Indian MMRCA competition: News

Original news is now officially confirmed... US, Russia, Sweden are out. Rafale and Eurofighter in...

The Indian Ministry of Defense has issued letters, on Wednesday, to two of the six vendors competing in the estimated USD 10 billion Indian Air Force (IAF) tender for 126 Medium Multi Role Combat Aircraft (MMRCA), asking them to extend the validity of their commercial bids, which will expire on Thursday, tomorrow.
StratPost can confirm that the European Eurofighter Typhoon consortium and the French Dassault’s Rafale have been invited to do so, effectively making up the shortlist.
StratPost can also confirm that according to the IAF and the ministry, the other aircraft in the fray, the US Boeing’s F/A-18 Super Hornet, the US Lockheed Martin Corporation’s F-16, the Russian MiG-35 and the Swedish SAAB’s Gripen did not pass the technical evaluation conducted by the IAF.
It is noteworthy that this comes just a day before the commercial bids of all six vendors were to expire.
It would not be unsurprising if this move by the ministry and it’s coincidentally sharp timing were to raise the hackles of the spurned vendors. Industry insiders are already expecting to see a robust response from these vendors and their countries of origin, at least in private, to this decision.
One question some of the vendors losing out are already asking is why the ministry asked all the vendors to resubmit their offset proposals early this month if they already knew the outcome of the technical evaluation submitted by the IAF last summer, and waited till a day before the expiry of the commercial bids to effectively announce a shortlist by inviting extension of commercial bids from only two vendors.
The commercial bids of the other four vendors will lapse on Thursday, tomorrow.
Something else the uninvited vendors are ready to question is the basis for judging technical compliance, with robust speculation that none of the MMRCA-6 aircraft were actually completely compliant with the IAF’s 643 parameters listed in the Air Staff Qualitative Requirements (ASQRs) for the tender.

http://www.stratpost.com/india-selects-ef-rafale-for-mmrca-shortlist

Vladimir79 wrote:TBO is less than advertised for RD-33MK... no suprise there. Russian engines are doomed to poor durability issues it appears.

But plz don't stop the delivering of RD-33 engines for our JF-17 project.

GarryB wrote:I'd be surprised if either the Eurofighter or Rafale could be delivered to India for 10 Billion dollars.

Certainly not 126 airframes anyway.

This was clearly a bid by the Indians to buy new technology... I hope they get what they want out of it because neither Rafale nor Typhoon will be cheap... and I suspect the choice will have to be Rafale as it is a more complete aircraft right now, plus the French don't add strings...

No strings? They are holding them hostage with the M2000 upgrade. They sign on Rafale and they get the price they want.

Regarding the Mig-35... it seems to be going to be everything the Mig-29 should have been and I am sure the Russian AF will find it very useful.

The state was banking on MiG-35 winning MMRCA, I have doubts if its development will even continue based on their current lack of investment.

Looking at Wiki the prices for Eurofighter and Rafale are 90 mil Euros, and 70 mil Euros respectively.

According to the last NAO report, Typhoons cost £122 million. Rafale costs about E70 so it is far cheaper.

A quick currency conversion... and that is 11.34 billion Euros and 8.82 billion Euros which is flyaway cost... only the first 16 will be made by the winner and the remaining 110 will be made in India... for rather a lot more.

I think it is 18 fly away and the contract price is not set. Rafale is the only one that gets into the price range.

I disagree.

If the Russian engine is such rubbish why are they already making these engines for themselves to fit to their upgraded Mig-29s and Mig-29Ks?

Because there is nothing else to put into them except the old RD-33s which are worse than MKs.

Will be amusing to see how Europe comes in on time and within budget on this program...

Both production lines have plenty of spare capacity. Delivery won't be a problem.

Obviously there would be no problem with Indian F-18s blowing up Chinese targets, but they wont be allowed to use them against Pakistan... which might be a problem for India.

We also get F-16 Bl/52Ds...& will be getting further upgraded models...all with the stamps: NOT TO USE AGAINST INDIA

but really who cares

hehe...yes that will be true...& can you bold the word innocent.
but in the coming future it will be the Kashmir issue (that British intentionally left unsolved) that will provoke if any aggressive behaviours from our side...why because India already had displayed ruthless behaviour to Kashmiris

The final fight is between Eurofighter and Rafale , decision would take another year.

Both US bids for a major Indian Air Force fighter contract lost because of technical faults - not US export control policies or corruption in New Dehli, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace scholar Ashley Tellis said in an interview.

The former American diplomat in New Dehli arrived at his conclusions after a three-week trip to India that included meetings with top Indian government, military and industry officials. The IAF selected the Dassault Rafale and the Eurofighter Typhoon as finalists for the medium multi-role combat aircraft (MMRCA).

By excluding the Boeing F/A-18E/F and the Lockheed Martin F-16 - as well as the Saab Gripen and MiG-35 - the Indian government angered Washington DC, as well as set off a wave of speculation that the decision was based on concerns in New Dehli about overly restrictive US export policies.

But Tellis believes that interpretation of the MMRCA downselect is incorrect, while providing the most detailed assessment of the factors that led to the final decision.

According to Tellis' sources in the IAF, the F-16IN bid received low marks in the technical evaluation for a slow turn rate and poorer handling performance due to the addition of conformal fuel tanks.

Those deficiencies made the F-16IN less competitive in dogfights against older F-16 Block 50s, which are operated by Pakistan.

The Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet was the US government's best shot to win the contract, but it was also hampered in the Indian evaluation by poor manoeuvrability compared to the European fighters, Tellis said.

Boeing's bid proposed to improve the Super Hornet's power by introducing the General Electric F414 enhanced performance engine (EPE), with 20% higher thrust.

But the Indian evaluators refused to credit the EPE because it is a developmental item, Tellis said. This contrasted with India's acceptance of active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar technology by the European bidders despite its developmental status.

"They just gambled on the fact that they were going to get an AESA by the time the airplane was going to enter the force," Tellis said.

The decision also reflected the IAF's preference for an aircraft with strong dogfighting performance over a combat style emphasising beyond visual range engagements using long-range sensors, Tellis said.

Indian officials expressed no concerns about the US government's export policies, which would have required heavy monitoring by US officials if certain sensors and avionics systems were included in Boeing's or Lockheed's bid, Tellis said.

"What they would have done in this case was demand that the vendor [substitute] equipment that did not have [monitoring] constraints," Tellis said. India had agreed to a similar arrangement with the acquisition of the Boeing P-8A Poseidon.

Despite the initial reaction by Washington officials, both sides are cooling off since the announcement, he added.

"The damage was certainly serious," Tellis said. "But both sides have understood how this outcome came out and both sides have made efforts to get beyond it. The US is going to win many more competitions in India."

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2011/06/03/357566/tellis-us-fighters-lost-mmrca-contract-due-to-technical.html

By Sudha Ramachandran

BANGALORE - India's defense relations with Russia have hit a bit of rough weather with Moscow canceling two important bilateral military exercises in recent months.

First, Russia called off joint naval exercises scheduled to be held at Vladivostok in late April . This was followed with the cancellation of the joint army exercise it was to host in June. According to an Indo-Asian News Service (IANS) report, Russia called off the naval exercises even as India's warships - including INS Delhi, INS Ranvir and INS Ranvijay - had already reached Vladivostok for the war games.

The explanation put out by Moscow was that Russian ships would not be available for the exercises since they were being deployed


for relief operations in Japan in the wake of the earthquake and tsunami disaster. Adding insult to injury, after the cancelation of the exercises, the Russian ships sailed off into the Pacific to engage in war games on their own. As for the joint army exercises, Moscow reportedly told Delhi that its late intimation had left it with little time for preparation; hence its inability to host.
The Indian media has interpreted the Russian move as a tit-for-tat response to India's rejection of its bid for a US$10.4 billion sale to India of 126 medium multi-role combat aircraft (MMRCA). Russia's MiG-35, Sweden's Gripen NG fighter, and the Boeing F/A-18 Super Hornet and the Lockheed Martin F-16IN Super Viper from the United States were among those that failed to make the cut. That left Typhoon jets from the four-nation EADS Eurofighter consortium and Rafale from Dassault of France in the final round of the race for the mega-deal.

The Indian government is playing down the media's description of the Russian pull out from war games as a "snub". Russia postponed rather than cancelled the exercises, it said. "There was nothing last-minute about the postponement of the naval exercise," said Ajai Malhotra, India's ambassador in Moscow. In view of the disaster in Japan, the Russians informed India in mid-March of the decision to postpone the exercises. "This was well over a month before that exercise was to have been held," Malhotra said.

The Indian navy too has said that the Russians informed them ahead of their inability to participate in the exercises. Its spokesperson Commander P V S Satish said that India sent its warships to Vladivostok only for a port call.

Military sources dismiss the "flimsy excuses" put out by the Russians. An army officer told Asia Times Online that India-Russia military exercises are "planned months in advance" and are "are not informal or ad-hoc." These war games are part of the Indra series of military exercises that India and Russia have been conducting since 2003, and "there have been no problems in the past".

The loss of "the deal of the century" would have hurt Russia, though of the three losers, Moscow is reported to have responded with the least fuss to India's decision not to purchase its hardware. However, a report in Pravda pointed out that the lost bid for the Indian deal "virtually means that Russia's air force will not be receiving those fighter jets [MiG-35s] either".

Elaborating the argument, the report said that had India purchased the Russian fighter jets, the huge contract would have enabled the manufacturer to set its price lower for the home market. That was not possible now. "Most likely, Russia will have to shelve those plans [to purchase 72 MiG-35s]," it concluded.

Furthermore, India's rejection of the MiG-35 is expected to weaken Russia's chances of sales in potential markets in Latin America and the Middle East.

A Ministry of Defense official rejected the view that the Russian move is a response to Delhi's decision on the MMRCA deal.

He pointed out in an interview with Asia Times Online that just as India had "some difficulties with the Russians" with regard to defense procurement, perhaps Moscow too had its "problems" with India "on other issues". These difficulties are bound to find their reflection in "occasional snubs and spats", he said, cautioning against giving these too much importance, especially since the relationship remains robust.

Reports in the Indian media have often drawn attention to the time and cost overruns that plague Russian military deals with India.

A refurbished Admiral Gorshkov (a Russian aircraft carrier now renamed INS Vikramaditya) was to be ready for induction into the Indian navy by 2008. But three years down the line the aircraft carrier is not ready yet and whether the Russians will delivery it by their new end 2012-early 2013 deadline seems doubtful. What is more, India is forking out $2.34 billion for Gorshkov's retrofitting instead of the $974 million agreed upon in 2004.

Similar problems have dogged the delivery of an Akula-II class nuclear-powered submarine, which Russia had promised to handover to India in 2009 on a 10-year lease, and of Talwar-class stealth frigates.

Like the navy, the Indian Air Force and the army have complained about the delays in delivery and repair of Russian equipment and a shortage of spare parts. Russia's sudden hiking of the cost of Sukhoi fighters and its renegotiation of the contract for supply of the Su-30s to India in 2007 did inject a perceptible chill in bilateral relations.

On their part, the Russians feel aggrieved over India's warming relations with the US. They point out that while India is purchasing billions of dollars of weaponry from the Americans, the Israelis and other rivals, Moscow has pointedly avoided supplying arms to Pakistan out of respect for Indian sensitivities.

The bilateral quibbling notwithstanding, India-Russia relations are far more stable and less volatile than those between India and the other big powers. At the end of the day, India knows that Russia is its most dependable partner and the Russians are far more willing to share technology than the others. Delhi also recognizes that unlike the Russians, the Americans have little compunction about making available to Pakistan, the same military hardware it sold to India.

And the Russians know they cannot afford to antagonize India because of the huge market it provides to its arms industry.

Even as Russia recovers from the blow of the rejection of its bid to supply combat aircraft and as India smarts from the Russian snub over the military exercises, Moscow has shifted to top gear its campaign for multi-billion dollar deals for supplying India with light choppers, attack helicopters and heavy cargo carriers. Together the deals are pegged at being worth about $4 billion.

According to the Russia & India Report, in an attempt to make its bids attractive, Russian Helicopters JSC is offering to assemble choppers in India before their export to third countries. Clearly, Russia is anxious to avoid a repeat of its failed bid to sell combat aircraft.

Sudha Ramachandran is an independent journalist/researcher based in Bangalore. She can be reached at

Most countries value commonality, and if a supplier has proven they are reliable and do not impose sanctions on the customer then what exactly is the problem?

This is the most oddest decision & debated quite well all over net. The bold reason is all I see to prove the oddity of Indian decision. I think Indians are looking for avionic packages & history proves that their Russian planes were fitted with Israeil/euro avionics...so why not a euro plane

no they loss because they don't want to share their technology

http://defencedog.blogspot.com/2011/05/mig-failed-but-not-forgotten-mmrca.html

MMRCA was a race where both horse and mule had participated , it is very odd that a Gripen and Rafale/Typhoon would compete for the same pie when the winner would be a single choice , obviously the MOD told every body that they would be given a fair hearing and then IAF went to choose what was the best among the 6.

Obviously the looser would certainly hate to be in that place would would feel unfair in some respect since there is no way a F-16 would ever compete with a Typhoon for the same deal and win.

But the Indians would says its an open competition and no one forced them to compete.

Coming back to the exercise it is not clear why the Russians cancelled it , there are contradicting reports where Indian ambassador to Russia mentioned that were were informed in April of the cancellation and Indian Navy chief expressing dissapointment with Russians for not informing , but the news is the exercise is being rescheduled for June and July.

Obviously any observer of Indian Defence force would conclude that standardisation is not something you can remotely associate with them just the opposite IAF for eg operated missile from Russia ,West and Israel , the aircraft is from east and west imagine the logistics burden and cost over spending that IAF must be doing just to maintain two seperate systems with broadly similar performance capability.

So now we have Russian , American , Israel , French , UK and Indian system in the IAF , certainly no Air Force would envy to be in IAF shoes its a logistics night mare and drain on precious resource

The latest indian navy ship Shivalik have weapons from Russia , Radar from Russia and Israel , Engine from US LM2500 , EW and Sonars from India , IPMS from Europe , towed sonar from French , helicopter from UK i.e Sea King , Combat Management System jointly developed with Russia ......did I miss any country

Well i think Indian played of the American , Russia , Sweden , Europe to its benefit , they probably knew very well that this deal will be for Europe but they kept the other players in the game to extract the best deal and see how their aircraft performs.

Every one knew Mig-35 was a weak contender so was F-16IN , the American brought in 2 aircraft in the hope one would get selected and poliical pressure would work.

Surely all the contender would have learnt their strong points and shortcoming as evaluated by IAF and shared with them , so in a way it would help them eliminate it.

I thought Mig-35 win would have streamlined the logistics and would help in rationalisation of force with a good and cost effective fighter but any ways IAF opted for an expensive and top of line fighter , i think eventually IAF will realise that most of the money goes in maintaining different types of fighter in its inventory and is a logistic nightmare at the time of crises and they would have used the money better by streamlining their force.

What I meant was Mig-35 was more in F-16 , Mirage-2005 and Gripen class and was more suitable to compete amongst them both in price and performance.

Where Rafale and eurofighter more appropriate comptetitor was Su-35 , sukhoi was told not to participate so was F-15 barred but F-18 also in similar class was allowed to compte

So a more appropriate comptition would be among superhornet,rafale and ef typhoon.

The rest now I think were just there for bargain with the rest three , obviously the looser would not take that kindly.

Its very difficult to accept how Gripen and Eurofighter would compete in the same race

The F-16 was meticulously aded to the competition in hope to pressurise Islamabad to update its F-16 fleet to IN blocks, learning for now that Pakistanis are more interested in the fleet of J-10 & Turkish F-16 updates..

US plays both sides...India..Pakistan...throw ships full of money at both. Greed keeps the world wanting the US currency to still have value. If their pockets are full of it they won't declare the US dollar is worthless....

Too bad Russia didn't realize this and went the "collapse and break apart" route.