Posted on 02/16/2012 12:21:08 AM PST by coldphoenix
PARIS --- While many observers cite technology transfer, prices and performance as being major factors in India’s selection of the Rafale as its next-generation fighter, reality is very different even if these factors obviously did play a significant role.
In the same way that it is true that Rafale lost several competitions through no fault of its own, it must be recognized that its victory in India was also won, to a great extent, through no fault of its own. The real reason for its victory is political, and the long memory of Indian politicians was a major contributing factor.
This is not to say, however, that Rafale’s own impressive qualities had nothing to do with its selection. The Indian Air Force, which was extensively briefed by the French air force in the autumn, was particularly impressed by its operational performance during the Libyan bombing campaign and in Afghanistan. Rafale also has a naval variant which could be of future interest to India, given its plans to buy and build aircraft carriers, while the recent decision to upgrade India’s Mirage 2000H fighters will simplify the air force’s logistics chain, as these will share with Rafale many weapons and other equipment.
The Indian Air Force also is a satisfied user of long standing of French fighters, going back to the Dassault Ouragan in the 1950s. It was also particularly appreciative of the performance of its Mirages during the 1999 Kargil campaign against Pakistan, and of the support it then obtained from France. During that campaign, India obtained French clearance – and possibly more - to urgently adapt Israeli and Russian-supplied laser-guided bombs to the Mirages, which were thus able to successfully engage high-altitude targets that Indian MiG-23s and MiG-27s had been unable to reach.
Rafale was preferred because of lower costs, and the Indian air force's familiarity with French warplanes such as the Mirage, Bloomberg reported Feb. 1 quoting an Indian source who asked not be named. "Unit-wise, the French plane is much cheaper than the Eurofighter. Moreover, the Indian air force, which is well equipped with French fighters, is favouring the French," the source said.
To Indian officials, France’s steadfastness as a military ally contrasted strongly with that of the United States, which stopped F-16 deliveries to Pakistan (but kept the money) when it found it expedient to do so, and slowed or vetoed delivery of components for Light Combat Aircraft that India was developing. And, of course, the 1998 arms embargo, decreed by the US after India’s nuclear test in May of that year, left a very bad taste in Indian mouths. France, on the contrary, was the only Western nation not to impose sanctions on that occasion.
That, Indian sources say, was New Delhi’s real reason for eliminating Boeing and Lockheed Martin from the fighter competition; India has resolved, these sources say, to buy only second-line equipment from the U.S., such as transport (C-17, C-130J) or maritime patrol aircraft (P-8I). Vital weapons such as missiles and fighters, when they cannot be locally produced, will remain the preserve of France and Russia.
Political considerations were also a significant factor playing against Rafale’s final competitor, the Eurofighter Typhoon. As this aircraft is produced by a consortium of four nations, each with different foreign policies and different attitudes and tolerances to arms exports, Indian officials were a bit nervous about their ultimate reliability as a single supplier.
Germany is a long-standing Indian aviation partner, and a respected role model for Indian politicians, many of whom were educated there. German companies – essentially the former Messerschmitt-Boelkow-Blohm, now part of EADS - helped Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd. develop both the LCA and the Advanced Light Helicopter, now called Dhruv. These links were the reason the Eurofighter bid was led by Germany’s Cassidian, and not BAE Systems, the former colonial power. But Germany had dithered over technology transfer for LCA, soft-pedaled on ALH tech transfer when German pacifists raised their eyebrows, and coughed when India almost went to war with Pakistan over Kargil and Kashmir, so in the final analysis it could not be considered a reliable supplier of major weapons.
Italy has never sold a major weapon to India, and so could bring neither influence nor reputation to support Eurofighter, while the third partner, Spain, is totally absent from the Indian military landscape.
This left BAE Systems as the best-known Eurofighter partner in India, and so by default as its ultimate public face. BAE in 2003 sold £1.5 billion’s worth of Hawk jet trainers to India, with a follow-on, £500 million order in 2010. However, its previous major sale to India was the Jaguar light attack aircraft in the 1970s. In fact, this aircraft was jointly developed by Britain and France on a 50/50 basis, and while it was license-produced by HAL it was never really successful as a fighter. Furthermore, France could claim as much benefit from its Indian career as BAE.
Taken together, the Eurofighter partner nations posed an even thornier problem: in case of war, German law prohibits deliveries of weapons and spares, Italian law and public opinions would demand an embargo, while Spanish legislation is murky. What would happen, Indian politicians must have wondered, if after buying the Eurofighter they went to war? Would spares and weapons be forthcoming, or would they be embargoed? The political risk was obviously too big to take.
Weapons also played a significant role in persuading India to opt for Rafale: not only is its weapons range mostly French-made, and thus not subject to a third-party embargo, but so are all of its sensors. Eurofighter, whose air-to-air missiles include the US-made AIM-120 Amraam and the German-led IRIS-T, and whose primary air-to-ground weapon is the US-made Paveway, was obviously at a competitive disadvantage in this respect.
Furthermore, the Rafale is nuclear-capable and will replace the Mirage 2000N in French service as the carrier of the newly-upgraded ASMP/A nuclear stand-off missile; it is also capable of firing the AM-39 Exocet missile, giving it an anti-ship capability that its competitors do not have. India is also interested in fitting its BrahMos supersonic missile to a wide range of its combat aircraft, and Rafale could apparently carry it.
Given that India had sworn to buy the cheapest compliant competitor, it would have been unable to justify picking the Rafale had this not been offered at the lower price. While official figures have not been released, and indeed may never be, initial reports from New Delhi claim that Rafale was offered at a unit price of $4-$5 million less than Eurofighter, which is a surprisingly large advantage given the French aircraft’s reputation of being high-priced.
The French offer also featured substantially lower costs of ownership, according to the same reports, thanks to lower fuel consumption and simpler maintenance requirements.
If true, these figures imply the French offer undercut Eurofighter by over $600 million, which is a large enough difference for one French insider to wonder whether Dassault Aviation will ever make any money on the contract.
But, even if it doesn’t, the Indian contract gives Rafale instant legitimacy, not only because of the thoroughness and transparency of the bidding process, but also because India is the only country to have fought four and a half major wars since 1948, and so knows something about air combat.
For Dassault, the Rafale program will now remain active, with a stabilized production line, for decades to come, and the company will have that much more time to find additional customers. Keeping its production line and supply chain humming at an economically-viable rate are sufficiently valuable achievements to push immediate profits into the sidelines. Supporting 126 – and possibly 206, if India buys an optional second batch – combat aircraft, and providing spares, fixes and upgrades over the next 40 years, will generate gigantic profits, and this more than justified lowering Dassault’s notoriously high profit margins.
In fact, as one industry official noted, "this is France's answer to 'Al Yamamah', but with twice as many aircraft," drawing a parallel with the UK's sale of Tornado fighters and related services to Saudi Arabia, which was instrumental in keeping BAE Systems prosperous throughout the 1980s and 1990s.
And, as French Defense Minister Gérard Longuet told reporters during an impromptu press conference in Parliament, France may soon find “that good news travels in formation,” implying that further, long-deferred contracts might soon be announced.
Astute article that gives good reasons on why the Rafale won. Simple, to the point, and with good points.
Hmm... low fuel... that's like saying you want your best swimmer to be restricted on calorie intake and outburst ability.
US fighters were fine, imo. I do not understand Indian leftist politicians. They complain about how they were colonized, but they always use that to bash America, the one which had to also free itself from British colonization. Yet India having lost to Russians in the past and been colonized by the French and the British keeps coming back to them like a puppy dog... communists are really clever in how they orientate nationalism of various nations against AMerica.
I don’t blame the Indians for not trusting us. The U.S. sends Pakistan $2 billion per year, and we know that Pakistan supports terrorists who are fighting against India. Even if 0.1% (one-tenth of one percent) of that aid we send to Pakistan makes it into the hands of the terrorists, that’s still $2 million. That’s plenty of scratch to wage a terrorist campaign indefinitely.
I totally understand not trusting us in any situation.
If this was all about American bashing, how come India has started buying billions worth of US weaponry since 2005? While the US still ships off military aid to the Pakis.
The US aircraft, while more mature and affordable, lost because they were nearing the end of their development curves and had lower kinematic performance. Unlike the newer European designs, which were optmised to take on threats like the SU-27, which is flown by the PLAAF.
http://www.carnegieendowment.org/files/dogfight.pdf
http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/the-rafales-long-flight-to-india/464320/
Some of that ‘aid’ finances the purchases of weapons like the AMRAAM and Harpoon anti-ship missiles. Which have no relevance in anti-terror operations.
http://www.carnegieendowment.org/files/Force_June_2011-Ashley_J._Tellis.pdf
A commentary by the same author on the technical reasons why US planes were eliminated.
I think I'll call a miss on
However, its previous major sale to India was the Jaguar light attack aircraft in the 1970s. In fact, this aircraft was jointly developed by Britain and France on a 50/50 basis, and while it was license-produced by HAL it was never really successful as a fighterIn service in India since 1980, In production until 2008. Being reengined to serve until the MCA becomes available in the mid 2020s. Someone in Indian defence must like them
That was the last, and least, of 10 other reasons given why the decision made was made. Also, they never said American planes were not adequate (and the F/A-18 was the most mature plane in the competition) ...just that the two finalists (the Rafale and the Typhoon) were better.
That is something that has been said in other competitions, most recently the Switzerland competition in 2011 where the Rafale won the technical trials easily, and the Swiss selected the Gripen due to cost. The benchmark for the Rafale, Typhoon and Gripen in the competition was the F/A-18E, which the Rafale and Typhoon easily beat. I have a chart from the competition in one of my posts from last week but one. I just don't see how the Indian selection is America bashing ...especially considering the points given, and the fact that India has spent billions on other key equipment. Just not first line of battle equipment for very good reasons given in the article. For instance, taking the example of the Kargil escalation, do you really believe the US would have given India permission to make adjustments to equipment on the fly in the way France did? Or give almost full transfer of technology on advanced avionics technology and make them a full partner like the Eurofighter consortium was doing? Or would the US lease a Virginia class submarine, or even an older LA class submarine, to India the way Russia did? What about the comfort of knowing that there will not be restrictions of using equipment, and in the even of a conflagration Delhi doesnt have to get DC's approval to waft left or shunt right?
Then it shouldn't be a surprise that American equipment will not win 100% of the time. Furthermore, even with those considerations, India has spent billions on such equipment as C-130s and Apache helicopters and Poseidon anti-submarine aircraft. Just don't expect India to select the F-35 over the PakFa or the F-16 over the Rafale.
Yes, and you can also add that the Jaguar was promoted only by the British against the French Mirage F-1. There are twice as many Jaguars in Indian service as there are Mirage-2000s.
Not to forget numerous other British aircraft which were sold to India prior to that-the Vampire, Canberra, Hunter, Gnat, Sea Hawk and Harrier.
However, it misses the point entirely that both the Eurofighter and the Rafale were deemed "qualified" by the military, and it became a simple price and technology transfer shootout.
Had the Eurofighter been lower priced, would we see a similar article stating how long and trusted the Indo-British military aircraft ties were?
Vital weapons such as missiles and fighters, when they cannot be locally produced, will remain the preserve of France and Russia.
What about vital components such as the engine for the Tejas? Again, a manufactured "reason" why the F-16IN and F/A-18E/F were eliminated.
Do you really think the LCA/Tejas is gonna be a frontline fighter..unlike the MMRCA..
Who knows exactly what goes on behind closed doors. we commoners can only speculate...
No, not a front line fighter, but a front line high volume light attack replacement for their MiG-21s, and perhaps a carrier based multi-role aircraft. Not exactly the "second tier" cargo aircraft the article suggests.
“Political considerations were also a significant factor playing against Rafale’s final competitor, the Eurofighter Typhoon. As this aircraft is produced by a consortium of four nations, each with different foreign policies and different attitudes and tolerances to arms exports, Indian officials were a bit nervous about their ultimate reliability as a single supplier.”
“Yet India having lost to Russians in the past and been colonized by the French”
Huh?
I am wondering with this MMRCA deal if India could rope in Dassault for the joint development of the 5th generation AMCA extending on the SNECMA-Kaveri engine jv. France does not have a 5th generation fighter program yet. Both countries would be at the starting point and unlike PakFa, a French-Indian AMCA jv might provide valuable design and development experience for DRDO and HAL.
I am wondering with this MMRCA deal if India could rope in Dassault for the joint development of the 5th generation AMCA extending on the SNECMA-Kaveri engine jv. France does not have a 5th generation fighter program yet. Both countries would be at the starting point and unlike PakFa, a French-Indian AMCA jv might provide valuable design and development experience for DRDO and HAL.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.