Bharat Rakshak Forum Announcement

Hello Everyone,

A warm welcome back to the Bharat Rakshak Forum.

Important Notice: Due to a corruption in the BR forum database we regret to announce that data records relating to some of our registered users have been lost. We estimate approx. 500 user details are deleted.

To ease the process of recreating the user IDs we request members that have previously posted on the BR forums to recognise and identify their posts, once the posts are identified please contact the BRF moderator team by emailing BRF Mod Team with your post details.

The mod team will be able to update your username, email etc. so that the user history can be maintained.

Unfortunately for members that have never posted or have had all their posts deleted i.e. users that have 0 posts, we will be unable to recreate your account hence we request that you re-register again.

We apologise for any inconvenience caused and thank you for your understanding.

Regards,
Seetal

The Trash Thread in the Trash Can (Use 4545 to Merge Posts)

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.
KrishnaK
BRFite
Posts: 884
Joined: 29 Mar 2005 23:00

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby KrishnaK » 21 Nov 2014 05:35

Austin wrote:Its a monkeys game with the whole idea of furthering US Interest by creating FUD.

Back in 70's and 80's when India was perceived as enemy and closer to NAM/SU , US played the same FUD game against India by supporting the pakistanis ecnomically and militarily to engage and contain India and played it well.
It's very funny, you talking about FUD. It is completely and utterly baseless that the US tried to contain India at any point. It is also very absurd. All democratic countries have to build up a narrative of enmity,confrontation or containment in public. That is what you have to do if those policies have to sustain changes in administration. Can you point to any sustained narrative in US government publications that state the requirement for India to be contained ? Documents far more embarrassing, like Nixon and Kissinger's role in the bangladesh genocide, right down the minutes of one on one meetings, have been made public. On the other hand US has been India's largest aid donor especially during our early years. The research preceding the green revolution that allowed India to become self sufficient was sponsored (in part ?) by the Rockefeller foundation. Norman Borlaug was awarded the Padma Vibhushan for that. The US remains our largest source of trading surplus a lot of which is services.

China was a sleepy town then so US found no threat to itself , till Henry Kissenger/Nixon found China to be useful anti-Soviet allay and befriended China to contain the SU.
Even when you aren't really coming up with Spin you're very wrong. The US fought with China in the Korean war if you care to remember. India was considered a strategic partner during the Kennedy era.

Today things have changed , China has the 2nd largest economy in the World and is the largest owner of US treasuries/bond and with rise of Chinese Economy rises its military and its perceived threat to US Domination in the world.

The same FUD game goes on , US now wants to use India to contain China and use Pakistan to play the same game against us. Again not in the interest of India or China or Pakistan but to further its own Goal.
US hegemony being eroded by China is not in our interest. I don't particularly care about Chinese interest. It makes a lot of sense to increase our options. The best bet is to increase interdependence and actually provide something which others need/want, whether it be exports, market or security.

India being dhoti clad SDRE knows this too well as it has been the victim of same game in the past ....It would stay away from this or that alliance that US is trying to put India into and has joined the BRICS and next year joining SCO ....again to protect its own interest.

India would engage with US as it does with any other nation and with US and China being India 1st and 2nd largest trading partner but wont fall into US trap of playing monkeys game to further US National interest at its own cost.
We're very much in the game of containing China, whether or not we join the BRICS or SCO. Whether we do so as a part of an alliance or in loose concert, it is definitely the US which is our largest and most important security partner. What does joining BRICS and SCO mean really ? But it does make you guys happy, so cheers.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6140
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby brar_w » 21 Nov 2014 07:39

saurabh.mhapsekar wrote:
brar_w wrote:It is imho, because the threat isn't just from the J-31, its from a combination of J-31's, J-20's at the upper end, Flanker clones and the emerging Su-35's and the Super Flanker Clone that will naturally follow from it on the lower end. Given the fact that they spend so much more then India on National defense, it would not be unreasonable to assume that they would maintain a very healthy lead over the IAF when it comes to local production, both of the J20, and J-31 over the Rafale and FGFA and with the lower end flanker clones, and Super Flanker clones (Su-35 knockoffs) in addition to knocking off Anti-Access denial systems like the S-400 and its clones that will logically follow.

We will have also 500+ 4.5 gen (600+ if LCA Mk2 happens on time), FGFA and hopefully AMCA in test flights by the time J31 is mature enough for Tibet airfields.


It aint as much about what you will have, it is about what capacity one has to produce. China is going to concurrently be producing its flanker clones and possibly two high end stealth fighters (relatively speaking). Their production volumes are likely to be significantly higher as that can be based on historic figures. In addition to that they would be possibly acquiring Su-35's, and from what I see the small order being predicted (28-50) is pretty much an immediate needs thing with the actual intention to incorporate its sophisticated technology to its own mass produced flanker clone both in the land and for the sea. The will qualitatively up their lower_level stuff, leveraging the Su-35, and with russia's help in propulsion and through natural development, and espionage produce at least 1 if not two stealth aircraft. They are looking to stand shoulder to shoulder with the USN in the region, and that of the deployed USAF presence so their projected volumes internally would almost in all scenarios be a multiple of what the IAF can manage to produce internally. Don;t think this trend will reverse in the next 10-15 years although I am always open to a pleasant surprise. This does not extend to one, two or 3 fighter types. This extends into sub-systems as well. Things like AESA radars, electronics and jammers. These guys are preparing to deny the USN in the Pacific and that is the scale/pace they are modernizing at. Given these realities, the Rafale, brilliant though it is, cannot be procured at an overall cost that is comparable to what others in the WEST are paying for a comprehensive 5th generation aircraft, with 5th generation stealth, fifth generation avionics etc. If this "5th" generation price was paid in "4th generation or even 4.5" generation timelines, it would have been perfectly acceptable. After all, had the IAF gotten this thing through fast, they would have been flying this thing by 2010, which would have given the IAF a good breathing room before the Chinese finally got a handle on modernizing their flankers, developing 5th generation fighter, acquiring S400 level air defense, and making massive improvements (by western media reports) in their organic IAD capability (S300 clones). But 2018 deliveries and a 2020-2025 timeframe with GOOD NUMBERS means that china would by then (Thats still 6-10 years out) have considerably advanced its BOTTOM as far as quality goes, and would be well on its way to mass-produce one or both stealth fighters. They don't have to worry about Transfer of Technology, or the babus sitting on files that involve forex transfer and would therefore have no upper limit to what they can produce per annum. Expect them to build a comprehensive fleet size in about a 1/3 the time it takes the IAF to fully acquire and assemble/build the Rafale and the FGFA, given parity (Development complete to inductions per year is what I am comparing) They have made these fighters in house, and have control over their relationship with russia for propulsion if required.

This is before the reveal the big and heavy stuff in the stealth bomber, which many in the media suspect they are developing in secret. Not painting a gloomy picture here but all I am saying is that there is a time and place to pay 20 Billion dollars for a fighter purchase. Its not when the said fighter would have been in serial production for 16 years when the first squadron is delivered to the IAF. Hence, I am of the opinion that the IAF look at the Rafale (or rather the MOD) for what its worth, a capable multi-role fighter that provides india a quality 4.5 generation product to hold the fleet until India's own multi-role 4+ generation fighter in the MKII LCA is under development. And as such, in the strategic picture it is merely a stop gap given how insignificant the number is compared to what the threat can field (and increasing the number becomes cost prohibitive). So TOT here that is blowing up the purse, is better spent elsewhere in directly acquiring technology or forming partnerships or outright acquiring companies whereby one does not need to run into the same problems and delays on the AMCA that one ran into on the LCA.

In Sum, China has a classified arms budget that is wildly considered underreported. Even then it is a multiple of the defense budget of India. One reasons is economic, the other is they are trying to deny a much greater threat that of the US and its pacific friends. For that they need to develop and produce a lot of stuff both at the high end and the the low end. Lots of good quality stuff, and some if not a lot of high quality stuff. They are doing this concurrently. What they have done is shown utter disregard to IP. Because of that, their bottom stuff is going to get a lot better especially in the field of fighters and air defense systems given their recent acquisitions of the flanker family and the negotiations of the S-400 and Su-35. Lets say their bottom quality stuff in 2020 would be what the Su-30 MKI is now. That would not be an unreasonable assumption given that they will push through AESA and other enhancements including weapons. So you cannot enter into an arms race and match them pound for pound in acquisition. Therefore, you must maintain a distinct qualitative edge over them. Here the systems that can do that, and investments in which will provide the most "bang for the buck" would be systems like the AMCA and the FGFA. So these programs should consume a lot of the precious resources, not spending 20 Billion to acquire a fleet of 120 odd fighters that went into serial production in 1992. China would absolutely love this from an economic perspective that the largest acquisition deal the IAF has ever signed (i think this would be the largest single deal) would be for a fighter the would have flown some 18 years before the first squadron was delivered to the IAF. Like I said at 10-12 Billion this looks pretty good because it serves a genuine short-medium term need. The remaining 10 billion can go into the AMCA, and acquiring strategic technologies, like the ones in the pipeline not the ones that the rest of the world had in production about a decade ago.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15925
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby NRao » 21 Nov 2014 07:56

Its a monkeys game with the whole idea of furthering US Interest by creating FUD.


Every nation who wants a place at the high table has done that. No exceptions.

China is doing it today. And has replaced Russia as the #2.

Kashi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2586
Joined: 06 May 2011 13:53

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby Kashi » 21 Nov 2014 08:06

KrishnaK wrote: Even when you aren't really coming up with Spin you're very wrong. The US fought with China in the Korean war if you care to remember. India was considered a strategic partner during the Kennedy era.


So was Iran during the Shah regime, Cuba before Castro, Saddam before Gulf war I. Likewise Egypt switched from a Soviet to a US poodle after 1981,

US hegemony being eroded by China is not in our interest.


Why not?

We're very much in the game of containing China, whether or not we join the BRICS or SCO. Whether we do so as a part of an alliance or in loose concert, it is definitely the US which is our largest and most important security partner. What does joining BRICS and SCO mean really ? But it does make you guys happy, so cheers.


Absolute bollocks that..our so-called largest and important security partner is busy in containing us using the vile Pakhanis. But then that seems to make you happy so cheers..

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5080
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby Viv S » 21 Nov 2014 08:45

Its astonishing to see folks here really more concerned about the US than China.

Image



Pakistan's leeching of the US ends when the latter's campaign in Afghanistan does. Our geopolitical tussle with China is just beginning.

Image

Kashi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2586
Joined: 06 May 2011 13:53

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby Kashi » 21 Nov 2014 08:54

Viv S wrote:Its astonishing to see folks here really more concerned about the US than China.


No, some of us clearly believe that we have legitimate concerns about both US and China, even if they are outwardly different. Some of use refuse to accept the drivel that "US is India's most important security partner". Reading some of the posts here, I understand the phrase MUTU better than ever.

And to jog the memory

1971 War: How the US tried to corner India

Viv S wrote:Pakistan's leeching of the US ends when the latter's campaign in Afghanistan does. Our geopolitical tussle with China is just beginning.


Wishful thinking. It did not end at the end of the last campaign, it will not end now. If you remember, Robin Raphel was in the mid-90s, the Unocal- Taliban agreement was in 1996 or thereabouts.

America will always be involved in Pakistan alongside Allah and Army. Also, they seem to have long term plans to keep some troops stationed in Afghanistan, so there campaign will never end ergo Pakis will continue to leech and continue with their attempts to bleed us with a 1000 cuts..

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5080
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby Viv S » 21 Nov 2014 08:58

Austin wrote:
Saurav Jha ‏@SJha1618

DRDO is involved in over 200 joint projects with the Russians. And how many with the Americans exactly?


FGFA. MTA. BrahMos. I don't know of any other joint project. I suspect Mr Jha is being a little liberal with the term in his tweet.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20120
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby Austin » 21 Nov 2014 09:05

Viv S wrote:FGFA. MTA. BrahMos. I don't know of any other joint project. I suspect Mr Jha is being a little liberal with the term in his tweet.


They would be both big (ATV ) and small project and many would be classified for public to know

deejay
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3725
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby deejay » 21 Nov 2014 09:19

VivS, no one is forgetting China. It is China and a changing world order that brings us to consider an alignment with US. We are not sure if this is right way. Even in the best of days we did not follow the Soviet line though we did have an alignment.

I for one appreciate and support the fiercely independent approach India has had and would not wish for a compromise on that. Aligning with the US - there is mistrust - will mean an equal-equal relationship between the two nations. Is the US ready for that? Will the US extract a heavy price from us as it does from Pakistan?

These are choices we sit upon and discuss in the backdrop of an increasingly aggressive China.

member_20317
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3171
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby member_20317 » 21 Nov 2014 09:24

DRDO could tell that to you but then they will have to kill you.

Must say americans have a way with the words. Always wanted to say that.

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5080
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby Viv S » 21 Nov 2014 09:27

Kashi wrote:No, some of us clearly believe that we have legitimate concerns about both US and China, even if they are outwardly different. Some of use refuse to accept the drivel that "US is India's most important security partner". Reading some of the posts here, I understand the phrase MUTU better than ever.

The presence of US hegemony in Asia is a 'legitimate concern'. The prospect of losing a war against China would warrants a much more severe description.



Tried and failed and as a superpower to boot. China's victory was a lot less ambiguous and geopolitically it was a near peer at the time. Today in contrast, the gulf in power between us is huge.

Wishful thinking. It did not end at the end of the last campaign, it will not end now. If you remember, Robin Raphel was in the mid-90s, the Unocal- Taliban agreement was in 1996 or thereabouts.

The last campaign was about bleeding the Soviets in Afghanistan. This one started with the death of 3000 US citizens, masterminded by a gent found enjoying his retirement in a Pakistani military cantonment. There are parallels to 1980s, but in this case Pakistani proxies have been bleeding the Americans rather than the Soviets.

America will always be involved in Pakistan alongside Allah and Army. Also, they seem to have long term plans to keep some troops stationed in Afghanistan, so there campaign will never end ergo Pakis will continue to leech and continue with their attempts to bleed us with a 1000 cuts..

- April 1979, the first round of sanctions was applied to Pakistan.
- The Soviets invaded Afghanistan in Dec 1979.
- Sanctions were lifted days later.
- The Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan completed in Feb 1989.
- Exactly four months later i.e. June 1989, the US cut off aid to Pakistan.
- 16 months after that i.e Oct 1990, new round of sanctions was imposed on Pakistan.
- Lifted 11 years later, exactly ten days after the events of 11 Sep 2001, as the US campaign in Afghanistan began.

As to the current US footprint in Afghanistan, they're going to scale it back only gradually, to prevent the whole state from melting down post withdrawal a la Iraq, leaving them to explain just what they achieved having invested 15 years, thousands of lives and hundreds of billions of dollars. (BTW retention of US troops is something that India has been lobbying pretty hard for, given our significant economic interests in the country.) Afghanistan has relatively low intrinsic strategic worth to the US; a decade from now they will have no incentive to retain anything beyond a token presence, if that.
Last edited by Viv S on 21 Nov 2014 10:17, edited 2 times in total.

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9376
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby Aditya_V » 21 Nov 2014 09:32

Viv S, but the US did keep Paki F-16's supplied through Turkey. Pakistan got its Nukes, M-9 and M-11's transferred from China in the late 80's with US knowledge and thier ally Saudi funding. Their sanctions on Pakistan was an eyewash since India in early 90's was in no position to re arm.

Avarachan
BRFite
Posts: 465
Joined: 04 Jul 2006 21:06

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby Avarachan » 21 Nov 2014 09:35

Austin wrote:Wonder why are disussing Geo-Politics in Military Dhaga .... Better open new thread in Strategic Section and discuss


As some people seem to have noticed, threads in the "Strategic Issues Forum" are not displayed on BR's front page. I think certain members have intentionally flooded BR's front page with posts favoring a certain country, as they know that many casual readers of BR don't explore past the front page. This issue needs to be addressed and corrected, in my opinion.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15925
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby NRao » 21 Nov 2014 09:37

Wonder why are disussing Geo-Politics in Military Dhaga


FUD.

200 projects like making tires for the MKI. True.

favoring a certain country


Countries.

member_20317
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3171
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby member_20317 » 21 Nov 2014 09:50

NRao wrote:
Countries.


Drag along

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15925
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby NRao » 21 Nov 2014 09:55

ravi_g wrote:
NRao wrote:
Countries.


Drag along


Only trying to help a visitor from the dark side. :) .

I know he deals with a certain country, specializes in fact.

Not a big deal. Prarabdha will take over. 2 weeks to go.

member_20317
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3171
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby member_20317 » 21 Nov 2014 10:04

Agami too

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5080
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby Viv S » 21 Nov 2014 22:40

Austin wrote:
Viv S wrote:FGFA. MTA. BrahMos. I don't know of any other joint project. I suspect Mr Jha is being a little liberal with the term in his tweet.


They would be both big (ATV ) and small project and many would be classified for public to know


ATV's hardly a joint project. The Russians are providing consultancy. While the technologies involved are proprietary, in principle its no different from Fincantieri consulting on the IAC program or EADS vis a vis the Tejas.

As for the rest, I'd imagine if such programs were truly confidential (the ATV project was well known, even before being 'officially' disclosed), Saurav Jha won't have been tweeting about them.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 15002
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby Karan M » 21 Nov 2014 22:51

ATV is a strategic program and the Russians have helped us with our BMD program as well as have some other nations. Ties with Russia though are strategic and beyond transactionary as they have helped across multiple programs. The European firms will not consult with us for the ATV and Khan firms could not even provide consultancy on the LCA.

Now please restrict this Russia versus US versus the rest stuff to one thread, perhaps the JSF one. Its getting tiresome to open multiple threads and see the usual stuff from Amrika rakshaks versus Russia rakshaks.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 15002
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby Karan M » 21 Nov 2014 22:54

Austin wrote:Wonder why are disussing Geo-Politics in Military Dhaga .... Better open new thread in Strategic Section and discuss

Pilatus or HAL’s trainer: Parrikar’s first “Make” decision


Some folks have gone nuts with their desire to "bring US and India closer". This means running down the Russians at every opportunity whereas ignoring the albatross in the room, the freaking freebies to TSP from Pak and the US desire to play equal equal.

Its bloody irritating to open thread after thread and see a handful of posters just regurgitate the same stuff (US this, Russia that) in thread after thread. Every thread from the PAK FA one to this to Naval to others has the same. :roll:

Sagar G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2596
Joined: 22 Dec 2009 19:31
Location: Ghar

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby Sagar G » 21 Nov 2014 22:55

Viv S wrote:
Saurav Jha ‏@SJha1618

DRDO is involved in over 200 joint projects with the Russians. And how many with the Americans exactly?


FGFA. MTA. BrahMos. I don't know of any other joint project. I suspect Mr Jha is being a little liberal with the term in his tweet.


I can't comment on the no. of projects but there are a lot of projects we are doing with the Russians that aam abdul has no idea of.

Sagar G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2596
Joined: 22 Dec 2009 19:31
Location: Ghar

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby Sagar G » 21 Nov 2014 22:57

Karan M wrote:Every thread from the PAK FA one to this to Naval to others has the same. :roll:


Dollar army ???

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5080
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby Viv S » 22 Nov 2014 00:09

Karan M wrote:ATV is a strategic program and the Russians have helped us with our BMD program as well as have some other nations.

Doesn't translate into joint projects.

Ties with Russia though are strategic and beyond transactionary as they have helped across multiple programs. The European firms will not consult with us for the ATV and Khan firms could not even provide consultancy on the LCA.

The Chinese might have something similar to say. And the Russians been more than rewarded through billions in non-competitive contracts, to the point where they expect preferential access as their due.

Now please restrict this Russia versus US versus the rest stuff to one thread, perhaps the JSF one. Its getting tiresome to open multiple threads and see the usual stuff from Amrika rakshaks versus Russia rakshaks.

To be fair, your post is just as participatory as most others on the matter. You can't offer up your views on the off-topic discussion and then request we stick to the thread's topic.

Cosmo_R
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3349
Joined: 24 Apr 2010 01:24

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby Cosmo_R » 22 Nov 2014 00:17

NRao wrote:Rumor has it that GE and a Euro company are two players in the AMCA engine effort.


Who woudda thunk? Is RR a euro?

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15925
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby NRao » 22 Nov 2014 00:41

Viv S wrote:The Chinese might have something similar to say. And the Russians been more than rewarded through billions in non-competitive contracts, to the point where they expect preferential access as their due.


The past has very little to do with anything.

At the risk of being told that this is for the Strategy pages or FUD, recent events in ND:

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/651ce248-6f35 ... z3Jj4iwAMP


Who woudda thunk? Is RR a euro?


Someone in India heard you or are reading BR!!!

No, not just RR, *I think it is* EuroJet (one Indian web site indicates the same)
Last edited by NRao on 22 Nov 2014 01:04, edited 1 time in total.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6140
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby brar_w » 22 Nov 2014 00:47

It would be EuroJet Turbo GmbH since they have the engine which is in a similar class.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15925
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby NRao » 22 Nov 2014 00:55

^^^^^

Similar in which "class"?

Asking to get a feel for what the Indian side may be looking for. After all the recent comments on the J-31 *also* come back to the one central topic for a "5th gen" plane (something that was mentioned by a US expert some time back) - a "5th Gen" engine. Something that seems to be haunting the PAK-FA too.

Is there - in your opinion - an engine that is fairly readily available for the AMCA?

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6140
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby brar_w » 22 Nov 2014 01:08

Similar in which "class"?


Both it and the GEF414 are in the 20K lb class wet thrust, and are a pretty good base to start a comprehensive modernization program that could lead to a solution for the various next gen fighter project competitions that would want a similar class of propulsion. Competitions in South Korea, Turkey, India etc. GE has the EDE upgrade in the pipeline that the USN is considering seriously (program could begin as early as a couple of years) and then their is also he EPE..

http://www.geaviation.com/press/militar ... 21204.html

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articl ... de-398210/

These are your logical choices, and it would come down to (imho) which OEM is able to extract the maximum in development funds from its source developer (USN and Euro consortium for the EJ) thereby minimizing the custom investment from individual partner that may wish to use it. Other then that I do not see any clean sheet engine program for that thrust class other then the P&W program that they have been considering but not committing to internally (it would most likely not happen). I am fairly sure that GEWIII would be for a 35-40K pound class fighter engine.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 15002
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby Karan M » 22 Nov 2014 02:22

Viv S wrote:
Doesn't translate into joint projects.


And what would you know? Are you working on them? Go on tell us about how many projects with Russia there are and what they have and have not contributed. Lets see the depth of your knowledge beyond snark and copy pasted news reports.

he Chinese might have something similar to say. And the Russians been more than rewarded through billions in non-competitive contracts, to the point where they expect preferential access as their due.


So let the Chinese have something to say. They may consider their ties to be strategic as well, for their level. Doesn't make ours any less. You have made a pointless comment here.

To be fair, your post is just as participatory as most others on the matter. You can't offer up your views on the off-topic discussion and then request we stick to the thread's topic.


No I am not participating, I am expressing my sincere disgust at your non stop spamming in multiple threads for your fave country which can do no wrong versus the eebil Russians & sidetracking discussion after discussion by taking it into the you said, she said rubbish. Precious little on Indian military aviation. A lot of Viv S's patented line by line replies on the same old tired shtick.

Your attitude bears mention even after you lot pulled the same rubbish in the other threads and cluttered it up. And now you snark about me requesting you after being asked to stop with this persistent boorish behaviour?

You want to continue with your one sided propaganda, go ahead and do it in the JSF thread, which is in the pits anyways thanks to similar stuff. Leave the rest of the threads uncluttered so that other folks can actually track the topic headings versus airy fairy geopolitics, or is that sort of netiquette beyond you?
Last edited by Karan M on 22 Nov 2014 02:32, edited 1 time in total.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 15002
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby Karan M » 22 Nov 2014 02:27

Sagar G wrote:
Karan M wrote:Every thread from the PAK FA one to this to Naval to others has the same. :roll:


Dollar army ???


More like "I live in x place, I will tout it till everyone else is tone deaf". :roll:

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15925
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby NRao » 22 Nov 2014 02:28

^^^^^

So, are you saying that neither has an engine for the AMCA? And that it could take a few years to develop one.

IF so, that could push the timelines, don't you think?

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6140
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby brar_w » 22 Nov 2014 02:38

NRao wrote:^^^^^

So, are you saying that neither has an engine for the AMCA? And that it could take a few years to develop one.

IF so, that could push the timelines, don't you think?


No foreign OEM will develop an engine specifically for the AMCA unless its fully paid for upfront (as a general R&D program). The process to develop brand new engine, test it, get it certified and incorporate it is one of the most riskiest in all fighter development. Both will offer from their existing portfolios of products, and will likewise present multiple paths to upgrade that a customer can choose from. GE for example has presented the EDE planned enhancements to the US Navy, and they are considering starting a program perhaps by 2016. The GEF414 has been quite a successful product for the company but don't expect GE to continue to invest a lot of its own money into this product given the looming GEWIII. Not sure what Eurojet T Gmbh has in mind, but they find it hard to bring all the stakeholders to agree to a firm plan and get a written commitment. Ultimately it boils down to economics. Both GE and Eurojet will invest moderate amounts of their own capital if the customers come forward and are willing to sign an agreement. I believe South Korea could perhaps be the first customer to do this in the coming years closely followed by choices from Turkey and India. Meanwhile both these OEM's will continue to seek money from the existing line of products (Eurofighter partners, US Navy) to enhance the programs.

The only way they would work on a clean sheet is if there is dollar upfront but that would be highly unlikely for any of the 3 or 4 programs out there looking for an engine in this thrust class. I think GE may have an edge here, since their investments into the 414 line could be financially rewarding given that they currently have 3 fighters with this engine, so a potential 4th or 5th would mean that they could develop something and market it back to the existing customer base.

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5080
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby Viv S » 22 Nov 2014 03:59

Karan M wrote:And what would you know? Are you working on them? Go on tell us about how many projects with Russia there are and what they have and have not contributed. Lets see the depth of your knowledge beyond snark and copy pasted news reports.

So let the Chinese have something to say. They may consider their ties to be strategic as well, for their level. Doesn't make ours any less. You have made a pointless comment here.

I know of three joint ventures that the two countries are working on. If there are another 197 more highly classified projects, there's no reason for the number to leak out either.

As far as the military and strategic balance between the two goes, its a zero sum game. Every edge gained by the Chinese through their ties with the Russians that can be implemented against us (which is about most of them), impacts our ties with the Russians.

No I am not participating, I am expressing my sincere disgust at your non stop spamming in multiple threads for your fave country which can do no wrong versus the eebil Russians & sidetracking discussion after discussion by taking it into the you said, she said rubbish. Precious little on Indian military aviation. A lot of Viv S's patented line by line replies on the same old tired shtick.

Your attitude bears mention even after you lot pulled the same rubbish in the other threads and cluttered it up. And now you snark about me requesting you after being asked to stop with this persistent boorish behaviour?

Except that your post wasn't limited to expressing 'sincere disgust'. Not considering it included a defence of the Russia - 'Ties with Russia though are strategic and beyond transactionary as they have helped across multiple programs'.

Actually your 'request' was more on the lines of ... 'now that I have expressed my opinion on the matter, drop this topic as its off-topic, spamming, trolling, etc etc'.

You want to continue with your one sided propaganda, go ahead and do it in the JSF thread, which is in the pits anyways thanks to similar stuff. Leave the rest of the threads uncluttered so that other folks can actually track the topic headings versus airy fairy geopolitics, or is that sort of netiquette beyond you?

Netiquette really? After that post?

I'd have been more than happy to drop the line of debate with Austin had you limited your first post to - 'please restrict this Russia versus US versus the rest stuff', without prefacing that with your personal opinion on the issue. Debates don't start out that way but sometimes they do devolve, and mods have step in and draw the line. Clutter ceases, life goes on. If you were actually bothered by what's going on you'd have PM'd the mods and let them handle it, rather than attempting to clean up the thread with expressions of 'sincere disgust'. Alternately, if you think the forum would be better off without me altogether, you can take that point up with the mods as well, who in turn can take a decision to hand out a warning or impose a ban, as they see fit.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15925
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby NRao » 22 Nov 2014 18:23

Cain Marko wrote:
Karan M wrote:Austin wrote
Wonder why are disussing Geo-Politics in Military Dhaga .... Better open new thread in Strategic Section and discuss

Pilatus or HAL’s trainer: Parrikar’s first “Make” decision
/Austin


Some folks have gone nuts with their desire to "bring US and India closer". This means running down the Russians at every opportunity whereas ignoring the albatross in the room, the freaking freebies to TSP from Pak and the US desire to play equal equal.

Its bloody irritating to open thread after thread and see a handful of posters just regurgitate the same stuff (US this, Russia that) in thread after thread. Every thread from the PAK FA one to this to Naval to others has the same. :roll:


:D

Well it is bound to happen Saar, is a bit like watching worldcup, everybody gets involved, what with Putin and Obama both visiting lagataar.
NRao = US
Philip = Russia

Team US is gaining a bit on BR with stiff support from VivS. where is Sanku Maharaj OR Shankar?


CM,

Thanks!!!

On the internet, the only way one can be certain that one can be engaged is to name that person. Appreciate that.

On "NRao = US":

* I have proposed the IAF reduce the MKI and buy the PAK-FA (NOT FGFA) ........ THAT BTW is not a US product
* At the right price I have no problem with the Rafale. I have a problem with the price, not the plane......... THAT BTW is not a US product
* JSF, I have always said that the JSF is NOT for the IAF. Recently I modified that stand, for a certain reason, but I still feel the IAF is not ready for the JSF (which we can elaborate if need be) (I have asked multiple times "what is a 5th Gen plane" and NO ONE has responded - so that is another issue).
* JSF in India: I have always said IF the JSF comes to India it will be the IN (and not the IAF)
* C-130 - good buy
* C-17 - good buy, need to ramp up. My predictions for the IL-476 have come true so far (and I have provided info on why I think it will die)
* Apaches - have no clue what their purpose is

Always said nations have interests. So, IF Indian interest is buy from a given nation then more power to India (as I said about recent Russian move to Pakistan).

Nope. I am NOT proposing US products.

And, here is the kicker:

What I am saying (and have for 15 years) is that India and the US will get closer. That they have no optionS. That this is not a anti-some-other-nation move. Nor is it a pro-US move. It is in the best interest of India.

Wait for a while. They have yet to let that cat out of the bag.

I think this move towards each other will last for a few decades.

#PivotIndia (is what I am predicting) (And, just for clarity, a prediction is not a wish or a lean. It just says that I think that event will happen. No emotions. Just a plain simple thought. Internet for you.)

Those with an anti-US mind set will read that as a pro-us move (which is why I at times state - not a knock). BUT that is up to you. I cannot change your mind. I can only point out what I find.

Finally I find that people normally do not read-up. Just out to peddle their own views.

Thx.

Sagar G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2596
Joined: 22 Dec 2009 19:31
Location: Ghar

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby Sagar G » 22 Nov 2014 18:41

NRao wrote:And, here is the kicker:

What I am saying (and have for 15 years) is that India and the US will get closer. That they have no optionS. That this is not a anti-some-other-nation move. Nor is it a pro-US move. It is in the best interest of India.


For 15 yrs. you have been proved wrong and for the next 15 yrs. as well you will be proved wrong. Your daydreams of India and US being joined to the hip is never going to materialize. No self respecting Indian is going to accept the scumbag America as a friendly nation. At best we will have a business relationship. No I don't think being a lackey to US is in best interest of India which the US basically wants. Yes India has options other than US which it has shown from time to time so please stop trying to threaten us with "they have no options", the US doesn't India is spoilt for choices. India has shown the two finger salute to US whenever it has tried to play smartass with us and take my word it will continue to do so whenever it is required just like the recent WTO deal.

NRao wrote:Wait for a while. They have yet to let that cat out of the bag. :rotfl:


Yeah keep waiting :lol:

NRao wrote:I think this move towards each other will last for a few decades.


A decade from now and US won't even figure in India's discourse other than to rub salt on their self inflicted wounds.

NRao wrote:Finally I find that people normally do not read-up. Just out to peddle their own views.


Pretty rich coming from you.

I wish my reply gives you closure and you move on to some relevant thread to carry on your "US Bhakti Movement".

member_26622
BRFite
Posts: 537
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby member_26622 » 22 Nov 2014 18:52

Respected Gentlemen and Boys - Can we get back to fun stuff instead of throwing mud at each other.

Quick review - Even my recent posts have turned pro US (F35 specifically).

The fact is we are hell bent on importing an expensive plane (big delhi egos), so giving up on drilling common sense and settling for value deal (Indianness has to show).

Russians were tops on upfront value but they are now bending backwards to Chinese 4 trillion $ war chest.
Europeans price everything like Ferraris so better to go for US Corvette >> just better bang for the buck!

Baki India-US-Russia-Chini bhai bhai is like standing on shifting sand dunes. Only friend is the green $ seemingly.

Victor
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2645
Joined: 24 Apr 2001 11:31

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby Victor » 22 Nov 2014 20:23

Sagar G wrote:No self respecting Indian is going to accept the scumbag America as a friendly nation.

Go figure:
Narendra Modi: This Republic Day, we hope to have a friend over…invited President Obama to be the 1st US President to grace the occasion as Chief Guest.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15925
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby NRao » 22 Nov 2014 21:09



That is just the tip-of-the-iceberg. There are plenty of other indicators - among the recent events the WTO agreement being one of the biggest ones. Modi has chalked out which nation can provide what (based on what Indian needs are and what each nation's strengths are) to India. And, how to roll the entire project out in India.

"Friendship" and "Strategic" are two totally unrelated things. Soviets/Russia I would call closer to "friendship", the one with the US would be solely "strategic". While friendships are enduring, strategic are not. There could be combinations of them too (Israel). Also, there is a huge diff between "people" and "government".

Anyways.

My other feeling:

IN: Were offered the E-2D, then a presentation on the JSF and recently the EMALS. The next logical step has occurred. Would not be surprised if IN goes for a *bigger* carrier - larger air wing - with EMALS. TBD. Time will tell.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6140
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby brar_w » 22 Nov 2014 21:41

@Nrao, integrating EMALS, and totally overhauling a carrier air wing to incorporate the E-2 and another fighter is a very costly and time consuming effort. As an indicator, even though the USN has developed all these systems it would take them a minimum of a decade and could take them up to 15 years to fully integrate all the capabilities they want from a combination of the Ford, F-35C, E-2D and NIFCCA. Carrier aviation works much slower than land based stuff, that is why you have to plan years if not a decade in advance. For the IN to make such a drastic shift to larger carriers with the advantage of the kit that these carriers enables (particularly what EMALS enable) would be a very long term commitment both in dollars as well as time. Its a great tradeoff, if one is to truly convert the carrier group into something that can launch high tempo, far reaching offensive ops. But that is a strategic decision that has to be taken at the top most level (circles), given other choices for fund allocation.
Last edited by brar_w on 22 Nov 2014 21:52, edited 1 time in total.

Victor
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2645
Joined: 24 Apr 2001 11:31

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby Victor » 22 Nov 2014 21:48

dhiraj wrote:What is this 'tailor-made opportunity'.

It is the opportunity to put new engines on a 60-year old airframe design. Same sarkari thinking that still keeps using the stupid Amby for transport. Given this thinking, we could just restart the MiG-21 lines and pop the GE414 up their back ends. Khatam kahani.
Last edited by Victor on 22 Nov 2014 21:49, edited 1 time in total.


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 77 guests