This does not put French tech at risk, in fact it's the opposite. With 36 + 57 alone, Dassault will have to build a pretty sizable spares industry in India anyway. More orders means more ToT. No orders means no ToT. Like, we do not need full ToT for the engine and airframe if we don't plan on building more Rafales, all we need is spares production. It will limit the IAF's flexibility, but Dassault would get away with a massive 93 jet order without having handed over much ToT and we will still be dependent on their supplies. Dassault wins gloriously if this happens. Even more so if they win the IN's deal.
MRFA is indeed a huge deal...if it happens. And history says it won't.
Rafale is no longer the jet nobody wanted to buy (which it was prior to IAF selection), they're bagging orders left right & center, the overall foreign orders in recent times are bigger numbers than what we hope to buy with MRFA+subsequent order from local line combined (which itself is a big if). When they can do that without parting with any ToT whatsoever, they can afford to play hardball.
Our tender is no longer as lucrative as the original 126 MMRCA with option for 63 more, and Dassault is no longer as desperate as they were for foreign orders pre-2016. Combine that with the fact we're already heavily invested into Rafale platform, and you realize we don't hold as many cards wrt ToT as we think.
We're likely to get as much ToT as we did with purchase of 60 M2Ks...which is zilch. Which means that when time comes to upgrade Rafales in the future, Dassault can offer ToT for spares at that point and bag another deal worth billions. Exactly like with M2K-5 upgrade program. Also, remember that the original IAF request in 1980 was for 150 M2Ks but we ended up buying only 1/3rd that.
They stand to lose quite a lot by offering ToT (of any grade) for such small orders and denying themselves a revenue stream that would extend well into the future.
since the L2 can always be brought in if negotiations with L1 fail, new rules.
And spend another $2B on top of deal cost for a fresh set of ISEs? No way we can afford that. The new rules are useful to avoid running into single vendor situations, but can't circumvent financial realities. We kind of painted ourselves into a corner when we bought only 36 jets but spent a fortune modifying them as though we were buying 200.
And like it or not, reason we bought only 36 (instead of 126) was finances, plain & simple. And our GDP growth prospects today are not as strong as they were in 2016.
Last edited: