Bharat Rakshak

Somnath sir, the interview is sourced from paffalcons.com which is a brfish site for Pak.

Charm Offensive for the Defense Sector

--------------------------------------

4. (C) The Joint Secretary went on to describe Indian defense correspondents as the most dubious of change in the Indo-US relationship. To make in-roads into this constituency, he suggested that DOD/DSCA Director LTG Kohler speak to a group of defense correspondents during his April 20-22 visit to New Delhi. PolCouns described a roundtable discussion for defense writers hosted by the Embassy on April 8, during which analysts were divided about whether the Indian Air Force (IAF) is truly interested in acquiring a US multi-role combat aircraft (MRCA). Some analysts believe that the IAF is only interested in US participation in the MRCA tender to bid down the price of competitors' planes, especially the French Mirage. PolCouns expressed greater concern, however, about public comments from some GOI sources that reinforce doubts about US reliability that may negatively impact the IAF decision. The Charge recalled the most recent example in a meeting between Transportation Secretary Mineta and Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL)

SIPDIS

Director on April 14, where the HAL chief made harsh comments about US unreliability (Reftel).

5. (C) Jaishankar stated that he is aware of ""skepticism in the system,"" but believed it was only an ""articulate minority"" that aired their doubts about the US publicly, while the ""silent majority"" of the GOI is neutral or positive. He also pointed to ""conversions"" such as Navy Chief Admiral Arun Prakash who had been doubtful about the US as a partner only a few months ago, but had ""turned around"" as a result of his visit to the US in March. He added that the Chief of Air Staff will ensure that the tender is undertaken according to the established rules and encouraged LTG Kohler to address the issue of GOI interest directly during his meetings in New Delhi later this week. (Mission followed up with GEN Kohler's staff.)

6. (C) To enhance the US MRCA bid, the Joint Secretary also urged the US to highlight its comparative advantage in joint defense ventures with the private sector. This would dovetail with the GOI's new initiative to increase government-industry partnership in defense (""the Kelkar Committee""). It also reflects an area where US competitors Russia and France do not have a record to point to in India.

RAF Typhoon jets 'grounded owing to spares shortages'

The RAF's most advanced fighter jets have been grounded owing to shortages of spare parts, MPs have found.

The Commons public accounts committee said five Typhoon pilots were grounded last year because they had been unable to put in enough training flight hours.

The jets have been used in Libya, and were deployed for the first time in a ground attack this week near Misrata.

The Ministry of Defence insists the problems identified by the committee have since been addressed.

Although Typhoons - which are made by BAE systems in Warton, Lancashire - have already been carrying out air defence missions, they have only recently been equipped for a ground attack role and were deployed in a bombing mission for the first time this week in Libya.

In their report, the MPs warned that only eight of the RAF's 48 Typhoon pilots were qualified to carry out ground attacks last year.

But Air Vice Marshal Phil Osborn said that there were now "sufficient Typhoon aircraft and pilots to undertake the task in Libya".

The RAF was undertaking its mission in a "proportionate, disciplined, reliable way," he added.

The committee claimed that the RAF was having to cannibalise aircraft for spare parts in order to keep the maximum number of Typhoons - formerly known as the Eurofighter - in the air on any given day.

It added that the Ministry of Defence (MoD) had warned the problems were likely to continue until 2015 when it expects the supply of spares finally to have reached a "steady state".

Rising cost

The committee said that the MoD relied on a "small group of key industrial suppliers who have the technical and design capability to build, upgrade and support" the jets.

"Problems with the availability of spare parts have meant that Typhoons are not flying as many hours as the department requires," it added.

"The Typhoon supply chain is complex and stretches across Europe. However, the department admitted that it had not been managed well enough or delivered all the required parts when needed."

The committee noted that the MoD was now buying 30% fewer Typhoons than it had originally planned.

But the cost of the project had risen by an estimated £3.5bn, meaning that the expected cost of each aircraft had increased by 75%.

Ground attack

The overall cost of the programme is now estimated at £20.2bn, with the cost per plane rising from £72m to £126m. ($206m US)

The committee complained that the MoD had been unable to offer a "coherent explanation" for a decision in 2004 to equip the early Typhoons for ground attack operations at a cost of £119m, only to switch them back to an air defence role in 2009, a year after the upgrade was finally ready.

"The history of the Typhoon fighter aircraft represents yet another example of over-optimism, bad planning and an unacceptably high bill for the taxpayer," committee chair and Labour MP Margaret Hodge argued.

"This pattern of decision-making is more about balancing the books in the short-term rather than ensuring value for money over time."

Defence Secretary Liam Fox said the committee had recognised that the Ministry of Defence and the aerospace industry had been working to "resolve spares issues".

"Performance targets are now being met", he said.

Jonathan Beale
Defence correspondent, BBC News

Earlier this week an RAF Typhoon carried out a bombing raid over Libya, dropping a paveway bomb and destroying two tanks. It's the first time the RAF's latest warplane has carried out a ground attack mission.

The MoD quickly released video of the successful strike and will be hoping that it can deflect some of the criticism of the Typhoon project, which the public accounts committee says suffered from "over-optimism and bad planning". The MPs also note that, of 48 trained Typhoon pilots, only eight were fully trained to carry out ground attack missions.

The RAF is keen to point out that past problems have been resolved. It says it now has "significantly more" than eight pilots ready to carry out bombing raids.

That said, the RAF is clearly stretched having to meet all its operational requirements - Air Chief Marshall Sir Stephen Dalton admitted as much in a recent Guardian interview. Sacking scores of trainee pilots has not made life any easier.

um not very encouraging to read if the RAF is forced to cannibalize parts made by its own partner consortium.

The EF/Rafale is gonna be just too expensive ..maybe they may satisfy the Iaf requirements but its gonna be expensive. In fact in libya it looks like Rafale and EF are in a race to bomb the T55

i keep coming back to the question if they can settle the Offset of 50%.
any thoughts on this?

Spares shortage keeps Typhoon jets grounded

Friday, 15 April 2011


Pilots of the RAF's most advanced fighter jets are being grounded because shortages of aircraft spares mean they cannot put in enough flying hours to keep their skills up to date, MPs warned today.

BTW, where is Philip? Haven't seen him posting for sometime now....

Apparently he has been banned till May..

:roll:

That is all communication gear!! Your cell phone has tracking capabilities!!

...

1. Are the refueling probes on Rafale retractable?
2. Will the probes on the MRCA Rafale be retractable?

Right! ... now add some logging stuff on it to record things like locations where they are getting based, number of hours they are flying, which areas they are flying, how long they are flying, etc. During "routine" maintenance of parts, the US personnel could just download these logs and taken back to the US for further analysis. A lot of information could be gleaned from such troves of data on the IAF ... its deployment patterns, its flying hours practices, etc.

Also, communications between pilots and command centre could be recorded ... like an airplane's black box. All of these are useful to help break IAF codes etc.

Both could be monitored "live" as well ... but have a higher chance of detection by the IAF.

...

Perhaps the GE engines for the LCA have trackerS and, oh, why not add, the old kill switch.

The question is not if "it will be done'. The question is if it will be used (against India).

...

The ministry of defence (MoD) may relax certain offset provisions that will be applicable to the proposed $10.8 billion order to buy 126 medium multi-role combat aircraft (MMRCA) for the Indian Air Force (IAF), according to two people with direct knowledge of the matter.

An indication to this effect was conveyed to all the six companies that are in contention for the contract, in a letter sent on 4 April, according to the people cited above. The letter had invited the companies participating in the contract to send in their offset proposals by 17 April.

Under its defence procurement procedure, India imposes counter-trade obligations on original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) that are awarded defence contracts worth more than Rs.300 crore by way of transfer of critical technologies and production of components in India. To meet this obligation, foreign vendors partner with Indian firms. At present, the offset obligation for the MMRCA contract is 50%, which roughly translates into a possible $5 billion worth of business being generated via the offset route.

The two people said that the MoD has formally allowed all six foreign contractors in the race for the deal to fulfil their offset obligations, in part, via the tier-1 foreign sub-contractors executing their projects.

The people cited above said that the MoD has formally allowed “tripartite memoranda of understanding (MoUs)” to be signed among the primary vendor, the sub-contractor and the Indian company that the vendor or sub-contractor may partner in order to fulfil offset obligations.

“In other words, any offset obligation fulfilled, say by an engine supplier, would be treated as having been fulfilled by the primary contractor who is selling the aircraft to the Indian government,” one of the two people cited above said. This person also said that the OEM will have to take a guarantee for the subcontractors executing the offset contract, failing which the OEM will be held liable for penalties. In fact, industry officials point out that a similar practice “had been informally on” for several defence projects between 2007 and 2009, but some MoD officials in the defence offsets facilitation agency (DOFA) had raised objections to this in 2010.

In another anticipated change, the MoD may extend the maximum period allowed for fulfilment of offset obligations by five years for the jet deal. “The present regulations mandate the vendor to complete the offset requirements during the period within which the contract is being executed. This could be extended by two to five years,” said a second person.

Industry officials said that the MoD could come up with a fresh set of guidelines on defence offsets in the next few weeks. Six foreign defence companies—Boeing and Lockheed Martin of the US, RSK MiG Russia, Dassault of France, SAAB of Sweden and EADS, a consortium of several European countries, are competing in the project billed as the single largest defence contract that India is likely to award.

Industry officials and analysts said that these changes, if effected, would be a positive step. “Foreign defence vendors had been asking the government for these relaxations for a while now, and this is a welcome step,” said retired colonel and defence analyst Rajiv Chib of PricewaterhouseCoopers India.

You are talking more about the geopolitics of things while I am talking merely from the point of technical feasibility of things.

One more thing - my last post for this I hope - do NOT live in fear.

I would be far more concerned about a China bribing her way via EU, where she has already promised to provide economic relief to EU nations that need economic help. This is FAR more realistic - in the current environment - than a US Congress trying to plug India. I have said this for a long time, Indo-US strategic interests will converge. The two nations cannot afford to be at each other's throats much longer.

Chinese economic power is huge - they (some Chinese strategists) are already talking of buying Indian currency to legally manipulate India. That is above the table, for heaven's sake!! Spain with some ungodly unemployment can be far more susceptible to Chinese threats than a US Congress - for perhaps then next 10-20 years. How about a gift of a $100 billion to BD + SL + a few African countries to move India out of the way?

Am I to be afraid of a threat that has existed for some time now? Or try and prevent one that is a greater threat?

Isn't buy MMRCA from US (with undesired components) guided by fear of:

(I do not think you have read my posts, but anyways ...........)

You quote a post where I state do not be afraid and then you pose a question where you think I have some fear!!

No.

I manage risk, which is why I have no fear. Built into my risk matrix are failures (2-3 kinds). What the US is providing, assuming the worst case, is still known. The value is in the strategic relationship - which is bound to change (I feel in 20-30 years).

The way I see it today:

EU: That non-intrusive facade is a fake. Libya, IMHO, exposed their true nature. No strategic value (because of intra-squabbling) (they ARE horrible - no other way to put it)
France: Will want a lot more flesh and blood. Dogs bark, cats meow, lions roar, France like flesh and blood. Little strategic value
Russia: Limping at best, with a horrible supply chain. Little strategic vlaue
(The above statements are observations/data points, NOT meant to be knocks on anybody/nation.)

From an Indian PoV, when it comes to the MMRCA, they ALL are bad, that is the truth. So, I have to select the best out of the worst and reduce my risks.

Here is what I would suggest (based on my limited knowledge granted), for the next 15-20 years: Indo-Russia be given all of India's nuclear future. France+Germany be given all of IN sub requirements. US be given AF recs[color=#FF0000]. ALL of them have to help India build out, including helping India consolidate IOR++. No Aussies and no Japan. I will concede Pakistan to China, that is it. Dismantle the string of pearls for good. After the 15-20 years, India should be a stand-alone nation in most, if not all, strategic aspects.[/color]

In a scathing report, the parliament's Committee of Public Accounts, which scrutinises the way government departments spend money but has no regulatory powers, said the Typhoon project was mismanaged, pushing up costs.

"The history of the Typhoon fighter aircraft represents yet another example of over-optimism, bad planning and an unacceptably high bill for the taxpayer," said committee chair Margaret Hodge in a statement.

"The (defence ministry) is now buying 30 percent fewer Typhoon fighter aircraft than originally planned, the cost of the project is now expected to be 3.5 billion pounds more than was originally approved ... the cost of each aircraft has increased by 75 per cent," she added.

The watchdog said the overall project cost had risen to 20.2 billion pounds and that the cost of each plane had risen to 126 million pounds each. The body also said it had taken too long to bring the jet -- conceived in the 1980s -- into service. Britain is buying 160 of the aircraft, and the accounts committee suggested that support costs for the plane could be higher than originally budgeted.

Global demand for a new generation of fighter jets has surged, and the arms market is likely to be watching the Typhoon's performance in Libya closely, weighing up its advantages against its purchase and running costs. The defence ministry defended the Typhoon project, and said problems in its production were being resolved.

"The Typhoon is a world beating air-to-air fighter and is fast developing a ground attack capability as is being demonstrated in Libya," Defence Secretary Liam Fox said in a statement. "I am determined that in the future such projects are properly run from the outset, and I have announced reforms to reduce equipment delays and cost overruns," he added.

The question is not if "it will be done'. The question is if it will be used (against India).

Watchdog slams delays, high costs of Typhoon jet

It is just staggering how much more the EF costs comparedmto the others in the race.. The EF with supports is easily going to strech the 11bn$ budget beyond breaking point.

The question is if it can be done then it will be used ( or unused ) will depend on the whims and wishes of US , reminds me of the old proverb which says Intentions can change over night if capability exist.

A question that I would ask is if Indian Defence Community is comfortable with such snooping capability that comes built in with sophisticated systems , for US allies or for nations that further US interest or sustains it this snooping capability is no big deal.