Sponsor Message:
Military Aviation & Space Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
India Cancels Contract For Midair Refuellers  
User currently offlineGolfradio From Canada, joined Jun 2009, 714 posts, RR: 2
Posted (4 years 3 months 1 week 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 8281 times:

The contract for Midair Refuellers has been canceled by the Indian Finance Ministry claiming that the selected tanker the A330 MRTT is expensive. Looks like the finance ministry is opposing the deal because the lowest bid that satisfies the requirements has to be selected and that would mean the IL78.

You got to love the bean counters.

http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_centre-cancels-contract-for-midair-refuellers-for-fighter-aircraft_1331383

Excerpts from the news article

Quote:
Defence ministry sources said the contract was cancelled after the finance ministry raised several objections to the acquisition. The ministry’s objections, sources in the military said, were due to a lingering L1 (lowest item in a contract) syndrome in the government.

...

Under the norms of contract of government of India, the cheapest item that satisfies the parameters must be bought.


[Edited 2010-01-06 07:03:09 by golfradio]

61 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineKC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12060 posts, RR: 52
Reply 1, posted (4 years 3 months 1 week 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 8272 times:

Does this mean the Indian tanker compitition will reopen, possibly to the IL-78, KC-767 and A-330MRTT?

India had 6 A-330MRTTs on order. So will EADS rebid the contract, lowering the total costs?

If the cancelled is completed, this reduces the number of A-330MRTTs, of all designations to just 28 aircraft.

I believe the UK is the largest customer of the A-330MRTT with 14, Saudia Arabia is now next with 6, Austriala is next with 5 and the UAE has 3 on order.


User currently offlineGolfradio From Canada, joined Jun 2009, 714 posts, RR: 2
Reply 2, posted (4 years 3 months 1 week 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 8215 times:

I have a feeling this contract will go into the deep freeze unless EADS is willing to renegotiate which, I believe is not likely.

I doubt the IAF is going to conduct the field trials and technical evaluations again. The A330 MRTT was selected as the best fit for the role. So there is no point in considering the KC-767 and IL-78 again unless something has changed on either of those two aircraft.


User currently offlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 11919 posts, RR: 25
Reply 3, posted (4 years 3 months 1 week 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 8206 times:



Quoting Golfradio (Reply 2):
The A330 MRTT was selected as the best fit for the role. So there is no point in considering the KC-767 and IL-78 again unless something has changed on either of those two aircraft.

Nothing has changed, and IL-78 is still cheaper than A330 MRTT.

Mebbe Boeing should offer to pull some KC-135Es out of the desert and re-engine them to KC-135R standard?

Not sure if that'd be cheaper than IL-78 though.



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlinePar13del From Bahamas, joined Dec 2005, 6727 posts, RR: 8
Reply 4, posted (4 years 3 months 1 week 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 7953 times:

X-Files fan here so cue up the conspiracies.
1. India has issues with the price and delays on their new a/c carriers, public is already outraged over the cost, so throw in some IL78 tankers with some inflated prices and stand firm in the public eye on the carrier problems. Wink here, wink there.

2. India is looking to buy some P8 Poseidon, Boeing is already talking about being aggressive with this order, throw some 767 tankers in with the bid, offsets on the P8 and good to go.

3. Does the EU have any other products being purchased by India, is the Tiger helicopter still in the running? If not, EADS / Airbus has to find a way to lower the price of their product to match that of the IL78.


User currently offlineWarRI1 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 8507 posts, RR: 10
Reply 5, posted (4 years 3 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 7911 times:



Quoting Par13del (Reply 4):

2. India is looking to buy some P8 Poseidon, Boeing is already talking about being aggressive with this order, throw some 767 tankers in with the bid, offsets on the P8 and good to go.

Boeing, the ball is in your court, do not frig it up. Advice, stay away from retired Air force Generals this time. Rely on your product and reputation.



It is better to die on your feet, than live on your knees.
User currently offlineKC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12060 posts, RR: 52
Reply 6, posted (4 years 3 months 1 week 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 7715 times:



Quoting WarRI1 (Reply 5):
Quoting Par13del (Reply 4):

2. India is looking to buy some P8 Poseidon, Boeing is already talking about being aggressive with this order, throw some 767 tankers in with the bid, offsets on the P8 and good to go.

Boeing, the ball is in your court, do not frig it up. Advice, stay away from retired Air force Generals this time. Rely on your product and reputation.

That could be an option.

Quoting Revelation (Reply 3):
Mebbe Boeing should offer to pull some KC-135Es out of the desert and re-engine them to KC-135R standard?

That could be an option, too.

In addition there may be another option for the IAF, if they are willing to look at used airliners. There are plenty of used B-767-200ER/-300ERs and A-310-300s avalable on the market. The A-310 already has an A-310MRTT kit avalable, and one could be developed for the B-767 (I believe IAI was looking at this for Poland, and possibly Israel).


User currently offlineGolfOscarDelta From India, joined Feb 2008, 169 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (4 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 7499 times:

Considering the current Indian govt/administration's record being pro US, i wouldn't be surprised if the KC-767 was chosen for the tanker and the F/A-18 for the MRCA.

[Edited 2010-01-08 21:38:15]

User currently offlineZeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 8640 posts, RR: 75
Reply 8, posted (4 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 7485 times:



Quoting Golfradio (Thread starter):
Looks like the finance ministry is opposing the deal because the lowest bid that satisfies the requirements has to be selected and that would mean the IL78.

The requirement was to provide refueling capability for both the current and future fleet, the IL-78 is not boom capable and hence unable to refuel the P-8I.

The IL-78 does not meet the requirements, but it is cheaper.



We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
User currently offlineComorin From United States of America, joined May 2005, 4869 posts, RR: 16
Reply 9, posted (4 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 7394 times:



Quoting GolfOscarDelta (Reply 7):
Considering the current Indian govt/administration's record being pro US

I think India and the US are now joined at the hip economically, and eventually strategically too. let's not forget we were both former English-speaking colonies!

Militarily, its not about a particular aircraft or carrier anymore, it's about which system you want to plug into. Disparate systems are an organization's biggest nightmare, but the opposite of that is single source dependency.

I would like to think that India's future may be acquiring NATO compatible assets and a far- fetched hope that she may eventually join NATO.

So to those of you who worry about jobs going to Bangalore, see, the dollars are coming right back in a big way  Wink


User currently offlineVenus6971 From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 1437 posts, RR: 1
Reply 10, posted (4 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 7368 times:



Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 6):
In addition there may be another option for the IAF, if they are willing to look at used airliners. There are plenty of used B-767-200ER/-300ERs and A-310-300s avalable on the market. The A-310 already has an A-310MRTT kit avalable, and one could be developed for the B-767 (I believe IAI was looking at this for Poland, and possibly Israel
).

I think maybe we could sell them some KC-135's in storage currently at AMARC, Boeing or Tinker getting the contract to update them to a current standard of the customers chosing, it will simplify their logistics to ensure that everything works together along with their recently inked contract for 10 C-17's. Singapore and Turkey seem to be having nothing but good luck with their KC-135's.



I would help you but it is not in the contract
User currently offlineKeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (4 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 7314 times:

I do not think there was ever a contract. EADS never claimed it. In India you have a contract when their money is on your bank account.

User currently offline474218 From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 6340 posts, RR: 9
Reply 12, posted (4 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 7309 times:



Quoting Revelation (Reply 3):
Mebbe Boeing should offer to pull some KC-135Es out of the desert and re-engine them to KC-135R standard?

Just one problem, Boeing does not own the KC-135E's stored in the desert?

Quoting Zeke (Reply 8):
The IL-78 does not meet the requirements, but it is cheaper.

A Cessna 150 is even cheaper, but then it doesn't do the mission either.


User currently offlineComorin From United States of America, joined May 2005, 4869 posts, RR: 16
Reply 13, posted (4 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 7306 times:



Quoting Keesje (Reply 11):
In India you have a contract when their money is on your bank account

That should read 'offshore' account...  Smile

Here is an article in the Times of India that mentions the contract even though the article is about the C17 deal:

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/i...al-with-US/articleshow/5425123.cms


User currently offlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 11919 posts, RR: 25
Reply 14, posted (4 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 7306 times:



Quoting 474218 (Reply 12):
Just one problem, Boeing does not own the KC-135E's stored in the desert?

Indeed, but it's pretty clear to me the US government doesn't want anything to do with them so Boeing could get them for a song.



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlineGolfOscarDelta From India, joined Feb 2008, 169 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (4 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 7210 times:



Quoting Comorin (Reply 9):
I would like to think that India's future may be acquiring NATO compatible assets and a far- fetched hope that she may eventually join NATO.

I'm not too sure about that, didn't India start the whole Non Aligned Movement to avoid being a part of either the Soviet block or the NATO.

Quoting Comorin (Reply 9):
So to those of you who worry about jobs going to Bangalore, see, the dollars are coming right back in a big way

Don't forget the 50% offset clause that all Indian military deals have, so its still going back to Bangalore (HAL mostly) at least half of it.


User currently offlineKC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12060 posts, RR: 52
Reply 16, posted (4 years 3 months 1 week 23 hours ago) and read 7146 times:



Quoting Comorin (Reply 9):
let's not forget we were both former English-speaking colonies!

Well, in the case of the US, that was 229 years ago, and the US and India were never English colonies at the same time.

Quoting 474218 (Reply 12):
Quoting Revelation (Reply 3):
Mebbe Boeing should offer to pull some KC-135Es out of the desert and re-engine them to KC-135R standard?

Just one problem, Boeing does not own the KC-135E's stored in the desert?



Quoting Revelation (Reply 14):
Indeed, but it's pretty clear to me the US government doesn't want anything to do with them so Boeing could get them for a song.

Boeing could buy up the KC-135Es from the USAF, but I just don't see them doing that. It would be easier and faster for the USAF just to sell the KC-135Es and convert them at TIK themselves. Of course Boeing does have a boeing KC-135 plant in San Antonio that could also do the conversion and update work opn the KC-135E.


User currently offlineComorin From United States of America, joined May 2005, 4869 posts, RR: 16
Reply 17, posted (4 years 3 months 1 week 23 hours ago) and read 7143 times:



Quoting GolfOscarDelta (Reply 15):
'm not too sure about that, didn't India start the whole Non Aligned Movement to avoid being a part of either the Soviet block or the NATO

That was Long Ago and Far Away. We used to sing 'Hindi-Chini Bhai Bhai' as kids...  Smile

India's now in bed with the US and Israel (a threesome!) because of common strategic and commercial interests. Corporate America is in love in Bangalore and Gurgaon, and the Next Big Thing in India is Manufacturing.

Quoting GolfOscarDelta (Reply 15):
Quoting Comorin (Reply 9):
So to those of you who worry about jobs going to Bangalore, see, the dollars are coming right back in a big way

Don't forget the 50% offset clause that all Indian military deals have, so its still going back to Bangalore (HAL mostly) at least half of it

Good point, but fifty cents on the dollar isn't bad, and that's a good number of jobs created in Long Beach for ex-software developers!


User currently offlineHAWK21M From India, joined Jan 2001, 31568 posts, RR: 57
Reply 18, posted (4 years 3 months 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 6897 times:

Is there a Renegotiated deal on the cards  Smile
regds
MEL.



Think of the brighter side!
User currently offlineLumberton From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 4708 posts, RR: 20
Reply 19, posted (4 years 3 months 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 6876 times:



Quoting HAWK21M (Reply 18):
Is there a Renegotiated deal on the cards

Something similar to what Brazil is doing to France WRT the Rafale's price? Perhaps.



"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
User currently offlineCMB56 From United States of America, joined Dec 2009, 230 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (4 years 3 months 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 6740 times:

There is something there that I do not understand. The Finance Ministry is vetoing the 330MRTT purchase because it costs too much but yet there has just been a tentative order/request placed for C-17s. If the 330 gave their finance people sticker shock wait till they see the tab for the C-17.

User currently offlineLumberton From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 4708 posts, RR: 20
Reply 21, posted (4 years 3 months 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 6715 times:



Quoting CMB56 (Reply 20):
If the 330 gave their finance people sticker shock wait till they see the tab for the C-17.

How so? If this number is correct, why should they have "sticker shock"?
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp...ALeqM5hOw0yW35usLvQdUtmlLMosNekTBQ

Quote:
The comments came as senior defence ministry officials confirmed to AFP the scrapping of the 60 billion rupee (1.31-billion dollar) tender for the six refueller planes, which has upset the technology-starved Indian airforce.

For 6 tankers that's well over $200 million per aircraft. Perhaps they got wind of EADS' low ball bid for the USAF tanker the last go around and want the same pricing?  Wink



"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
User currently offlineComorin From United States of America, joined May 2005, 4869 posts, RR: 16
Reply 22, posted (4 years 3 months 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 6593 times:

As a layman, I would think that India's air force, especially it's missile capabilities, is the most important Defence Arm. The good old days of gentlemanly Tank and Infantry battles are over.

My humble view is that India's neighbors need to know that belligerence will be met with devastating consequences. Since I don't see how the Navy or Army can make that happen, it has to be trip-wire missile defense all along it's border.

Politically, are India's politicians too fat and flabby to make this happen? I hope not. As India gets richer, she has to defend her assets and industrial base.

I'd really like to know what you military types think.

So getting back to the Midair Refueling issue, I read in the Indian press (Times of India) that the move away from Airbus may be part of a shift to an overall US-leaning strategy. India could become a huge Boeing play over the next decade.


User currently offlineLumberton From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 4708 posts, RR: 20
Reply 23, posted (4 years 3 months 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 6504 times:



Quoting Comorin (Reply 22):
So getting back to the Midair Refueling issue, I read in the Indian press (Times of India) that the move away from Airbus may be part of a shift to an overall US-leaning strategy. India could become a huge Boeing play over the next decade.

I think its far too early to draw that conclusion based on some hardware purchases.



"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
User currently offlineGolfradio From Canada, joined Jun 2009, 714 posts, RR: 2
Reply 24, posted (4 years 3 months 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 6441 times:

Why are there two different contracts with different restrictions? The MRTT tender seems to carry the L1 restriction which stipulates lowest cost but the article also mentions the tender for the VIP helicopter purchase which does not have that restriction. If both tenders are military purchases by the MoD, I would expect them to have identical restrictions.

But this would not be the first time that the Government has vetoed a selection by the actual Armed Forces in favor of a political choice.


25 Post contains links Lumberton : If this report is accurate, this procurement just got a lot more interesting. http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-...03124.html?mod=WSJ_latestheadline
26 Revelation : Very interesting indeed. Cue the howling in 3.. 2.. 1...
27 Post contains links KC135TopBoom : Yes, the Airbus Cheerleader section will be all over this of how the US Government (who has yet to select their own new tanker) has twisted the arms
28 BarfBag : Yet, India's biggest trade partner is not the US anymore, but China, with whom our trade volume overtook that of Indo-US trade two years ago. I don't
29 Golfradio : Either way you slice it (Performance or Cost), the MRTT contract should have gone to either EADS or Ilyushin. Yet, Boeing gets a RFI when nothing has
30 BarfBag : It would be pointless to discern long term motives from the ad-hoc decisions made by MoD. Their acquisition processes have never lent themselves to su
31 Lumberton : Maybe, or maybe not. Ten years ago, who would have guessed that the Indian government would have stuck their thumb in Russia's eye and ordered P-8s a
32 Golfradio : I don't get it. If they love the IL-78s so much and it was the cheapest option why would they pick the A330? In May 2009, Air Chief Marshal Fali Majo
33 BarfBag : I don't see how India had any motive to stick anything to Russia. It is in our interest to build economic and strategic ties with various powers, and
34 BarfBag : As another perspective, I don't think there's any weapons system that will be entirely free of niggles and issues, more so an imported one, due to th
35 Ozair : There are serious supply shortages with IL-76 airframes. Numerous countries including China and India are having issues acquiring them. Not a great s
36 KC135TopBoom : I don't think it does. You have cancelled the A-330MRTT contract because of costs, and probably other issues that are not public. To Boeing, they onl
37 Revelation : It seems quite clear to me that a boom would be mandatory.
38 KC135TopBoom : Yes, but as I already pointed out, they do have a lot more choices than only the new build A-330MRTT. From Airbus, they could also get converted used
39 Sovietjet : Why do you think so? There are tons of Il-76s sitting around in Russia which the Russian AF can't afford to keep flying. If you don't believe me go o
40 ThePointblank : I bet you most of those have already been stripped of parts, or have deteriorated to the point where refurbishing is highly cost and labour prohibiti
41 KC135TopBoom : Boeing was not invited to submit a bid under the original IAF tanker program RFP, it was only a compitition between the A-330MRTT and tanker varient
42 Golfradio : Yes, you are correct. I went back searching for the 2007 RFP and only EADS and UAC had responded.
43 Zeke : I see you are rewriting history yet again. The 2007 RFP was sent to Lockheed Martin, Boeing, EADS and Ilyushin. Lockheed Martin and Boeing did not re
44 N328KF : What platform did they expect Lockheed would tender? KC-130J?
45 Zeke : The would be up to LM when they looked at the RFP.
46 KC135TopBoom : I don't remember Boeing or LM being sent the IAF RFP in 2007, Zeke. Got a link?
47 Post contains links DEVILFISH : The potential suppliers will be looking at a new RFI..... http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...es-rfi-for-refuelling-tankers.html Quote: "Boeing say
48 KC135TopBoom : If India rejected the A-330MRTT because of costs, I just don't see Boeing offering the KC-777F, as it would most likely cost more than the A-330MRTT
49 Revelation : I don't know, but it'd be a real shame to go through the bother of acquiring tankers and not getting the boom even if they only have P-8I and C-17. I
50 KC135TopBoom : Does anyone have a copy of the IAF's new RFI?
51 Shmertspionem : Typical of the Indian media's limited understanding of complex issues. The finance ministry's objections from what i gathered talking to some grandees
52 Post contains links Lumberton : The German reaction, and since it is the German ambassador, presumably he speaks for the German government. A "rude" surprise indeed. http://news.onei
53 Post contains images Par13del : In the political arena if it ensures that their product is once again selected or some other EU product is purchased as an offset for loosing this on
54 KC135TopBoom : If there is a new compitition, perhaps EADS could offer an A-310MRTT that is a used aircraft and then converted? It would costs a lot less than new bu
55 Shmertspionem : Air India has a large fleet of A-310's 19+ i think - one of the largest operators of the type - given that it is a) fully government owned and b) abo
56 KC135TopBoom : Then wouldn't moving 6 of these A-310-300s to the IAF as a government aganecy to government agency be cheaper? Then they only need to cover the costs
57 Revelation : In the US this is known as SJS: "Shiny Jet Syndrome".
58 Shmertspionem : I'll try to remember SJS KC135 - i'm going to pretend you didnt use or imply common sense, fiscal sense, second hand, cheap, indian air force, indian
59 KC135TopBoom : Thank you, my friend. But, I would like to point out that is exactly where the USAF got it's E-8C fleet, as well as some of the VIP C-40Cs (at least
60 Post contains links Zeke : Been again in the press recently .... "Four years ago, the Defence Ministry had sent request for proposal to American Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Europe
61 Spacepope : Don't know if they're flying again yet or not. Problem was that an engine separated from the pylon/aircraft on takeoff from a RuAF transport. India i
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic India Cancels Contract For Midair Refuellers
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Military aviation related posts only!
  • Not military related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
Finmeccanica Wins A Contract For 48 M-346 To EAU posted Wed Feb 25 2009 08:10:59 by 777
Alenia Won A Contract For 18 G-222 To Afganistan posted Tue Sep 30 2008 02:27:25 by 777
Lockheed Gets Contract For Orion posted Thu Aug 31 2006 22:25:54 by JBirdAV8r
New Stealth Aircraft Under Contract For Usaf posted Sat Jun 24 2006 23:05:17 by RichardPrice
Usmc Awards $18.8B Contract For CH-53K posted Fri Jan 13 2006 03:06:16 by AirRyan
India To Buy Six C-130Js For Special Forces posted Wed May 30 2007 23:03:21 by DEVILFISH
"A Deal For Jet Fighters Opens The Door To India" posted Sat Apr 16 2005 23:06:00 by STT757
F-16 For Pakistan, Mirage 2000 For India... posted Tue Mar 29 2005 23:46:54 by Bsergonomics
Israel Radar On Russian Jet For India posted Wed Feb 11 2004 09:30:00 by HAWK21M
Boeing Hoping To Beat Lockheed For Navy Contract posted Mon Jan 5 2004 14:13:32 by Keesje

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format