
    Posts
    366
    "Catching up"? LOL.

    Yeah, the first Eurofighter with a Storm Shadow will be ready to take of - finally - by 2018 (yes: according to NAO, they'll be "catch up" with A2G by 2018)

    In the mean time:

    Program:
    If its RBE2-AESA enters in industrial phase, Thales intends to maintain its lead in providing some technological bricks considered crucial to broaden the scope of active antennas. This new roadmap is built around two key technologies: gallium nitride (GaN), a broadband semiconductor called to prevail for future emission-reception modules of radars with active antenna, and silicon-germanium (SiGe), a low power semiconductor, whose use in the control floors of the beam of active antennas will significantly reduce their size.
    If I remember correctly a previous article, we can expect anuncement about GaN for Rafale this year.

    Have you found an agreement finally with the 'I' and the 'S' of "PIGS" to fund the rotary Captor first operational AESA?

    Catching up...

  27. #207
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    796
    Well he is working hard to collect all rumors and try to make them look more credible with a biased estimate of costs.

    He has made a specialty of spreading rumors with him as a single origin.

    Like the dead end RBE2 PESA which was recently praised in swiss evaluation unlike typhoon radar, like the fact the singaporean evaluation where he is the only source to tell that the typhoon emerge as the favorite aircraft when it did not even made the shortlist and that several high placed sources stated the rafale was the winner technically, like the dutch evaluation when we have an article explaining that the process was closely monitored by the RNLAF and he assert it is a paperwork exercise...Or like when the poor peter collins was deemed incompetent or grandclaudon etc etc...Business as usual for a lobbyist.

  28. #208
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    42
    Oh and regarding MMI and pilot workload of the Rafale and Typhoon, I suggest you read the leaked report of the swiss evaluation. It should bust some myths regarding this topic.
    Last edited by Breguet; 19th February 2012 at 12:22.

  29. #209
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Cataclysm
    Posts
    4,022
    Quote Originally Posted by Jackonicko View Post
    Yes Rafale is closer to getting an operational AESA, but Typhoon is catching up and will have a vastly superior AESA when it does.
    Sure, buddy. And this claim is based on what?
    We've been already fed enough by "vastly superior" Captor and "vastly superior" MMI tales, thank you..
    Last edited by MSphere; 19th February 2012 at 12:31.

  30. #210
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    4,893
    To be honest the IAF has evaluated the aircraft and they found the typhoon and Rafale capable for their needs..

    These issues going on in the EU over subsidies etc will only go to annoy the end customer...

    the only thing that could wreck all of this is now the 2 people who have said they do not like the assumptions used in the pricing.. nothing else matters, congress are as corrupt as ever if not more than they used to be but on this issue they will try and balance out the other corruption scandals and Defense ministor will prolong the purchasing procedure to make him self clean of any scandals. And damn the needs of the country...

    lol could imagine this going in the way of the artillary farse!
    Wrinkles wrinkles my kingdom fallen to a wrinkle

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

- Part of the    Network -

KEY AERO AVIATION NEWS

MAGAZINES

AVIATION FORUM

SHOP

 

WEBSITES