Indian Military Aviation

All threads that are locked or marked for deletion will be moved to this forum. The topics will be cleared from this archive on the 1st and 16th of each month.
srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4699
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Indian Military Aviation

Postby srai » 15 May 2008 23:20


Last page of previous thread here


rohitvats wrote:We really need a dedicated attack helicopters in the IA's inventory to bolster both offensive and defence anti -tank capabilities. Any idea what is the number IAF wanted to induct as replacement for Mi-24/35s?




http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HAL_Light_ ... Helicopter
...
HAL hopes to equip the Indian Air Force with about 65 gunships starting 2010.
...



That refers to this article, Paris Air Show: First flight of HAL`s light combat helicopter in 2008

...
HAL eventually plans to supply 65 of these armed versions of the Dhruv Advanced Light Helicopters (ALH) to the Indian Air Force, Baweja informed a press conference at the Paris Air Show.
...
Last edited by Gerard on 05 Aug 2009 18:07, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: new thread started at this point

Abhisham
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 86
Joined: 09 Jan 2003 12:31
Location: Singapore

Postby Abhisham » 16 May 2008 06:27

rohitvats wrote:We really need a dedicated attack helicopters in the IA's inventory to bolster both offensive and defence anti -tank capabilities. Any idea what is the number IAF wanted to induct as replacement for Mi-24/35s?


IA will be looking at both WSI Dhruv and LCH to meet its requirements for attack choppers. It never hurts to have heavy attack chopper in the class of Apache / Mi-28N. The latter has a lot of common spares with the Mi-17 choppers too. But more importantly they should concentrate on getting the required towed and self propelled arty.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Postby Singha » 16 May 2008 07:48

if WSI Dhruv/LCH will be ready around 2010-12 that explains the hunt for a
heavier and costlier foreign chopper to compare unfavourably against and
erect hurdles so that instead of 60 desi items, 20 foreign items can be
purchased while "desi defects" are rectified and a engine more powerful
by 50% is developed or located.

asbchakri
BRFite
Posts: 250
Joined: 14 Sep 2007 11:20
Location: Chennai
Contact:

Postby asbchakri » 16 May 2008 09:01

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HAL_Light_ ... Helicopter
...
HAL hopes to equip the Indian Air Force with about 65 gunships starting 2010.
...



The aticle says

...
The first flight of the helicopter is expected in April/May 2008[4].
...


So any info on the first flight

Igorr
BRFite
Posts: 598
Joined: 01 Feb 2005 18:13
Contact:

Postby Igorr » 16 May 2008 16:50


sanjaychoudhry
BRFite
Posts: 756
Joined: 13 Jul 2007 00:39
Location: La La Land

Postby sanjaychoudhry » 17 May 2008 02:00

India-made pilot less plane fails to take off

BALASORE: Did the indigenously developed Pilotless Target Aircraft (PTA), which goes into several trials and was even inducted into the Indian Air Force eight years back, fail to provide the desired results?

If the sources at the defence base in Chandipur-on-sea are to be believed, the PTA, also known as Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV), didn’t perform as required reportedly forcing the defence authorities to purchase the same from Israel and Italy.

The imported PTAs have, however, been successfully test-flown from the Integrated Test Range (ITR) here on many occasions. But what has left the defence experts shocked is that after spending over Rs 165 crore and a lapse of nearly three decades, the Indiamade PTA, produced by Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) and Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL), did not fully meet the requirements of the IAF.

‘The Ministry of Defence (MoD) has recently cleared a proposal for its bulk production. It is nothing but a bolt from the blue. On the other hand, the unsatisfied IAF has put on hold its induction which has affected the training of pilots and missile crew,’ a retired defence official said.

Disclosing the drawbacks of the PTA, the sources informed that the engine developed by HAL had certain limitations.

‘The indigenous PTA could fly up to an altitude of only 6,500 metres against the requirement of 9,000 metres. Besides, HAL offered a guarantee of only five landings against an envisioned requirement for minimum 10 landings.

But the IAF had accepted these limitations so that training did not get further affected,’ the sources said.

‘But it was a nightmare for the IAF after it revealed numerous defects and design deficiencies in PTA. Though these were brought to the notice of the DRDO, but none of the improvements was proved. And worse, now the MoD has ordered HAL for bulk production without verifying the aircraft’s performance,’ the sources added.

Link

sum
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10057
Joined: 08 May 2007 17:04
Location: (IT-vity && DRDO) nagar

Postby sum » 17 May 2008 10:13

So, the Lakshya is a dud? :-?

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17016
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Postby Rahul M » 17 May 2008 11:17

^^^^^

No sources named, name of reporter not mentioned.
No credibility at all.

Believe it at your own risk.

Lakshya does not satisfy the high end requirements of the IAF. This is well known for a long time, which is why the foreign PTAs were bought.

Lakshya project was for a low cost reusable low to medium performance PTA,
a requirement it satisfies perfectly.

Igorr
BRFite
Posts: 598
Joined: 01 Feb 2005 18:13
Contact:

Postby Igorr » 17 May 2008 13:06

sum wrote:So, the Lakshya is a dud? :-?
No, the babus are corrumpied with foreign natashas most prob :mrgreen:

Tilak
BRFite
Posts: 733
Joined: 31 Jul 2005 20:19
Location: Old Lal Masjid @BRFATA (*Renovation*)

Postby Tilak » 17 May 2008 19:02

Israel lags on Phalcon delivery
- Eyes in sky meant for Indian Air Force delayed for the second time
SUJAN DUTTA

[quote]New Delhi, May 16: After the Russians and the Americans, with whom the Indian armed forces have issues over delays or conditions attached to their military equipment, it is now the turn of Israel to slip behind schedule for the delivery of high-tech hardware for the Indian Air Force.

A source in the Indian Air Force has confirmed that the delivery of the first Phalcon will be delayed. It was expected in September but is now more likely to reach India only at the end of the first quarter of 2009, disrupting the Indian Air Force’s force-building plans.

Israel, which is India’s second largest supplier of military equipment, has told the Indian Air Force that it will not be able to deliver the Phalcon Airborne Early Warning and Control Systems — command centres in the sky — by September this year when the first of the three aircraft was due. It has told India that its delivery of two Aerostat radars — surveillance equipment on a balloon tethered to a radar station on the ground — will also be delayed.

This is the second time that the delivery schedule of the Phalcons has been disrupted. The original schedule envisaged the delivery of the first aircraft in November 2007, the second in August 2008 and the third in the second half of 2009.

The delays mean that the air force will now have to rework its timetable of building up force levels for “network-centric battle management platformsâ€

putnanja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4464
Joined: 26 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: searching for the next al-qaida #3

Postby putnanja » 18 May 2008 09:36


Juggi G
BRFite
Posts: 1070
Joined: 11 Mar 2007 19:16
Location: Martyr Bhagat Singh Nagar District, Doaba, Punjab, Bharat. De Ghuma ke :)

Postby Juggi G » 18 May 2008 10:23

A Little Turbulence in the Air Force over the Love Story of an Officer and an Air Man
Indian Express
[quote]A Little Turbulence in the Air Force over the Love Story of an Officer and an Air Man
Posted online: Sunday, May 18, 2008 at 0025 hrs

Woman officer, a Flt Lt, wants to marry Sergeant. IAF says it won’t interfere but conducts survey of all woman officers to get feedback to ‘evolve guidelines’

Chandigarh, May 17: The Indian Air Force is in a bit of turbulence after a woman Air Force officer, a Flight Lieutenant, has said that she wants to marry a junior, a Sergeant, a non-commissioned officer.

In the IAF’s strict hierarchy, that’s a problem and tradition seems to be standing in the way.

So Air Headquarters, Delhi, has thought it best to conduct a “survey among lady officersâ€

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36415
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Postby SaiK » 18 May 2008 19:54

RaviBg wrote:Pak, China threat: IAF to deploy Sukhois

The move is significant since the Sukhois, which have a cruising speed of 3,200 km and can carry eight tonne of armaments, can strike targets deep inside China after taking off from Tezpur. Their radius of operation, of course, can be cranked up to around 8,000 km with air-to-air refuelling by IL-78 tankers.


All said well.. still, I am wary off China.. especially the need to deploy AESA radar on the Ramba with 450kms ranged scanning and tracking, and able to destroy air targets at 300kms with a-a ks172s and surface with brahmos.

any subtle news on brahmos warheads with the n word yet? furthermore, we should not be stuck with nato tactics vs. russkie, since chinese are more russkie philosophy & tech with their own home fiddled grown stuffs.

The more weapons and range we can weaponize rambha, the better is our security.

more augmented rambas are needed.. heard IAF facing pilot problems as they are retiring and quiting to join better paid civil services.

GuruPrabhu
BRFite
Posts: 1169
Joined: 01 Apr 2008 03:32
Location: Thrissur, Kerala 59.93.8.169

Postby GuruPrabhu » 18 May 2008 20:04

SaiK wrote:
more augmented rambas are needed.. heard IAF facing pilot problems as they are retiring and quiting to join better paid civil services.


IAS or IPS?

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36415
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Postby SaiK » 18 May 2008 20:11

alright.. civilian aviation services.

Igorr
BRFite
Posts: 598
Joined: 01 Feb 2005 18:13
Contact:

Postby Igorr » 18 May 2008 23:53

[quote]Israel lags on Phalcon delivery
- Eyes in sky meant for Indian Air Force delayed for the second time
SUJAN DUTTA

New Delhi, May 16: After the Russians and the Americans, with whom the Indian armed forces have issues over delays or conditions attached to their military equipment, it is now the turn of Israel to slip behind schedule for the delivery of high-tech hardware for the Indian Air Force.

A source in the Indian Air Force has confirmed that the delivery of the first Phalcon will be delayed. It was expected in September but is now more likely to reach India only at the end of the first quarter of 2009, disrupting the Indian Air Force’s force-building plans.

Israel, which is India’s second largest supplier of military equipment, has told the Indian Air Force that it will not be able to deliver the Phalcon Airborne Early Warning and Control Systems — command centres in the sky — by September this year when the first of the three aircraft was due. It has told India that its delivery of two Aerostat radars — surveillance equipment on a balloon tethered to a radar station on the ground — will also be delayed.

This is the second time that the delivery schedule of the Phalcons has been disrupted. The original schedule envisaged the delivery of the first aircraft in November 2007, the second in August 2008 and the third in the second half of 2009.

The delays mean that the air force will now have to rework its timetable of building up force levels for “network-centric battle management platformsâ€

GuruPrabhu
BRFite
Posts: 1169
Joined: 01 Apr 2008 03:32
Location: Thrissur, Kerala 59.93.8.169

Postby GuruPrabhu » 19 May 2008 00:16

We will condemn when the delay is accompanied by the demand of ransom to the tune of billions of dollars for miscalculating the number of screws needed to fit the dome on the aircraft. Russia is our friend but she has become increasingly belligerent more so in the recent past, as friends we have and should raise concern about something that is obviously wrong. Pointing out that delays are caused by other nations too doesnt absolve Russia from sticking to agreements with regards to cost and timeframes

Igorr
BRFite
Posts: 598
Joined: 01 Feb 2005 18:13
Contact:

Postby Igorr » 19 May 2008 00:59

GuruPrabhu wrote:We will condemn when the delay is accompanied by the demand of ransom to the tune of billions of dollars for miscalculating the number of screws needed to fit the dome on the aircraft.
Oh, i see, i see. You're waiting to some Russian fault in this case to condemn :wink:

rsingh
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3391
Joined: 19 Jan 2005 01:05
Location: Pindi
Contact:

Postby rsingh » 19 May 2008 01:35

Igorr wrote:
GuruPrabhu wrote:We will condemn when the delay is accompanied by the demand of ransom to the tune of billions of dollars for miscalculating the number of screws needed to fit the dome on the aircraft.
Oh, i see, i see. You're waiting to some Russian fault in this case to condemn :wink:


I wonder if you really understood what was said. Time to abandon that Altavista thingi..........get Google translator.

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4444
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Postby Cain Marko » 19 May 2008 03:50

GuruPrabhu wrote:We will condemn when the delay is accompanied by the demand of ransom to the tune of billions of dollars for miscalculating the number of screws needed to fit the dome on the aircraft. Russia is our friend but she has become increasingly belligerent more so in the recent past, as friends we have and should raise concern about something that is obviously wrong. Pointing out that delays are caused by other nations too doesnt absolve Russia from sticking to agreements with regards to cost and timeframes


One understands Igorr's vexation. I sympathise as well. Russia-INdia defense related trade is huge in volume, there are bound to be some hiccups. compared to the size, israeli and french delays should be inexcusable.
Btw what "ransom" are you talking about? A 40 ton carrier with a complement of 16 a/c is dirt cheap at USD 2 billion whether we like it or not. Try going the euro route and you won't even get a 10 ton LPD with 5 choppers for the same cost! Delays or not I'd like to see where india can get 240 MKI types for USD 8.5 bln (and thats after the cost escalation!). The miscaluculation that you were alluding to (Gorky and associated mess I take it) is also a fault of the IN and its plethora of teams that kept on saying all was alright until very recently. What were those "teams of experts" doing there? Vodka? What belligerence are you talking about? Cold shouldering the Russians while cozying up to the US for nuclear deals doesn't exactly foster warmth does it?
I understand that pointing the weakness of others' doesn't exactly absolve russia for its messes, but surely we are mighty quick in getting slighted when it comes to russia.

Regards,
CM.

Vivek K
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2343
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

Postby Vivek K » 19 May 2008 10:37

CM,

Since you say that the Gorky is dirt cheap (and is 3-4 yrs delayed), please provide us with a comparative cost of such equipment from other sources.

Thanks.

Igorr,

We would like to wait and watch. However, if we rely on any one (Russia or Israel) supplier too much, we will suffer such problems. The Phalcon is a test of Israel as a supplier. If it does not come, then India will learn the lesson that we can only depend on ourselves.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Postby Singha » 19 May 2008 10:40

wasnt the delivery of the airframe itself delayed to Israel. few months back
some photo of IL76 in yellow primer at Beriev airport in Taganrog was posted.

PaulJI
BRFite
Posts: 149
Joined: 10 Mar 2007 00:49

Postby PaulJI » 19 May 2008 14:42

Cain Marko wrote:[Btw what "ransom" are you talking about? A 40 ton carrier with a complement of 16 a/c is dirt cheap at USD 2 billion whether we like it or not. Try going the euro route and you won't even get a 10 ton LPD with 5 choppers for the same cost! ...

Regards,
CM.


You would get a lot more than that.

You could get both Mistral & Tonerre (>20000 ton LHDs), & 5 choppers each, & have money left over. $2 bn is almost twice what the UK paid for all four 16000 ton Bay class LSDs combined, or both Albion & Bulwark (18500 ton LPDs) combined, including their landing craft & all associated equipment (in fact, more than those two plus all 6 Point class militarised ro-ros), & more than twice what Spain is paying for Juan Carlos I (27000 ton LHD).

It's half the budget for a 65000 ton CVF - and the CVF budget includes enlarging docks, & other associated works.

I think you have a rather unrealistic idea of the cost of European ships.

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7730
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Postby rohitvats » 19 May 2008 15:45

There we go again. I thought we had buried this argument. Where's Shankar?

Russia-INdia defense related trade is huge in volume, there are bound
to be some hiccups
You allude this statement as if Russia is one monolith production firm which does all the resource planning and produces all the harware. It's the invidual factories which do all the work, right. The inability of the shipyard building Vick to deliver on time is unrelated to Sukhoi prouction schedule. Unless you assume that a finite resource is being rationed between different groups. Russia owes up for the delays as it is with Russia and the factory/shipyard in question that we have signed deal with. So the argument is irrelevant.

A 40 ton carrier with a complement of 16 a/c is dirt cheap at USD 2 billion whether we like it or not. Try going the euro route and you won't even get a 10 ton LPD with 5 choppers for the same cost! Delays or not I'd like to see where india can get 240 MKI types for USD 8.5 bln (and thats after the cost escalation!). The miscaluculation that you were alluding to (Gorky and associated mess I take it) is also a fault of the IN and its plethora of teams that kept on saying all was alright until very recently. What were those "teams of experts" doing there? Vodka?

There we go again on the cost issue. So basically what you are saying is since the price quoted was dirt cheap in the first place, India should not mind the extra cost, actually ransom amount and pay up. And again it was the IN fault. The russkies are angels with white wings. The LPD argument has already been debunked by other posters. And we went for the Vick only because it was available at the erthswhile price. I'm not sure what IN's decision would have been if the price was what we will have to pay. As for the SU-30MKI part, my freind you make it sound as if a big favor has been done to us. Well, the russkies would have sold to anyone with money. and they are doign it. So what's the big deal. As for the price part, thats more a funstion of economics than realpolitiks.

What belligerence are you talking about? Cold shouldering the Russians while cozying up to the US for nuclear deals doesn't exactly foster warmth does it?
Ah!!! the ultimate gem. It's orgasmic in its arguments actually. Teh zist of the argument is, "India better stick to Russian shpere of influence or else they'll squeeze our balls".Some extraordinary example of "freindship" we have here

sauravjha
BRFite
Posts: 186
Joined: 17 Apr 2008 14:11

Postby sauravjha » 19 May 2008 16:17

you know something , if we buy something Amrikhan and it is delivered real quick , that'll definitely set the cat among the pigeons. Let's wait and see what happens with the P-8.

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4444
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Postby Cain Marko » 19 May 2008 22:49

Vivek K wrote:CM,

Since you say that the Gorky is dirt cheap (and is 3-4 yrs delayed), please provide us with a comparative cost of such equipment from other sources.

Thanks.

The last I looked, the Italian Cavour cost around 2.2 bln USD exclusive of the air wing. Do the math for 8 odd fighters (ONLY STOVL at that) like the JSF and figure the cost. If it had a complement of 16 rafale (because we have 16 fulcrums on the Vikad), what would be the price including support etc? I'd wager about 4-5 bln USD at least. Also, the Cavour type has certain limitations when compared to the Gorky and i'd wager that pound for pound, the Gorky delivers a greater punch.
Now, I'm sure that a lot of folks will say aah but the cost of operation is much cheaper and so on. But I ask them, prove it! What is the cost of operating a Vikad per year and what is the cost of operating a Cavour per year. Use the same freaking criteria if you can. Then add the resulting figures for a 30 year period to the upfront costs of each ship. then add costs such as MLU/refits. We'll see how much (if at all) the massive difference in upfront costs are offset by cost of operation.
The delay of 3-4 years for a carrier the size of the Gorky is hardly such a big deal. They expect to have it ready circa 2010-11. good enough. It was an unrealistic expectation in the first place in 2004 to have thought it to be ready in 4 years.
However, what gets under my craw the most is not about the ship or its delay. Its the fact that IN experts were there all the freaking time, from the very beginning till the delay was announced. don't tell me it took them 10 years to figure out they are getting a raw deal! bottomline remains, if you want extremely cheap hardware with the performance of extremely expensive hardware, you have to incur "other" costs such as delays and a few cost escalations. No need to make such a broughaha about it. Ditto with the MKI deal. Whine all you want, but there is no way you can get an a/c of MKI capability at the price the IAF got it for. forget the Typhoons and Rafales and shornets, even a m2k-5, which is nowhere near as capable as an MKI would cost a LOT more.

We would like to wait and watch. However, if we rely on any one (Russia or Israel) supplier too much, we will suffer such problems. The Phalcon is a test of Israel as a supplier. If it does not come, then India will learn the lesson that we can only depend on ourselves.

Point is exactly as you say vivek. India needs to depend on itself. What is aggravating is that it should take 'em a few more mult-billion-$$ deals to figure this fundamental point! :evil:

Regards,
CM.

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4444
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Postby Cain Marko » 19 May 2008 22:55

PaulJI wrote:
Cain Marko wrote:[Btw what "ransom" are you talking about? A 40 ton carrier with a complement of 16 a/c is dirt cheap at USD 2 billion whether we like it or not. Try going the euro route and you won't even get a 10 ton LPD with 5 choppers for the same cost! ...

Regards,
CM.


You would get a lot more than that.

You could get both Mistral & Tonerre (>20000 ton LHDs), & 5 choppers each, & have money left over. $2 bn is almost twice what the UK paid for all four 16000 ton Bay class LSDs combined, or both Albion & Bulwark (18500 ton LPDs) combined, including their landing craft & all associated equipment (in fact, more than those two plus all 6 Point class militarised ro-ros), & more than twice what Spain is paying for Juan Carlos I (27000 ton LHD).

It's half the budget for a 65000 ton CVF - and the CVF budget includes enlarging docks, & other associated works.

I think you have a rather unrealistic idea of the cost of European ships.


The comparison to the LPH types was only for effect, more of a hyperbole. Not to be taken literally. The greater point that I was trying to make was that European hardware in general, is a LOT more expensive. Whether you look at a MiG-29 vs Mirage-2000 upgrade comparison or a Cavour vs Vikad comparison, I think the price difference will be obvious.
Btw, the cost of a CVF that you allude to is without its fighter wing, correct?

Regards,
CM
Last edited by Cain Marko on 19 May 2008 22:57, edited 1 time in total.

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4444
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Postby Cain Marko » 19 May 2008 23:27

rohitvats wrote:There we go again. I thought we had buried this argument. Where's Shankar?

You allude this statement as if Russia is one monolith production firm which does all the resource planning and produces all the harware. It's the invidual factories which do all the work, right. The inability of the shipyard building Vick to deliver on time is unrelated to Sukhoi prouction schedule. Unless you assume that a finite resource is being rationed between different groups. Russia owes up for the delays as it is with Russia and the factory/shipyard in question that we have signed deal with. So the argument is irrelevant.

Right, so tell that to the gentleman making the comment that it is russia as a whole that is to blame and not just the individual shipyard.
There we go again on the cost issue. So basically what you are saying is since the price quoted was dirt cheap in the first place, India should not mind the extra cost, actually ransom amount and pay up.

What i'm saying is that if people look at the overall picture and compare it to the other choices, its not half bad. And russia is not some demon out to eat our babies. lets realize that so long as indigenous products are ignored, and a desire to max out every penny until it screams remains in the Indian psyche, there is simply no match to russia as a supplier. If you want contractual obligations to be written in stone and followed, be ready to fork over some big time dinero. And even then delays and booboos are very possible (look at the M2k-5 deliveries to greece). S**t tends to happen.
And again it was the IN fault.

My point in highlighting the IN's role in the whole fiasco was to provide a more balanced perspective. Considering the overall picture, I personally feel it is immature at best to be blaming any party in this mess. The Russians agree on an absurdly cheap deal (even though it is amply clear to every joe that its not possible), India is very happy; now that the deal is not so absurdly cheap (but still very cost effective), no need to get the knickers in a bunch. such crap will stop only when India achieves complete self sufficiency in this dept. And that won't happen until phoren loving services and bribe loving babus and politicians get their asses whupped.
The russkies are angels with white wings.

never said so, only that they are the only ones willing to haggle with penny wise Indians. They may be no angels, but I doubt they are demons.
And we went for the Vick only because it was available at the erthswhile price. I'm not sure what IN's decision would have been if the price was what we will have to pay.

Be as it may, the future is always unpredictable and I'm sure the IN knows this. Surely, when even internet forum bosses knew that the Gorky would take a lot more than 4 years in 2004, wouldn't the IN experts on the ground know better?
As for the SU-30MKI part, my freind you make it sound as if a big favor has been done to us. Well, the russkies would have sold to anyone with money. and they are doign it. So what's the big deal. As for the price part, thats more a funstion of economics than realpolitiks.

The favors (if any) my friend are mutual. just as russia needed India's help, so did india need russkie help. Remember GOI couldn't afford M2k-5s (which was IAF's original choice). As for "russkies having sold to anyone", they obviously sold india gold std eqpmt (esp in terms of the flankers) while China (despite having tons more $$$) didn't get it. Let us not be forgetting such "little" "favors" as you call them.
Ah!!! the ultimate gem. It's orgasmic in its arguments actually. Teh zist of the argument is, "India better stick to Russian shpere of influence or else they'll squeeze our balls".Some extraordinary example of "freindship" we have here

Right old chap, never did i mention anything about friendship in my post. But the fact remains that the roosies offer a golden goose, India turns it down in favor of promised "land of milk and honey" and you expect them to feel swell about it eh? Please look at how India's other traditional ally, france is taking this type of behavior. If you hadn't heard, they've lodged complaints because of political armtwisting by the U.S. They've almost given up on the MRCA (which btw started out as being their deal) as well. As far as friendship goes (since you brought it up), I'd say that the Russkies have earned a wide berth from peacenik Indians after the amount of help rendered in terms of nuke subs, cryo engines, boycotting TSP etc etc.

Regards,
Cm.

ranganathan
BRFite
Posts: 277
Joined: 06 Feb 2008 23:14

Postby ranganathan » 20 May 2008 00:40

$ 4 bil per CVF is just the estimate. :roll: . Rest assured by the time it actually comes the price would have shot upto a minimum of $ 5-6 billion. The gorky for under $ 2 bil is still decent.

sanjaychoudhry
BRFite
Posts: 756
Joined: 13 Jul 2007 00:39
Location: La La Land

Postby sanjaychoudhry » 20 May 2008 01:12

Thales and India's Samtel create jv in India to make helmet visors

French defence and security group Thales and India's Samtel said they agreed to create a joint-venture company in India to make helmet visors for the Indian air force.

No financial details were disclosed.

In a joint statement they groups said Samtel will hold 74 percent of the News Delhi-based group, to be called Samtel Thales (other-otc: THLEF.PK - news - people ) Avionics, and Thales the remainder.

http://www.forbes.com/markets/feeds/afx/2008/05/19/afx5025818.html

John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2411
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Postby John » 20 May 2008 01:44

ranganathan wrote:$ 4 bil per CVF is just the estimate. :roll: . Rest assured by the time it actually comes the price would have shot upto a minimum of $ 5-6 billion. The gorky for under $ 2 bil is still decent.

Cavour cost was about 2 billion, IAC looking at about 1 billion will definetly hit 2 billion+ by the time it is completed.

PaulJI
BRFite
Posts: 149
Joined: 10 Mar 2007 00:49

Postby PaulJI » 20 May 2008 01:45

ranganathan wrote:$ 4 bil per CVF is just the estimate. :roll: . Rest assured by the time it actually comes the price would have shot upto a minimum of $ 5-6 billion....


Tricky, since much of the cost is covered by a fixed-price contract (the rest is the government=provided element), & BAe, Thales & VT won't be able to hold the incomplete ships hostage in Rosyth for more money. :lol:

ranganathan
BRFite
Posts: 277
Joined: 06 Feb 2008 23:14

Postby ranganathan » 20 May 2008 03:07

John wrote:
ranganathan wrote:$ 4 bil per CVF is just the estimate. :roll: . Rest assured by the time it actually comes the price would have shot upto a minimum of $ 5-6 billion. The gorky for under $ 2 bil is still decent.

Cavour cost was about 2 billion, IAC looking at about 1 billion will definetly hit 2 billion+ by the time it is completed.

Cavour is a piddly carrier which can barely carry 20 aircrafts in total. It cost about 2.2 bil.It is too mediocre to be compared with gorky. If cavour is enlarged to match gorky it will easily cost around 3-3.5 bil.

Igorr
BRFite
Posts: 598
Joined: 01 Feb 2005 18:13
Contact:

Postby Igorr » 20 May 2008 03:35

I loved how the information about Israeli delay provoked here unending debates on whether to blame Russia or not :mrgreen:
Enough jentlemen! Let come to the issue. Arnt interesting for you if Israel can manufacture the emitting modules of AESA byself? From the last information obvious it buys AESA modules from Ratheon. If so, how one can expect from Israel ToT for AESA (as many here hope)? Can the delay of Ratheon contractor be related to US unwilling or armtwisting? Is anybody interested to start even intelectual investigation about the issue?

kuldipchager
BRFite
Posts: 117
Joined: 30 Aug 2007 20:35
Location: USA
Contact:

Postby kuldipchager » 20 May 2008 04:58

We Better stay with Mig 35.Mig 35 is also coming with aesa Radar.I am sure We do Have Some BRAIN.If We use little,No Harm.We can upgrared to our weather conditions.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Postby Austin » 20 May 2008 05:52

Mig-35 is for the brain dead .......... I think Typhoon or F-18 , it should be.

Vivek K
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2343
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

Postby Vivek K » 20 May 2008 09:44

Igorr wrote:I loved how the information about Israeli delay provoked here unending debates on whether to blame Russia or not :mrgreen:
Enough jentlemen! Let come to the issue. Arnt interesting for you if Israel can manufacture the emitting modules of AESA byself? From the last information obvious it buys AESA modules from Ratheon. If so, how one can expect from Israel ToT for AESA (as many here hope)? Can the delay of Ratheon contractor be related to US unwilling or armtwisting? Is anybody interested to start even intelectual investigation about the issue?

There's been very little debate. Russia is playing games with some deals. Israel may be doing the same.

I get the feeling Igorr that you may be over-staying your welcome here! If you can understand what I mean!

ranganathan
BRFite
Posts: 277
Joined: 06 Feb 2008 23:14

Postby ranganathan » 20 May 2008 10:49

Igorr has been here for a long while and I don't see why people seem to be offended by his views? Frankly I find the pro- US views from so called "Indians" more despicable.

rakall
BRFite
Posts: 798
Joined: 10 May 2005 10:26

Postby rakall » 20 May 2008 11:01

Austin wrote:Mig-35 is for the brain dead .......... I think Typhoon or F-18 , it should be.



In the final dialogues of the movie Se7en, Morgan freeman says "Ernest Hemingway once said “the world is a fineplace and worth fighting forâ€

PaulJI
BRFite
Posts: 149
Joined: 10 Mar 2007 00:49

Postby PaulJI » 20 May 2008 14:36

kuldipchager wrote:We Better stay with Mig 35.Mig 35 is also coming with aesa Radar....


MiG-35s AESA radar is a few years behind all the others in development. In terms of TRM size & weight, it appears to be equivalent to the first generation fighter AESAs in the Japanese F-2 & the US squadron of retrofitted F-15C. It's flown with an array with only 680 elements, because of those size & weight issues - and remember, the MiG-29 has a good-sized nose, & is heavier than most of the other contenders. We don't know how good the Russian software is, of course. They certainly have good skills.


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 25 guests