Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

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.
sunilUpa
BRFite
Posts: 1795
Joined: 25 Sep 2006 04:16

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby sunilUpa » 06 Jun 2009 06:41


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

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby putnanja » 09 Jun 2009 06:01

Defence rethink on Israel freeze

New Delhi, June 8: The defence ministry is having second thoughts on its decision to freeze business with a major Israeli military firm because it is likely to boomerang on the armed forces.

The Israeli Military Industries (IMI) is a key supplier of critical equipment to Indian security forces and the ban on the firm, announced last Friday, will force the security establishment to look for alternatives that are not easy to find.

“The decision is to put transactions ‘on hold’. This is a temporary measure. We are assessing what is to be done,” a defence ministry source said today.
...

Jamal K. Malik
BRFite
Posts: 638
Joined: 27 Mar 2009 23:03

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby Jamal K. Malik » 11 Jun 2009 15:49

ARMS TRADE - Defense contractors see open door in India
http://in.reuters.com/article/topNews/idINIndia-40241720090611

Jamal K. Malik
BRFite
Posts: 638
Joined: 27 Mar 2009 23:03

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby Jamal K. Malik » 11 Jun 2009 23:33

India, US closer to signing end-user defence pact (EUVA)
http://www.ptinews.com/pti/ptisite.nsf/$all/02D4B782C91FA99B652575D2005CC246


SivaVijay
BRFite
Posts: 136
Joined: 09 Apr 2009 19:23

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby SivaVijay » 13 Jun 2009 11:56

The current corruption charges apart(those have very much became part of procurement process :cry: ), Why are the Tatas , the L&Ts or mahindras not considering singapore technologies for partenering or JV. These guys are not big but sure have a impressive package and experience and we may end up learning lot(good for indigenisation) :twisted: :twisted: . We have good relations , this will be a good step forward.

Time to boost the Look East policy....

Siddhartha
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 18
Joined: 04 Jun 2009 07:55

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby Siddhartha » 13 Jun 2009 12:08

May be it is a bit off the topics .. but any news on LCH?

SivaVijay
BRFite
Posts: 136
Joined: 09 Apr 2009 19:23

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby SivaVijay » 13 Jun 2009 12:14

As per the last news it was seen registering at VLCC....

k prasad
BRFite
Posts: 669
Joined: 21 Oct 2007 17:38
Location: Somewhere over the Rainbow
Contact:

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby k prasad » 13 Jun 2009 13:23

SivaVijay wrote:As per the last news it was seen registering at VLCC....


Looks like Shiv-saars brain cells are being transferred to other similarly named Jingos... :lol: :lol: :lol:

sum
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10055
Joined: 08 May 2007 17:04
Location: (IT-vity && DRDO) nagar

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby sum » 13 Jun 2009 21:50

SivaVijay wrote:As per the last news it was seen registering at VLCC....

:lol:
Good one...lots of our indigenous maal (LCA, LCH, Arjun) seem to be making frequent VLCC visits.


JaiS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 2190
Joined: 01 Mar 2003 12:31
Location: JPEG-jingostan
Contact:

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby JaiS » 16 Jun 2009 05:55

P8I aircraft to give Indian navy maritime patrol edge

Ukraine to modernize India Air Force cargo planes

IAF plans for 100 combat missiles for Jaguar


In a bid to add more firepower to its fighter fleet, the Indian Air Force (IAF) is planning to acquire over 100 close combat air-to-air missiles for the Jaguar aircraft. The Request for Proposal (RFP) for the acquisition of over 100 of these close combat missiles has been sent to five missile manufacturers including the Raytheon Corporation from United States, Israeli Raphael and European missile consortium MBDA.

“We have received the RFP from the Indian Defence Ministry for close combat air to air missiles for the Jaguar fighter aircraft. We are looking to understand the requirements of the IAF and after that we will decide about the missile that can be offered to them," Raytheon Vice President Dennis J Carroll said in Paris.

We have not yet gone through the details of the Indian requirements but we can offer our AIM-9X and AMRAAM for close range combat requirements," Carroll said. The Israelis are expected to offer the Derby-5 missile in the contract.


Andrew DeCristofaro
BRFite
Posts: 178
Joined: 14 Jun 2009 22:37

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby Andrew DeCristofaro » 16 Jun 2009 07:48

JaiS wrote:P8I aircraft to give Indian navy maritime patrol edge

Ukraine to modernize India Air Force cargo planes

IAF plans for 100 combat missiles for Jaguar


In a bid to add more firepower to its fighter fleet, the Indian Air Force (IAF) is planning to acquire over 100 close combat air-to-air missiles for the Jaguar aircraft. The Request for Proposal (RFP) for the acquisition of over 100 of these close combat missiles has been sent to five missile manufacturers including the Raytheon Corporation from United States, Israeli Raphael and European missile consortium MBDA.

“We have received the RFP from the Indian Defence Ministry for close combat air to air missiles for the Jaguar fighter aircraft. We are looking to understand the requirements of the IAF and after that we will decide about the missile that can be offered to them," Raytheon Vice President Dennis J Carroll said in Paris.

We have not yet gone through the details of the Indian requirements but we can offer our AIM-9X and AMRAAM for close range combat requirements," Carroll said. The Israelis are expected to offer the Derby-5 missile in the contract.



by the way where is iris T

why not acquire ASRAAM for jaguars which is also going to be used on mirage2000
and for that matter use r73 on jaguars

why there is need to send RFP to all EVERYTIME

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16814
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby NRao » 16 Jun 2009 09:10

JaiS,

You url for the 100 jags is goofed up:

http://www.timesnow.tv/IAF-plans-for-10 ... 319637.cms

AmitR
BRFite
Posts: 322
Joined: 25 Jan 2009 17:13

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby AmitR » 16 Jun 2009 10:47

Andrew DeCristofaro wrote:by the way where is iris T

why not acquire ASRAAM for jaguars which is also going to be used on mirage2000
and for that matter use r73 on jaguars

why there is need to send RFP to all EVERYTIME


Somebody gotta make some money dude! Go figure.

SivaVijay
BRFite
Posts: 136
Joined: 09 Apr 2009 19:23

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby SivaVijay » 16 Jun 2009 13:36

Close combat missile for Jag? Why would it need a close combat missile when it is not designed for a close combat fight...i mean isnt it prudent to have a Long range AAM and fry the buggers even bfore they enter the envelope where their better dog fighting skills starts making a difference?

AmitR
BRFite
Posts: 322
Joined: 25 Jan 2009 17:13

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby AmitR » 16 Jun 2009 13:46

SivaVijay wrote:Close combat missile for Jag? Why would it need a close combat missile when it is not designed for a close combat fight...i mean isnt it prudent to have a Long range AAM and fry the buggers even bfore they enter the envelope where their better dog fighting skills starts making a difference?


You mean to say that we now add a longer range radar and other systems also to Jag. More money.

SivaVijay
BRFite
Posts: 136
Joined: 09 Apr 2009 19:23

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby SivaVijay » 16 Jun 2009 14:19

AmitR wrote:You mean to say that we now add a longer range radar and other systems also to Jag. More money.

Good, if it can be done....

But I didn't mean Looong as in BVR, what I mean is a 30 KM R73 is better than a close combat missile which I believe will have range < 10Km. For a close combat missile you have to maneover more than for a missile with say 30-50Km range to get into lauch position , question is can the Jag handle that kind of maneovring?

Srivastav
BRFite
Posts: 142
Joined: 24 Jan 2009 17:23
Location: where the polar bears live

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby Srivastav » 16 Jun 2009 14:41

^^ All of the missiles mentioned in the article have a range of approx 20 or more. So they are pretty close or more than the 30 km range you are talking of. Furthermore, the jaguars will use this missile if some of the enemy fighters somehow manage to break free from our CAP birds and try to attack the strike jaguars.

Unless situation demands so, out strike package of jaguars will ideally always be under cover of miki's or 29's flying CAP.
Last edited by Srivastav on 16 Jun 2009 14:49, edited 3 times in total.

nrshah
BRFite
Posts: 577
Joined: 10 Feb 2009 16:36

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby nrshah » 16 Jun 2009 14:44

SivaVijay wrote:
AmitR wrote:You mean to say that we now add a longer range radar and other systems also to Jag. More money.

Good, if it can be done....


I don't think it is good idea to add longer range missile AAM and radars systems to Jag.
Remember it is deep penetration strike fighter and not an air dominance fighter.

Already we don't have dedicated bomber fleet as we used to have in 1971 where canberra's etc devastated the back bone of TSP.
In such time, converting a strike fighter into multi role will only increase the burden of tactical bombing on the remaining bomber / strike aircrafts

- Nitin.

SivaVijay
BRFite
Posts: 136
Joined: 09 Apr 2009 19:23

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby SivaVijay » 16 Jun 2009 14:54

Srivastav wrote:^^ All of the missiles mentioned in the article have a range of approx 20 or more. .


My Bad, don't have access to article, firewall!!! :(

But will there be a top cover in deep penetration strike???

I don't think so....

nrshah,
we need not convert it to a dominator , put a passive radar(but this PESA never come small enough :x ) so that she can atleast stay out of harms way, again if it is possible it's good....

vipins
BRFite
Posts: 449
Joined: 12 Jun 2008 17:46

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby vipins » 16 Jun 2009 15:29

There was already a proposal of upgrading jags with EL2032 radar

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/IAF/Aircraft/Specs/Jaguar.html
In 1996, a contract was signed with Elta to upgrade the maritime attack variant with the
EL/M-2032 multimode fire control radar. Ten EL/M-2032 radars are to be supplied.

so if 2032 is added to jags ,it can use longer range AAMs.Although the upgrade was for maritime jags only,as the link says.

Jaguars also have option of couple of overwing magic IIs.

Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13262
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby Lalmohan » 16 Jun 2009 15:44

wouldnt it be better to mate the jaguar with AA8's or something along those lines, after all its for protection and nuisance value, spend the money on ASM's instead

vipins
BRFite
Posts: 449
Joined: 12 Jun 2008 17:46

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby vipins » 16 Jun 2009 16:09

Lalmohan wrote:wouldnt it be better to mate the jaguar with AA8's or something along those lines, after all its for protection and nuisance value, spend the money on ASM's instead

IMO,May be a combo of EL2032-Derby would be good,giving sea harriers also uses
the same combo replacing magic IIs.
And derby will also be bought with SPYDER SAM system.
Also will add an option of using Derby in LCA as MMR is being supported by israel.

Andrew DeCristofaro
BRFite
Posts: 178
Joined: 14 Jun 2009 22:37

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby Andrew DeCristofaro » 16 Jun 2009 18:48

vipins wrote:
Lalmohan wrote:wouldnt it be better to mate the jaguar with AA8's or something along those lines, after all its for protection and nuisance value, spend the money on ASM's instead

IMO,May be a combo of EL2032-Derby would be good,giving sea harriers also uses
the same combo replacing magic IIs.
And derby will also be bought with SPYDER SAM system.
Also will add an option of using Derby in LCA as MMR is being supported by israel.

only pod mounted radar going to be used on jaguar or for that matter on mig27 and this too for SAR imagery because both fighters are basically ground attack,

and this is pretty cheaper than mounting radar on nose which obviously needs rebuilding of nose
and its time consuming so who will pay that and so there will be no derby

and what is need for buying extra short range missiles at first place????
god damn they are already available in india

sunilUpa
BRFite
Posts: 1795
Joined: 25 Sep 2006 04:16

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby sunilUpa » 16 Jun 2009 19:05

Sigh...these missiles are for Jaguar IM, - Maritime strike version.

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3971
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby kit » 17 Jun 2009 18:27

X posting

http://www.janes.com/news/defence/jdi/j ... _1_n.shtml

Can South Korea reach defence export premier league

This strategy, which has since been refined and enhanced by DAPA, has partly resulted in South Korea becoming the third biggest importer of materiel since 2004 with a 6 per cent share of all global arms imports behind China and India It has also seen the development of one of the most demanding offset policies in Asia.

According to figures published by the US government in December 2007, for instance, South Korea's offset demands reached an average of 58.5 per cent of the value of deals with US companies

dipayan
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 25
Joined: 26 Dec 2008 08:20
Location: Daytona Beach, FL

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby dipayan » 17 Jun 2009 21:18

didnt know where to post this

Tata To Produce S-92 Cabins For Sikorsky

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/ ... nnel=busav

apologize if it has been posted before

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5288
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby Kartik » 17 Jun 2009 22:55

SivaVijay wrote:
AmitR wrote:You mean to say that we now add a longer range radar and other systems also to Jag. More money.

Good, if it can be done....

But I didn't mean Looong as in BVR, what I mean is a 30 KM R73 is better than a close combat missile which I believe will have range < 10Km. For a close combat missile you have to maneover more than for a missile with say 30-50Km range to get into lauch position , question is can the Jag handle that kind of maneovring?


fact is that most WVR combat actually happens under 10 km range, and its especially so in the subcontinent where smog makes visibility beyond even 10 kms very difficult.

with a RWR on the Jaguar, the pilot would know if he's painted by a bogey, but without MAWS, he wouldn't know if there was a missile on its way already or not. to be on the safe side, the pilot would have to assume that it was and start evasive maneuvers or simply dive to the ground level in the hope that ground clutter would help break a missile lock and then make a dash for it.

the last thing the Jag pilot needs is a BVR shot that is wasted because there is no onboard radar to guide the missile before its onboard seeker acquired the target. he'd rather use a high offbore sight missile like the R-73, Iris-T or AIM-9X when the bogey is within visual range. it takes care of the maneuvering aspect and even if it misses, it distracts the chasing fighter for long enough for the Jag to go supersonic at low levels and escape.

ANY platform with a HMS and high offbore sight missile would be a threat and it would basically mean that the Jaguar wouldn't be easy prey for a fighter that intercepts it without its escorts.

Omar
BRFite
Posts: 142
Joined: 30 Aug 2005 07:03
Location: cavernous sinus

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby Omar » 17 Jun 2009 23:54

Xposted from newsfeed on front page.


The possible acquisition of the C-17 Globemaster which uses the PW F-117-PW-100 (a civilian version of the same engine is used on the boeing 757) could help make an attractive argument for the stalled development of anIndian PW engine MRO facility that was first reported about in 2006. This would be beneficial from a strategic perspective because engines wouldn't have to be overhauled outside the country and economic perspective since Indian airlines using PW engines wont have to overhaul their engines in Singapore.

Sontu
BRFite
Posts: 103
Joined: 06 Aug 2008 19:32

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby Sontu » 18 Jun 2009 00:06



Derby-5 !!!!..I think it should be Python-5 which is a WVR IR guided missile of the same class as AIM-9X or IRIS-T
any idea why MICA from MBDA were not invited ?

JTull
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2738
Joined: 18 Jul 2001 11:31

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby JTull » 18 Jun 2009 18:41

Sontu wrote:
Derby-5 !!!!..I think it should be Python-5 which is a WVR IR guided missile of the same class as AIM-9X or IRIS-T
any idea why MICA from MBDA were not invited ?


The Request for Proposal (RFP) for the acquisition of over 100 of these close combat missiles has been sent to five missile manufacturers including the Raytheon Corporation from United States, Israeli Raphael and European missile consortium MBDA.

Andrew DeCristofaro
BRFite
Posts: 178
Joined: 14 Jun 2009 22:37

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby Andrew DeCristofaro » 18 Jun 2009 19:20

Kartik wrote:
AmitR wrote:You mean to say that we now add a longer range radar and other systems also to Jag. More money.

Good, if it can be done....

But I didn't mean Looong as in BVR, what I mean is a 30 KM R73 is better than a close combat missile which I believe will have range < 10Km. For a close combat missile you have to maneover more than for a missile with say 30-50Km range to get into lauch position , question is can the Jag handle that kind of maneovring?
fact is that most WVR combat actually happens under 10 km range, and its especially so in the subcontinent where smog makes visibility beyond even 10 kms very difficult.

with a RWR on the Jaguar, the pilot would know if he's painted by a bogey, but without MAWS, he wouldn't know if there was a missile on its way already or not. to be on the safe side, the pilot would have to assume that it was and start evasive maneuvers or simply dive to the ground level in the hope that ground clutter would help break a missile lock and then make a dash for it.

the last thing the Jag pilot needs is a BVR shot that is wasted because there is no onboard radar to guide the missile before its onboard seeker acquired the target. he'd rather use a high offbore sight missile like the R-73, Iris-T or AIM-9X when the bogey is within visual range. it takes care of the maneuvering aspect and even if it misses, it distracts the chasing fighter for long enough for the Jag to go supersonic at low levels and escape.

ANY platform with a HMS and high offbore sight missile would be a threat and it would basically mean that the Jaguar wouldn't be easy prey for a fighter that intercepts it without its escorts.

there is nothing wrong with r73(cheapest option) no need to buy from outside or ASRAAM(second best option)and these can be fitted on jaguar but as you all saying nowdays india doesn't care for money so let it be

Vivek K
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2337
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby Vivek K » 18 Jun 2009 20:14

Ajatshatru wrote:One more thing, when writing India in your posts, use capital 'I'.

Second that! Good catch about the roller coaster English!

Vivs
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 22
Joined: 10 Feb 2009 20:44

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby Vivs » 19 Jun 2009 03:42

http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2009/06/ ... 59815.html

US eases technology transfer - is this just some hand waving or for real?

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

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby Singha » 19 Jun 2009 08:58

can a jaguar use this weapon at night when visual sighting of the attacker is not possible but the rwr would some approx bearing ?

Arun_S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2800
Joined: 14 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: KhyberDurra

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby Arun_S » 19 Jun 2009 22:23


arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10248
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby arun » 20 Jun 2009 14:58

Some forward movement on Project 17A Frigate programme. DAC has cleared 7 Frigates 8) .

Does this programme require further approvals say from the Ministry of Finance and/or Cabinet Committee on Security before orders can actually be placed on GRSE and MDIL :?:

The 45,000 Cr price tag quoted looks suspect. As given seems too high while dropping a zero would make it too low. Anyone, Any comment :?: :

Navy seals 45,000-cr deal: seven warships

Posted: Saturday , Jun 20, 2009 at 0440 hrs IST
Manu Pubby

New Delhi:

India has cleared its largest ever indigenous defence contract worth Rs 45,000 crore to manufacture seven advanced stealth frigates for the Navy at shipyards in Kolkata and Mumbai.

The P17A warship project, which will be India’s most advanced and stealthy frigates, has been cleared by the Defence Acquisition Council (DAC) on Friday. …………............

Indian Express


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 27 guests