Analysis With Estimated ₹2,307 Crore Per Unit Cost, Is Rafale M Deal More Expensive for India than IAF Rafale Deal?

With Estimated ₹2,307 Crore Per Unit Cost, Is Rafale M Deal More Expensive for India than IAF Rafale Deal?


The Indian Navy's plan to acquire 26 Rafale Marine (Rafale M) fighter jets from France has raised questions about whether this is the most expensive fighter jet deal for India on a per-unit basis, potentially exceeding the 2016 purchase of 36 Rafale jets for the Indian Air Force (IAF).

While the Rafale M deal, estimated at ₹60,000 crore (approximately $7.2 billion), is a significant investment for India's naval capabilities, a direct comparison with the previous deal reveals a more complex situation.

The Defence Acquisition Council approved the Rafale M deal in July 2023. It includes 22 single-seat aircraft and four twin-seat trainers, all designed for operations from aircraft carriers like the INS Vikrant and INS Vikramaditya.

The comprehensive package includes the aircraft, weapons (such as Meteor, Exocet, and SCALP missiles), simulators, spare parts, crew training, and ten years of logistical support.

Negotiations between Dassault Aviation (the manufacturer), the French government, and India are being finalized under an inter-governmental agreement, with the deal expected to be signed by mid-2025.

The total cost of ₹60,000 crore breaks down to roughly ₹2,307 crore ($277 million, using a current exchange rate of $1 = ₹83.5) per aircraft. This has led some to claim it is India's most expensive fighter jet acquisition, particularly as it is the Navy's single largest purchase. However, a fair comparison with the 2016 IAF deal requires a detailed breakdown of costs and considerations.

In September 2016, India contracted with France for 36 Rafale jets for the IAF at a cost of €7.87 billion (approximately $8.8 billion at the time). This included 28 single-seat and eight twin-seat aircraft.

This agreement, which followed lengthy negotiations and the cancellation of a larger 126-aircraft tender, included India-Specific Enhancements (ISEs) such as helmet-mounted displays and cold-engine start capabilities.

It also covered weapons (Meteor and SCALP missiles), spare parts, and a five-year performance-based logistics package designed to ensure 75% fleet availability.

The 2016 contract's €7.87 billion price tag was composed of several elements: €3.3 billion for the basic aircraft (averaging €91.7 million or ₹686 crore per jet at 2016 exchange rates), €1.7 billion for ISEs, €700 million for weapons, €1.8 billion for spare parts, and €350 million for logistics. This totaled €218 million per jet (₹1,630 crore).

If we adjust this figure for inflation to 2025 (assuming a conservative 3% annual inflation rate), the cost rises to approximately €289 million (₹2,412 crore at the current exchange rate of ₹83.5/€1), representing the equivalent cost in today's terms.

Comparing Unit Costs​

  • Rafale M (2025): ₹2,307 crore ($277 million) per jet, including weapons, training, and a 10-year support package.
  • Rafale IAF (2016, adjusted for inflation to 2025): ₹2,412 crore ($289 million) per jet, including ISEs, weapons, and a five-year support package.
At first glance, the Rafale M appears slightly less expensive per unit than the inflation-adjusted cost of the 2016 deal. However, a simple numerical comparison doesn't provide the complete picture.

The higher per-unit cost of the 2016 deal was significantly influenced by one-time costs, such as the €1.7 billion for ISE development, spread across only 36 aircraft instead of the originally planned 126. This substantially inflated the per-unit price.

The Rafale M deal benefits from these earlier investments, avoiding similar non-recurring expenses, although it does incorporate modifications specific to naval operations, such as reinforced landing gear and an arrestor hook.

A direct comparison is further complicated by the differing contents of each deal. The Rafale M's $277 million unit cost includes ten years of logistical support, double the five-year period included in the IAF deal. It also includes maritime-specific weaponry like the Exocet missile, which was not part of the 2016 package.

Conversely, the IAF Rafales included unique ISEs, adding €47 million per jet in development costs alone.

A precise "bare aircraft" cost comparison is impossible without access to official, classified breakdowns. However, some reports suggest the Rafale M's base price is similar to the 2016 deal's €91.7 million, adjusted for inflation (approximately €120 million or ₹1,000 crore today).

The additional costs of weapons and extended support increase the overall price, but not necessarily beyond the adjusted total cost of the IAF's aircraft.

Internationally, India's Rafale costs fall within a reasonable range. Egypt paid €125 million per jet for 30 Rafales in 2021 (a second batch without ISEs), while Qatar's 2015 deal for 24 jets averaged €263 million, including weapons and training.

The Rafale M's $277 million price aligns reasonably, considering its carrier-specific features and long-term support. This is in contrast to the IAF's adjusted $289 million, which reflects a smaller purchase quantity and custom enhancements.

While some critics have pointed out that the Rafale M deal may not include technology transfer, its strategic importance for maintaining naval superiority in the Indo-Pacific region, particularly in light of China's growing naval power, is a significant factor.

The 2016 deal, although more expensive per unit, addressed a critical need to bolster the IAF's fighter squadron strength, presenting a different set of strategic priorities.

In conclusion, while the Rafale M deal is a substantial investment, claiming it is definitively more expensive per unit than the previous Rafale deal requires careful consideration of differing contract terms, inflation, and the specific requirements of each branch of the armed forces.
 
To be secure on land , we must be supreme at sea. India’s ancient philosophy.

In the 21st century, war has evolved into dimensions not previously anticipated.

Do aircraft today in 2025, engage in WVR combat? No. It is the stand-off missiles which have BVR capabilities . The same has been highlighted in this column above.

The IN has Brahmos missiles with ranges from 300 kms to 800 kms now. These are very lethal missiles with supersonic capabilities at sea skimming levels when approaching their target.

The PLAN has nil capabilities today against our sea skimming Brahmos missiles at sea.

The best fighters are in service- the MiG29K ‘s armed with Astra air to air missiles and Brahmos NG ( air to surface) missiles. They are carrier borne already on Vikrant and Vikramaditya.

The Rafale-M fighters are not going to be delivered for quite a few years say 2029/2030 .

The IN and GOI need to enhance capabilities today to meet likely Chinese Navy threats in IOR.

The budgets available should be used to enhance IN capablilities now . A plan would be :-

- Buy more MiG 29K fighters and trainers for our aircraft carriers say fleet strength of 100 fighters.

- Enhance maintenance facilities for these fighters on both coasts.

- Enhance induction of our missiles type Brahmos NG and BVR missiles type ASTRA 1 and 2.

- Induct LCA-N fighters with proven capabilities to operate from our existing aircraft carriers .

- Speed up TEDBF fighters induction program.

The way ahead is crystal clear as enunciated above.
 
This is an aircraft that is not needed by a navy...

Instead, they could have bought a MiG-29 from Russia...

Our aircraft carriers are designed to protect the Indian Ocean... not to go to other countries and fight wars... MiG-29 is enough for this...

Even if we want more capable aircraft, the Indian Navy can use the aircraft in the Indian Air Force...

This is a very wrong decision...

Instead of this, the money spent on this could have been spent on purchasing aircraft for the Air Force or invested in the production of Tejas MK2 or AMCA... Otherwise, human capacity is mostly used in Indian aircraft production... We could have invested in converting it to automation.
 
Costs should not be a matter, as we are a $4 trillion economy and soon to become the third-largest economy in the world.
Maybe save a few billion and solve the pollution in Delhi. Canada is buying 88 F-35s for $13 billion US, and they think it is too expensive. I guess they have made a lot of room for payoffs.
 
Costs should not be a matter, as we are a $4 trillion economy and soon to become the third-largest economy in the world.
GDP doesn't define a nation's economy; else, in 1990, the Soviet Union would have had the largest economy by nominal GDP. Per capita income of India is still that of a poor country.
 
This is an aircraft that is not needed by a navy...

Instead, they could have bought a MiG-29 from Russia...

Our aircraft carriers are designed to protect the Indian Ocean... not to go to other countries and fight wars... MiG-29 is enough for this...

Even if we want more capable aircraft, the Indian Navy can use the aircraft in the Indian Air Force...

This is a very wrong decision...

Instead of this, the money spent on this could have been spent on purchasing aircraft for the Air Force or invested in the production of Tejas MK2 or AMCA... Otherwise, human capacity is mostly used in Indian aircraft production... We could have invested in converting it to automation.
It's absolutely needed as we have an empty carrier. Also, the MiG-29 has a poor serviceability rate, and higher and more regular maintenance, along with its parts and components.

Also, we will still be investing in the Tejas Mk2 and AMCA, as those are critical jets which will be manufactured in large numbers.
 
This is an aircraft that is not needed by a navy...

Instead, they could have bought a MiG-29 from Russia...

Our aircraft carriers are designed to protect the Indian Ocean... not to go to other countries and fight wars... MiG-29 is enough for this...

Even if we want more capable aircraft, the Indian Navy can use the aircraft in the Indian Air Force...

This is a very wrong decision...

Instead of this, the money spent on this could have been spent on purchasing aircraft for the Air Force or invested in the production of Tejas MK2 or AMCA... Otherwise, human capacity is mostly used in Indian aircraft production... We could have invested in converting it to automation.
Absolutely not! The MiG-29K is both an aging platform, as well as one that faces significant maintenance and availability issues. If all that wasn't enough, the MiG-29 production lines are pretty much closed, so getting new ones wasn't going to happen.
 
These jets will be very advanced and hold the latest technology and equipment. While on paper it looks very very expensive but after breaking down the costs in this article it shows how the final cost is almost the same as the first batch of 36 jets.

Also this final price will cover the jets entire lifespan for 30-40 years which covers weapons, simulators, software updates, training, MRO facilities, ISE and buddy to buddy refuelling etc which will increase its range and capability even more if needed.

The main reason why we aren’t going to manufacture it in India is because it will cost even more than just importing it, we would receive very little critical technology or equipment and manufacture very little bit and nothing critical as well. Also dassault have said that they won’t accept any liability or guarantee on any jets manufactured in India and we lack the necessary skilled workforce, facilities or infrastructure.
 
Rafaels Marine and its wepons are based on proven technologies that made British nearly fail in Falklands. So whats good is good, if payment needs to be done, do it but get the best weapons load out with good service and spares . Aircraft carriers with even 10 such aircafts along with Naval varient of LCA that is able to do carrier landings , will be enough to supress Bangladesh and Srilanka, that are slowly but surely being armed by Chinese so effectively encircling us like a noose very smoothly. We freed Bangladesh but its misbehaving and arming with submarines, naval vessels from China and so is Srilanka , Pakistan is hostile since ages so good quality aircrafts that can breech air defences and strike with precision opening holes into these small yet venomous countries next to us is a must. China will never attack us directly is sure as we are 10 times bigger then Taiwan that China cant take on till now in land invasion scenario and public here is extremely hostile to China since 1962 so it cant but yes ,its breeding snakes at sea in arabian and bay of Bengal to keep us from being bold .
 
What price would you put on being able to secure our oceans? Let's be honest, there are no other options until the TEDBF comes along in, oh well, 2040, if we are lucky, that is. I have a feeling we will need to order a second lot of Rafale-Ms once the MRFA line for Rafales comes along in Jewar (yeah, that's another thing that's going to happen, just wait and watch)!
 
Ended up spending like this and indirectly being dependent and financing foreign companies, but for local approval, keep pushing the files, do not spend any money on capacity. Why not just hire foreign mercenaries and get rid of the defence budget?
 

Forum statistics

Threads
4,330
Messages
47,039
Members
2,960
Latest member
BijuUK
Back
Top