Nothing wrong if it is across the board
We're having a circular argument here.If the GOI takes fast track decisions only in case of US puchase, what is the 'suspicious' in this? I've listed the weapon system to be brought by India from US and asked for alternate purchase options. Which are none, barring the debate on C-17.
Did not ordered before they were inducted (of course only 4 inducted, but they would have revealed their capabilities. It took hell lot of time for the reason being part of carrier deal which was in negotiation since 90s. Also, as i said, they were part of carrier deal and mind you only 4 (currently only 3) countries manufacture carrier based aircraft to this day. We all know how many country were willing to sell us carrier (even burnt second hand) in 1990 when the economic saga of this country was not thought of in the wildest dream, which was on verge of collapse, where foreign reserve sinked to the extent that it was not enough to fund 15 days purchase.
I think the timelines for the Gorshkov deal are way off the mark above. And I'm not questioning the efficacy or other wise of the MiG-29K aircraft. As you said, this was the only options available with Gorky and we went for it. And additional numbers were also signed for expanded requirement. Now that the IN has wider options, it has issued RFP for new-gen carrier borne aircraft. Will this deal be signed in the same timeframe as MiG-29K? Not unless IN says that plane X is the best options and we do not see the need for comparative trials. Take another example; if the requirement for MMRCA was felt in situation as obtained in late 80's and 90's, do you think there would have been an RFP? Or we would have settled for something like Mirage 2000-5?
So, what does this tell us? If an optimum solution (taking all factors into account) is available wth only single vendor, the deals happen that much quickly.
It is because of their own track of dealing with us and our rivals and even their close ally
What is suspicious about the deal in the above argument? The future behaviour of USA might well be suspect but where is the conspiracy in awarding the deal to US Companies? The way above argument is made, it seems to imply that GOI is circumveting some rules and regulation and advancing favors to the US firms in purchase of the equipment.
Agreed, hopefully they are delivered as they are promised to be and not some dumb sub standard equipment (reference radar of F 18)
While i'm no expert on things related to above argument, please do enlighten me on what exactly will be the "dumb" form of F/A-18 SH radar as compared to the ones in USN Service and how does the same compare with other competitors in service.
pegasus can cover some distance on its own, a crucial requirement to avoid counter fire. The difference in weight is most attributable to this feature which is absent in M777
And I've already covered the point of APU and weight penalty it places on the Pegasus ULH. So the trade-off, mobility of gun as underslung load versus APU, is best left to IA to decide. And while one has still develop means to counter the Counter Battery Fire (CBF) - we did that in Kargil, one cannot do anything about the excess weight of the gun.
As for the attack helo RFP, the reason Bell and Boeing did not participate was the initial insistence that helos be bought directly through Company while the same were availale through FMS Route. Which MOD accepted and the fresh RFP got issued. Also, Bell withdrew as the AH-1Z was in trials with US Marine Corps and not available for trials.
And I would want to trial AH-64 and AH-1Z in case I intend to purchase a good attack-helo.
As fo the LUH Tender, it is our own apples which were rotten. Something to do with EADS entering the competition with civilian version of their contender and IA certifying the same. A small matter cropped up later which showed that the person in IA evaluating the EADS Chopper and deal was the brother of EADS Rep. in India.
Every arms manufacturer will try his best to influence deals; it is just that some are more successful.
Which is more important currently? C 17 or A 330 MRTT? We have required air lift capability as of now.
You're getting into serious speculation territory unless you can back up above argument with some hard numbers. Let the IAF be the decision maker with respect to their requirement.