Indian Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

Brumby

Major
Basically Dassault promised everything and the moon to India, at the cost of $65mil per plane.

They now negotiated for $120 per plane, India asked for warranty of every planed manufactured at HAL as a bargaining counter and Dassault would not agree.

If what you assert is true then India should just take Dassault to court. If the terms are being negotiated then it would suggest there was no enforceable agreement to begin with and the terms are open to negotiation. Either India screwed up the process or the process is being played out as planned. Do you have privy to the terms of the bid and Dassault's proposal that they over promised and is now reneging?
 

paintgun

Senior Member
No, I simply don't. Navyreco is our french resident analyst and he might be able to share a thing or two.

RFP process and tenders are much more complicated than that. There are armies of marketing and sales specialists devoted to negotiating these tenders, plus politicians doing their rounds. What is agreed on the tender can vary greatly on the finalisation. For example accounting to multi year inflations and the drop in Rupee value, the hike from $65 to $120 does not seem that inconceivable.
 

aksha

Captain
I think their end game was to acquire the technology besides the plane. I am still at a loss concerning HAL and Indian politics. I think Dassault was happy to go with another local partner. Given HAL's less than stellar track record with the Tejas, it would be financially suicidal to assume delivery risk without some clear cut escape clauses.


you see, the other local partner i.e Reliance has ZERO experience.
there are other private companies with some experience like Taneja, TASL ,L&T etc.
why did they not go for them???
if they are unhappy with HAL's less than stellar track record, i wonder why did they went for a company with zero track record??????
 

Brumby

Major
No, I simply don't. Navyreco is our french resident analyst and he might be able to share a thing or two.

RFP process and tenders are much more complicated than that. There are armies of marketing and sales specialists devoted to negotiating these tenders, plus politicians doing their rounds. What is agreed on the tender can vary greatly on the finalisation. For example accounting to multi year inflations and the drop in Rupee value, the hike from $65 to $120 does not seem that inconceivable.

You summed it well. The devil most often is in the details. Given that it is at least a $10 billion plus program, there probably had been an army of lawyers that had combed through the legal details. If we are to make sense with the current issues, we have to baseline it against the original terms and understand whether there are variations arising since in order that an objective view can be formed. For instance, I understand the original terms were denominated in Euro and the rate locked in at that time. Since the Indian Rupee has depreciated close to 40 % from peak, the cost of the program to India would correspondingly increase by at least that percentage. Similarly, maybe Dassault had agreed to TOT and local production but the details were subject to negotiation as the case now.
 

Brumby

Major
you see, the other local partner i.e Reliance has ZERO experience.
there are other private companies with some experience like Taneja, TASL ,L&T etc.
why did they not go for them???
if they are unhappy with HAL's less than stellar track record, i wonder why did they went for a company with zero track record??????

Hypothetically even if Reliance has zero experience, if Dassault has full responsibility in managing the plant then Dassault is the one with the experience and the sole responsibility to make it happen. I don't believe that is the case with HAL - I could have misunderstood the terms as reported.
 

aksha

Captain
Hypothetically even if Reliance has zero experience, if Dassault has full responsibility in managing the plant then Dassault is the one with the experience and the sole responsibility to make it happen. I don't believe that is the case with HAL - I could have misunderstood the terms as reported.
you mean this
............Perceiving India as the perennial sucker, Dassault chose Reliance Aerospace Technologies Pvt Ltd (RATPL) as partner in the hope that the fabled Ambani reach and influence in Delhi would help it get around the HAL production obligation. Problems were not anticipated as evidenced by RATPL approaching the Andhra Pradesh government in 2013 for land around Hyderabad to set up a factory. But because RATPL has zero experience in producing anything remotely related to aviation, Dassault saw it as an opportunity to “double dip”, meaning arrange it so India would pay it twice for the same aircraft! This was to be managed thus: Dassault would set up a production line under RATPL aegis importing every last screw and production jig and collect the money for the 108 Rafales it puts together here at the cost-plus-profit price HAL would charge IAF. In other words, Dassault would export the Rafale assembly kits and wherewithal virtually to itself and pocket the proceeds while paying a premium to RATPL..................
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

THAT'S CHEATING TOO,on the RFP

and if you remember the scorpene deal,
you will remember that France supplied some critical components late(i had posted it long before in this thread), so much for responsibility.
 

aksha

Captain
coming soon ,possibly this week
nlca np2
with arrestor hook

7w3KMnj.jpg
 

aksha

Captain
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
has fired another warning shot across the bows of French fighter manufacturer, Dassault, which has been negotiating for three years with the ministry of defence (MoD) to sell the Indian Air Force (IAF) 126 Rafale fighters.

A fortnight after declaring that the
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
could make do with additional Sukhoi-30MKI fighters - which
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
builds in Nashik - in case "complications" in the negotiations were not resolved, Parrikar has gone further in outlining how the IAF could function were it decided not to procure the Rafale.

Speaking to a television channel, Headlines Today, on Monday, Parrikar said the Su-30MKI offered a viable alternative, especially given that Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL) was upgrading and overhauling the fighter and equipping it with state-of-the-art electronic warfare systems.

Said Parrikar: "Sukhoi-30 choice is always there. What I mean to say is: upgrade the Sukhoi-30, make it more capable." Dismissing concerns about the IAF's falling fighter numbers, Parrikar said the IAF could put more fighters into the sky by improving the serviceability rate of its current fleet of 35 squadrons.

Business Standard has earlier reported (October 23, 2014 "Govt takes note of Su-30MKI's poor 'serviceability'") that barely half of the IAF's premier Russian fighters are available for combat missions at any given time. Since then, due to HAL's efforts, that has risen to 58 per cent, still below the global norm of 80-85 per cent. Parrikar made it clear that the IAF needed to look at the issue of fighter costs. He said, "It is not always… go and purchase it. A cost effective purchase is also important."

Declining to reveal the actual cost of buying the Rafale, Parrikar said, "Whether it is Rs 40,000 crore, or Rs 50,000 crore or Rs 1 lakh-crore, we are speaking about 50 per cent of the capital budget of the defence services."

Parrikar also voiced his concern at Dassault's reported reluctance to meet the terms of the IAF tender, which required the French company to guarantee the 108 fighters that HAL would build in India, after the first 18 were supplied fully-built in France. The defence minister said, "I have told (Dassault) to send a person to work out the (differences). You have to be clear that, irrespective of anything, the (tender's) terms have to be met. They cannot be diluted."

Parrikar laid down a deadline of March 2015 for his ministry to revamp five important policies - permitting foreign companies to have agents in India; the issue of blacklisting companies for wrongdoing; defining "Make in India" policy; bringing micro, small and medium enterprises (MSMEs) into defence production; and a clear offsets policy.

Interestingly, Parrikar said he was considering creating a list of defence products that would no longer be imported. He said, "Maybe some items can be brought under that, where we have already developed a certain import substitution (ability). Some items may be brought under that by 2015."
[/URL]
 

Brumby

Major
you mean this


THAT'S CHEATING TOO,on the RFP

You made reference to a blogger that Dassault in using Reliance was trying to rip the IAF by double dipping. The blogger made a bunch of assertions on how that was going to happen but I really need you to explain how the double dipping actually works by using Reliance instead of HAL. I was trained professionally as a CPA and in my life time I have structured a lot of business transactions around the world and I have no clue what that blogger was talking about. Maybe you do and can explain it to me before I comment further.

and if you remember the scorpene deal,
you will remember that France supplied some critical components late(i had posted it long before in this thread), so much for responsibility.

I have no idea about the Scorpene deal and I would rather talked about each case on its own merits to keep it simple.
 
Top