Vote for the MRCA

PratikDas · Post by **PratikDas** » 21 Aug 2009 01:42

GeorgeWelch wrote:
PratikDas wrote: ....
Oh, so proliferation was perfectly fine.
No one said it was fine, but the fact remains there was no legal requirement to impose sanctions as there was for India and Pakistan.

Sanctions aren't always the most productive means to address an issue (and can be counterproductive), which is why such decisions are usually left up to the discretion of the government rather than mandated by law.

Thank you for putting it so eloquently! It is the arbitrary nature of the "discretion of the [US] government" the primary reason why the majority of the people in BR are against an American MRCA.

Raveen · Post by **Raveen** » 21 Aug 2009 01:43

Maybe ya'll need to calm down and George contribute his 2 cents
What ever happened to respecting fellow board members and thier opinions?
Just cause you dont agree with what George has to say doesnt mean he shouldnt say it or that you should all team up and jump on him for it
Live and let live
Lets just share thoughts, opinions and facts not opinions on other's opinions and personal attacks

Take your propaganda elsewhere, George Welch.

Raveen · Post by **Raveen** » 21 Aug 2009 01:51

Thank you for putting it so eloquently! It is the arbitrary nature of the "discretion of the [US] government" the primary reason why the majority of the people in BR are against an American MRCA.

just like it is the MoD's discretion on who to award the contract to based more on arbitrary political motives rather than actual performance

OT mode disengaged

GeorgeWelch · Post by **GeorgeWelch** » 21 Aug 2009 02:01

PratikDas wrote:Thank you for putting it so eloquently! It is the arbitrary nature of the "discretion of the [US] government" the primary reason why the majority of the people in BR are against an American MRCA.

All countries have this 'arbitrary' power.

But the US has actually been fairly restrained about using it when they aren't legally required to.

Which US discretionary sanctions do you disagree with?

PratikDas · Post by **PratikDas** » 21 Aug 2009 02:20

Raveen wrote: ...
Lets just share thoughts, opinions and facts not opinions on other's opinions and personal attacks

Take your propaganda elsewhere, George Welch.

Raveen, the long discourse between George and Cain has gone on because of "opinions on other's opinions". I didn't say anything there [and neither did you].

How is me asking George to take his propaganda elsewhere a personal attack? I had nothing negative to say over his long discourse on the virtues of the bug. And now, I have only labelled his comment that the "US cares about India" as propaganda. I followed up on that with facts, i.e. the USNews article.

I have a problem with George's comment that the US sanctions on India were nothing to be disappointed over because it was just the law. If we were to buy an American MRCA, are we never to test nukes again for the risk of an embargo on spares / service of the jets? It is absolutely not Off Topic.

Raveen · Post by **Raveen** » 21 Aug 2009 02:28

PratikDas wrote:
Raveen wrote: ...
Lets just share thoughts, opinions and facts not opinions on other's opinions and personal attacks

Raveen, the long discourse between George and Cain has gone on because of "opinions on other's opinions". I didn't say anything there [and neither did you].

That is true sir, but we must not indulge in behaviour we ourselves realize is inappropriate or at the very least counter-productive

GeorgeWelch · Post by **GeorgeWelch** » 21 Aug 2009 02:31

PratikDas wrote:And now, I have only labelled his comment that the "US cares about India" as propaganda. I followed up on that with facts, i.e. the USNews article.

The facts are that the US is making its best available to India and not to Pakistan. When Pakistan inquired about getting something like the nuke deal, the US said that was only available to 'responsible' countries. That the US cares more for India than Pakistan is not propaganda, it's fact.

PratikDas wrote:I have a problem with George's comment that the US sanctions on India were nothing to be disappointed over because it was just the law. If we were to buy an American MRCA, are we never to test nukes again for the risk of an embargo on spares / service of the jets? It is absolutely not Off Topic.

Well the law was changed to allow the President to waive sanctions so in effect the legal requirement to impose them no longer exists.

PratikDas · Post by **PratikDas** » 21 Aug 2009 02:41

Raveen wrote: That is true sir, but we must not indulge in behaviour we ourselves realize is inappropriate or at the very least counter-productive

Raveen, I don't think this discussion is counter-productive. If there were a genuine offer of a strategic relationship from the US that was sure to weather all storms then you would see a very optimistic reaction from many on BR. Then, I would have voted for the bug because it would be compatible with American aircraft carriers. But such an offer doesn't exist - neither from the US nor France. I have fought suggestions from Jean that the purchase of the Rafale would entail a strategic friendship with France. Jean tacitly admitted that if India ended up fighting China then the French would sit back and watch. There is no strategic friendship on offer. But French spectator sport is still better than the US definitely imposing sanctions after a possible Indian nuclear test - which has nothing to do with the bug, but would definitely affect our ability to operate the bug.

Once again, I don't think this is off topic. Proponents of the bug should ask themselves if they are comfortable with the prospect of such sanctions.

George Welch wrote:Well the law was changed to allow the President to waive sanctions so in effect the legal requirement to impose them no longer exists.

Is this something that would depend on the President of the day, his party's strength in the Congress, and his mood?

VijayKumarSinha · Post by **VijayKumarSinha** » 21 Aug 2009 02:43

Yes GW should be able to express its .o2 $ as we have to express our .o2 Paise

GeorgeWelch wrote:
All countries have this 'arbitrary' power.

But the US has actually been fairly restrained about using it when they aren't legally required to.

As it so happens, U.S. always has a convenient explanation for anything that it ever did, didn’t do or is doing. Be that be the fire bombings and then subsequent nuking of Japanese cities, killing of 3.4 million civilians in Vietnam (equivalent to 27 million Americans in terms of numbers). Killing of a million Iraqi’s in a circle of violence initiated by U.S.A and so on. You seem unwilling to understand or accept the reasons that Indians have in suspecting the problems that might arise for us in buying the 16’s or the 18’s.

GeorgeWelch wrote:
1. The F-22 hasn't been made available to anyone.
2. The F-35 was offered to India but India wasn't interested.

When was this f-35 offer made to India? India is not a partner on any level like a bunch of other countries. If you are talking about the 35’s that ‘might’ be sold if we buy the 16’s than that hardly cuts it don’t you think? Because, there are a dozen other countries including Turkey which is also a BFF of Pakistan who would be getting the 35’s pretty soon. Also, since the 35’s include a lot of technology from the F-22’s its needless to say that whoever gets the 35’s is as good as having the 22’s or better. Also, U.S. is shutting down the production of 22’s in favour of 35’s so it doesn’t really matter if the 22’s were exported or not because the 35’s will be.

GeorgeWelch wrote: No more than any of the other MRCA competitors

I don’t think so, the TOT that we get through either the EFT or the MIG-35’s is going to be substantially more than the one’s through 16’s and 18’s and you can’t have me believe otherwise because we know better. And by TOT I mean that which will be able to use in our indigenous programs like the LCA.

GeorgeWelch wrote:
The P-8 for instance is the very best.

This is exactly why we bought it.

But the 16’s/18’s are not the best out there. Also, the difference is between having 8 p-8’s for maritime patrolling and having 126 fighter aircrafts for a period of 40 years and being dependent upon the American Kripa for upgrading those planes.

Katare · Post by **Katare** » 21 Aug 2009 03:03

PratikDas wrote:
PratikDas wrote: ...
The US also turned a blind eye to Pakistan purportedly getting nukes from China. No sanctions on China at all! What happened to "the LAW"?
The law was that sanctions would be imposed on any non-NWS that tested a nuke. This didn't apply to China because a) they were a NWS and b) they didn't test a nuke
Oh, so proliferation was perfectly fine.

Take your propaganda elsewhere, George Welch.

Dude you should cut down on your propaganda and abrasiveness a little bit. China is one of the most sanctioned countries. A lot of Chinese entities get banned almost each year by US congress for proliferation activities. You should not forget that unlike India, China is/was one of the five permanent members of Security Council with legal rights to own nuclear weapons and everything else that anyone else got.

Pak-US relationship has almost always been based on an external factor i.e. USSR in 1970-80 and Al-Keeda now. Once those external factors go away the relationship also dithers away. There is hardly any similarity/common ground between nation of Pakistan and USofA. Comparing that "alliance of convenience/necessity" to the relationship between US & India which is being built on inherent similarities in our respective value systems is unfair.

Fighting with or showing all your frustration with GOTUS to an individual like GW would not accomplish anything but listening and having a discussion with him might bring some information out that might be useful.

We need broad array of latest defense technology at affordable cost to built a technological edge over Chinese numerical superiority. If US can play a role in helping us achieve that goal we must not hesitate in exercising that option.

Raveen · Post by **Raveen** » 21 Aug 2009 03:07

Exactly!
Amen brother!

GeorgeWelch · Post by **GeorgeWelch** » 21 Aug 2009 03:17

VijayKumarSinha wrote:Be that be the fire bombings and then subsequent nuking of Japanese cities

Wow way to wander off-topic. I'm not sure what Dresden or Hiroshima has to do with whether the US will impose sanctions on India. I mean if you bomb Pearl Harbor, then yeah, there might be some repercussions.

I don't see India bombing Pearl Harbor, so I really don't think it will be an issue.

VijayKumarSinha wrote:
GeorgeWelch wrote:
" 1. The F-22 hasn't been made available to anyone.
2. The F-35 was offered to India but India wasn't interested."
When was this f-35 offer to India made to India?

LM has been trying very hard to get India to buy the F-35.

First they offered it for the MRCA but it wouldn't be available in time.
So they offered a split-buy. Get F-16s now to meet the deadline and then the F-35 when it's available.
Then they tried to offer it outside the MRCA for a fifth-gen fighter but India decided to sign with Russia instead.

VijayKumarSinha wrote:India is not a partner on any level like a bunch of other countries.

That would be because they've never indicated any desire to buy it.

VijayKumarSinha wrote:
GeorgeWelch wrote: No more than any of the other MRCA competitors
I don’t think so, the TOT that we get through either the EFT or the MIG-35’s is going to be substantially more than the one’s through 16’s and 18’s and you can’t have me believe otherwise because we know better.

1. TOT is built into the RFP so it will be required of all competitors.
2. You're already getting Russia's best with FGFA/MCA, what more do you hope to get with the warmed-over MiG-35?

VijayKumarSinha wrote:And by TOT I mean that which will be able to use in our indigenous programs like the LCA.

Yes, that is what the RFP states.

VijayKumarSinha wrote:
GeorgeWelch wrote:
The P-8 for instance is the very best.
This is exactly why we bought it. But the 16’s/18’s are not the best out there. Also, the difference is between having 6 p-8’s for maritime patrolling and having 126 fighter aircrafts for a vast time frame of 40 years and being dependent upon the American Kripa for upgrading those planes.

Pakistan is turning to Turkey to upgrade their F-16s, so I don't see the dependence on the US.

If you get the MiG-35 Russia certainly won't be providing you any upgrades.
Both EF and the Rafale are having real problems getting any upgrades funded.
Selecting one of the others practically guarantees NO upgrades from source nation.

abhiti · Post by **abhiti** » 21 Aug 2009 03:20

Katare wrote:We need broad array of latest defense technology at affordable cost to built a technological edge over Chinese numerical superiority. If US can play a role in helping us achieve that goal we must not hesitate in exercising that option.

Any examples you can quote from history when US successfully did that. Instead what US normally does is that it uses the leverage it gains from whatever and improves its own position at cost of even the ones it is supposedly trying to help. In our case it will mean bargaining away India with China to gain something for US. US is just looking for bargaining chip!

abhiti · Post by **abhiti** » 21 Aug 2009 03:26

It is a joke...we got another Philip just that this one doesn't like Russia but America.

GeorgeWelch wrote:LM has been trying very hard to get India to buy the F-35. First they offered it for the MRCA but it wouldn't be available in time. So they offered a split-buy. Get F-16s now to meet the deadline and then the F-35 when it's available. Then they tried to offer it outside the MRCA for the MCA but India decided to sign with Russia instead.

What exactly is the logic beyond just a slogan of buying F-16 now and then F-35?

Pakistan is turning to Turkey to upgrade their F-16s, so I don't see the dependence on the US.

No dependence, huh? Where was Turkey all these years when US sanctioned Pakistan under Pressler amendment? Why did Pak not get parts from Turkey?

GeorgeWelch · Post by **GeorgeWelch** » 21 Aug 2009 03:30

abhiti wrote:
Katare wrote:We need broad array of latest defense technology at affordable cost to built a technological edge over Chinese numerical superiority. If US can play a role in helping us achieve that goal we must not hesitate in exercising that option.
Any examples you can quote from history when US successfully did that.

Israel

abhiti wrote: Instead what US normally does is that it uses the leverage it gains from whatever and improves its own position at cost of even the ones it is supposedly trying to help. In our case it will mean bargaining away India with China to gain something for US. US is just looking for bargaining chip!

Every country looks out for its own interests, but the US regards India as far more important than some disposable bargaining chip.

hariks · Post by **hariks** » 21 Aug 2009 03:41

I don;t think US will transfer any technology to India which will give India a decisive tech edge over China in the event of a war. French and other Europeans may sit back and watch the show while US will get actively involved, and would want to control the outcome. If half of Indian airforce is using SH, that will only increase US leverage on India. A number of laws, approvals from congress or whatever else may be used as excuses to justify whatever actions taken. If restrictions can be imposed on harmless items like microprocessors, spares and technology for a fighter aircraft can be denied any day.
I doubt the TOT will involve full software as well.

PratikDas · Post by **PratikDas** » 21 Aug 2009 03:48

Katare wrote:Fighting with or showing all your frustration with GOTUS to an individual like GW would not accomplish anything but listening and having a discussion with him might bring some information out that might be useful.

Point taken.

Katare wrote:We need broad array of latest defense technology at affordable cost to built a technological edge over Chinese numerical superiority. If US can play a role in helping us achieve that goal we must not hesitate in exercising that option.

I completely disagree with this notion that we should take what we can while we can. If we don't have assurance that we can keep using the bug unimpeded by sanctions then it would be better not to get it.

Ted Kotcheff · Post by **Ted Kotcheff** » 21 Aug 2009 03:58

GeorgeWelch wrote:
PratikDas wrote: As far as the nuke sanctions, that was the LAW at the time. The US administration didn't have a choice. India knew exactly what would happen and decided (rightfully so) that it was worth the cost.
The US also turned a blind eye to Pakistan purportedly getting nukes from China. No sanctions on China at all! What happened to "the LAW"?

The law was that sanctions would be imposed on any non-NWS that tested a nuke. This didn't apply to China because a) they were a NWS and b) they didn't test a nuke

Problem solved. Hallelujah...

Just get the Ruskies to test our newkiller bums

.

Katare · Post by **Katare** » 21 Aug 2009 04:58

abhiti wrote:
Katare wrote:We need broad array of latest defense technology at affordable cost to built a technological edge over Chinese numerical superiority. If US can play a role in helping us achieve that goal we must not hesitate in exercising that option.
Any examples you can quote from history when US successfully did that. Instead what US normally does is that it uses the leverage it gains from whatever and improves its own position at cost of even the ones it is supposedly trying to help. In our case it will mean bargaining away India with China to gain something for US. US is just looking for bargaining chip!

Almost all US allies/customers enjoy(ed) technological advantage over their rivals.

I am not proposing that we buy anything from USofA for any perticular reason. I don't like the idea of rejecting a worthy option based on assumptions/preconceived notions that may not be true in changing/changed scenario.

I think all the best aircraft available for export anywhere in the world are competing for this contract. Anyone of them might do the job for IAF so "US or non US" doesn't really matter. The very nature of the competition ensures that we would get a good product at reasonable cost.

Patrick Cusack · Post by **Patrick Cusack** » 21 Aug 2009 05:01

Russians were good friend to India a long time ago - when Russia was Communist. Brezhnev & before.
Lately they are screwing India - they should stop this and be a friend India can trust again

Virupaksha · Post by **Virupaksha** » 21 Aug 2009 05:14

Patrick Cusack wrote:Russians were good friend to India a long time ago - when Russia was Communist. Brezhnev & before.
Lately they are screwing India - they should stop this and be a friend India can trust again

Unfortunately or fortunately, they have a history of never being anti-India in any time frame and even today they help us in Arihant, which I cant say about the enterprise fame, free f-16, free every defence item fame AmirKhans.

So please dont compare the friendship of Russia at whatever stage it might be, to someone who openly and freely gives away dollies and dollies of free goods to Pakistan and who think they are the kings and think we should give away Kashmir for peace with Pakistan. Thanks but nothanks.

I have no idea regarding F-16 vs F-18 vs xyz. So I generally stay away from this thread except to lurk and laugh at the professional advertising being done on this topic by Mr. George Welch, as though BR has any role in buying MRCA. But who am I to say how one should cook his stew and juices?

Patrick Cusack · Post by **Patrick Cusack** » 21 Aug 2009 05:27

RAVI_KU - agree with you absolutely.

US has to really earn Indias trust - and India has to stop being taken for a ride. US was friends a long time ago Kennedy era - hopefully their new foreign policy will see value in embarking down the same friendly path. US dont seem to understand that India has no hidden agenda like the Ch*** and Pak*.

VijayKumarSinha · Post by **VijayKumarSinha** » 21 Aug 2009 07:00

GeorgeWelch wrote:
Pakistan is turning to Turkey to upgrade their F-16s, so I don't see the dependence on the US.

U.S.A is arming Pakistan through proxy via Turkey as it doesn’t want to be seen directly supplying Pakistan the game changing weapons. It is well understood by all where the weapons for Turkey come from, and all these weapons have been moved to P-tan during war time to be use against India through different routes such as Iran. On the other hand when ever U.S can provide it something that can slip unnoticed under the radar it always does so, for example:

http://www.deagel.com/news/Pakistan-Air ... 01968.aspx

Therefore, there is a big difference between what U.S. wants us to believe and what it actually does. It has already provided Pakistan with a Block 52 F-16 weapon. If indeed selling weapons to countries is all that matters to U.S. then we are better off with Russia and Israel at least we are guaranteed that they won’t be supplying any weapons to Pakistan any time soon.

Once again, there is no point in buying a weapon whose most advanced pieces are already in our enemies hands. We are better off buying something about whose workings our enemy has little knowledge of such as the eurofighter.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 21 Aug 2009 07:50

abhiti wrote:It is a joke...we got another Philip just that this one doesn't like Russia but America.

Er - what does this mean exactly? Since Philip is a personal friend I would like to know.

I mean there is one guy called Philip who is critical of the US and another guy called GeorgeWelch who is pro-US. So what is the similarity? Unless the similarity that you detect is something that is unrelated to Russia or the US or the aircraft being discussed.

I suspect there is Freudian slip here that shows your innermost biases. Thanks for the entertainment.

John Snow · Post by **John Snow** » 21 Aug 2009 08:18

By George not a fly will harm US interests as long as katare saab is prowling the BRF

b_patel · Post by **b_patel** » 21 Aug 2009 09:19

What exactly is the logic beyond just a slogan of buying F-16 now and then F-35?

LM wants money! They know the India's timetable prevents them from entering the F-35 otherwise they would have entered it in. The next best thing for them is to offer the F-16. Their F-16IN isn't a bad plane but compared to the rafale, SH, and Typhoon its not stellar. If LM didn't think they had a chance to win they wouldn't have entered the race.

b_patel · Post by **b_patel** » 21 Aug 2009 09:23

. It has already provided Pakistan with a Block 52 F-16 weapon. If indeed selling weapons to countries is all that matters to U.S. then we are better off with Russia and Israel at least we are guaranteed that they won’t be supplying any weapons to Pakistan any time soon.

So what! Who cares if Pakistan received the block 52; its not as capable as the MRCA contenders and they are only receiving 18 of them. Its not like they are shifting the balance of power towards pakistan.

VijayKumarSinha · Post by **VijayKumarSinha** » 21 Aug 2009 10:26

b_patel wrote:
. It has already provided Pakistan with a Block 52 F-16 weapon. If indeed selling weapons to countries is all that matters to U.S. then we are better off with Russia and Israel at least we are guaranteed that they won’t be supplying any weapons to Pakistan any time soon.
So what! Who cares if Pakistan received the block 52; its not as capable as the MRCA contenders and they are only receiving 18 of them. Its not like they are shifting the balance of power towards pakistan.

Patel ji, bura mat manana lekin Ramayan khatam hogayi aur puchte ho ki sita kaun thi?

So, you have a beef with this guy and somebody came along and gave him one hand gun and gave you two rifle’s and told you its ok to give him one small gun because you have a bigger, more powerful weapon, would that be acceptable to you?

Will numerical or technological superiority matter if even one Paki F-16 can sneak through our defences and drop a nuke at even one Indian city? The fact that these F-16s were able to get a lock on our planes during Kargil war, does that not even bother you?
Instead of assessing the motive of the person selling that weapon to both you are your enemy with your way of thinking you are just happy to have a psychological satisfaction of having a better weapon system.

JimmyJ · Post by **JimmyJ** » 21 Aug 2009 14:06

VijayKumarSinha wrote:Patel ji, bura mat manana lekin Ramayan khatam hogayi aur puchte ho ki sita kaun thi?

So, you have a beef with this guy and somebody came along and gave him one hand gun and gave you two rifle’s and told you its ok to give him one small gun because you have a bigger, more powerful weapon, would that be acceptable to you?

Will numerical or technological superiority matter if even one Paki F-16 can sneak through our defences and drop a nuke at even one Indian city? The fact that these F-16s were able to get a lock on our planes during Kargil war, does that not even bother you?
Instead of assessing the motive of the person selling that weapon to both you are your enemy with your way of thinking you are just happy to have a psychological satisfaction of having a better weapon system.

International politics and diplomacy is not just about a 'Yes' or 'No' OR 'With me' or 'Aganist me' logic.

Each an every nation has their on reasons and purpose for every action, afterall its their interest which matters to them the most. When India looks forward to buy non-Russian weapons is there any point in Russians raising concern about it? And even if they do, we will have a thousand reasons to look for non Russian tech.

If going by your example India won't be able to collborate with any of the MRCA contenders as Unkil, EU, and now Russia has one or the other military deal with Pakistan; direct or indirect.

Pakistan and China are realities...what we need to see is how to counter them from running over us atleast, if not over running them. For that if ever the American deal is useful then we should utilize it.

But I am the least fan of teens....For me Rafale is the way forward though my profile in net has a beautiful pic of Mig-35

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 21 Aug 2009 18:04

Excellent point,"US arming Pak through proxy Turkey".The Turkish arms industry is very sophisticated and is building warships,subs,etc.It also has a 300mm MBRL system and other armoured vehicles.Pak plans to build German U-214 subs through Turkish assitance,but the Germans are reassessing the merit of the deal given Pak's state of chaos.F-16 upgrades for Pak are also being routed through Turkey.US chicanery at work.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 21 Aug 2009 21:17

VijayKumarSinha wrote:
Patel ji, bura mat manana lekin Ramayan khatam hogayi aur puchte ho ki sita kaun thi?

So, you have a beef with this guy and somebody came along and gave him one hand gun and gave you two rifle’s and told you its ok to give him one small gun because you have a bigger, more powerful weapon, would that be acceptable to you?

Will numerical or technological superiority matter if even one Paki F-16 can sneak through our defences and drop a nuke at even one Indian city? The fact that these F-16s were able to get a lock on our planes during Kargil war, does that not even bother you?
Instead of assessing the motive of the person selling that weapon to both you are your enemy with your way of thinking you are just happy to have a psychological satisfaction of having a better weapon system.

Um, and what happens if one pakistani agosta or U-214 happens to sneak in and get a firing solution against the Viraat or Gorshkov? Or an Erieye manages to locate a flight of IAF aircraft and directs interceptors toward them? We stop buying from the Frenchies, Germans and Swedes as well eh?

We don't have to buy stuff from the US just for the heck of it. Only when their product is the best we can get. For e.g. if the IAF thinks that one of the teens is the most suitable MRCA for them. No point in rejecting it because amirkhan arms the pakis as well. This would be like rejecting the P-8 (even though the navy badly needs it) just because the US gave P-3s to pakis. So in this case the Pakis can very easily stop us from getting the best equipment by buying something from the americans.

enqyoob · Post by **enqyoob** » 21 Aug 2009 22:14

Will numerical or technological superiority matter if even one Paki F-16 can sneak through our defences and drop a nuke at even one Indian city? The fact that these F-16s were able to get a lock on our planes during Kargil war, does that not even bother you?

er... are you under the impression that it is possible to guarantee that NO nuke can reach India? Sorry to disappoint you, but there is NO chance of ensuring that NO nukes can reach Indian cities. That's right. Hope this does 2 u what the Indian nuclear tests of 5/98 are supposed to have done to the little darlings in a certain city in the US, according to the resident South Asia Expert M. Basu:

Atlanta children unable to sleep because of fear of Indian nukes

The only security is in assuring that there will be enough of an assured "response" to keep the Pakis from taking off with nukes.

BTW, DID any Paki F-16 get a "lock" or even turn on their power during the Kargil War? Why wouldn't Paki planes get a "lock" if the IAF went close enough and flew over Skardu? If the Pakis did, so what? Did they fire or run? I was under the impression that PAF stayed firmly inside their bunkers and messes and closed their eyes through the entire war - which is the only reason they survived.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 21 Aug 2009 22:18

narayanan wrote:
BTW, DID any Paki F-16 get a "lock" or even turn on their power during the Kargil War? Why wouldn't Paki planes get a "lock" if the IAF went close enough and flew over Skardu? If the Pakis did, so what? Did they fire or run? I was under the impression that PAF stayed firmly inside their bunkers and messes and closed their eyes through the entire war - which is the only reason they survived.

I think he is referring to This.

Although F-16As of the Pakistan Air Force (PAF) did not see combat in the 1999 Kargil War, they were initially employed in patrolling the border to ensure Indian Air Force (IAF) fighters did not cross the line of control. Later in the war, lack of spare parts due to sanctions imposed on Pakistan forced the PAF to withdraw its F-16 fleet from regular patrol duties. The PAF's main opposition was the MiG-29, used by the IAF to provide fighter escort for Mirage 2000 which were attacking enemy targets with precision guided munitions. According to Indian sources, IAF MiG-29 of 47 (Black Archers) squadron tracked two PAF F-16As close to Indian air space with their radars, but they were ordered not to attack because no official declaration of war had been issued.[98] Pakistani sources state that the number of border violations by Indian aircraft dropped noticeably when F-16s were on patrol and that there were several cases of PAF F-16 and IAF Mirage 2000 tracking each other with their radars, but again no combat took place.

If you believe the pakis of course.

Katare · Post by **Katare** » 21 Aug 2009 22:33

John Snow wrote:By George not a fly will harm US interests as long as katare saab is prowling the BRF

Eye of mordor! I feel like I being watched by Sauron!

Don't forget this is MRCA thread, come here with a light heart and your sense of humor ready!

Anyway, somehow no one takes offense when France supplies top notch weapons (like AIP equipped Agostas) to Pakistan for use against India without any restriction/EUM. But when Swede (AWACS), Germans (Subs) and US (F16) does the same people have a different Maapdand (standard). Even Russia has started supplying Pakistan like RD33 engines for its aircrafts and Mi helicopters.

8 years back when RFI's were sent for MRCA, F35 was no where in the picture so F16 was offered. Even today it's not ready for export and when it's ready a huge line of already signed up customers are waiting to grab them. So question why F35 was not offered defies logic. US is offering what ever best it has got to offer, if it's not good enough for IAF than someone else will get the contract.

b_patel · Post by **b_patel** » 22 Aug 2009 02:50

Patel ji, bura mat manana lekin Ramayan khatam hogayi aur puchte ho ki sita kaun thi?
So, you have a beef with this guy and somebody came along and gave him one hand gun and gave you two rifle’s and told you its ok to give him one small gun because you have a bigger, more powerful weapon, would that be acceptable to you?
Will numerical or technological superiority matter if even one Paki F-16 can sneak through our defences and drop a nuke at even one Indian city? The fact that these F-16s were able to get a lock on our planes during Kargil war, does that not even bother you?
Instead of assessing the motive of the person selling that weapon to both you are your enemy with your way of thinking you are just happy to have a psychological satisfaction of having a better weapon system

I have no idea what your saying in the first part, so yeah. India will always be offered superior arms compared to Pakistan b/c India can afford it. Why does it matter what Pakistan is offered? They do purchase military arms. Also the F-16's offered to Pakistan don't have the nuke capability. Im pretty sure about that.

vasu_ray · Post by **vasu_ray** » 22 Aug 2009 03:19

the marketing scheme is, buy 2 rifles, get 1 gun free, the twist though is the gun goes to your neighbor who is your arch rival, why, due to certain political compulsions

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 22 Aug 2009 04:39

Rafale is winning the contest on this thread hands down, but really is it going to win the MRCA? Its reality is that it has never won a similar contest and was nearly kicked out of this one.
Now now I know people will say that it was kicked out because of politics and pressure by the evil americans, but is our MRCA contest designed to be any different?

Bofors still makes the best field gun, we don't award it the contract.
We re tender the light helicopter contest so that the one we want in can participate.
We modify the RFP of the attack helo contest so that the one we want can participate.
The same saga is going to be repeated with the second line subs contract (Thank god that the americans don't build diesel electric / AIP subs)

Patrick Cusack · Post by **Patrick Cusack** » 22 Aug 2009 06:39

Equalising Strategic Odds - Be the supplier to both sides of the equation so that no one has the upper hand is a good strategy. If India opts for this route - Pak will have won the war without firing a single bullet and they can continue to keep hammering India every once in a while and not get attacked.

Hopefully there is a smart guy making the decision - my 2 cents, MRCA will therefore go to either Russia or France.

What I hear is that F-18 is virtually in-destructible which is vvvgood characteristic given the cost. If total technology transfer from US is possible then Israel and India can jointly develop and replace with custom avionics and indigenised engines or even source RR or Snecma engines - this may then be an option perhaps?

Willy · Post by **Willy** » 22 Aug 2009 23:58

My main grouse against buying anything from the US is that we pay valuble dollars to buy stuff from then while they go on giving freebies to the Pakis. In a way we will be indirectly subsidising free goodies for the Pakis.

putnanja · Post by **putnanja** » 24 Aug 2009 06:45

GeorgeWelch wrote:
VijayKumarSinha wrote:India is not a partner on any level like a bunch of other countries.
That would be because they've never indicated any desire to buy it.

To say that India would be a partner like the NATO allies if it buys more of US products is a laughable assertion.

And comparing Israel to any other NATO ally of the US itself, leave alone India, just doesn't make sense

Katare wrote:Anyway, somehow no one takes offense when France supplies top notch weapons (like AIP equipped Agostas) to Pakistan for use against India without any restriction/EUM. But when Swede (AWACS), Germans (Subs) and US (F16) does the same people have a different Maapdand (standard). Even Russia has started supplying Pakistan like RD33 engines for its aircrafts and Mi helicopters.

No one would be so worked up if the US sold the weapons to the pakis instead of gifting them. Check out the link and quote that I posted in page 3 from the CRS report, where it states that billions of US dollars went to arm Pakistan for fight against India, and none of those weapons were the kind that could be used against militants.

If the pakis wasted their meagre resources to purchase super-expensive arms, like the old SU, then they would be on their way down by now. But US propping it up and gifting away arms to the pakistan which can be used against India only is enough indications of how much the US "cares" about India.

And as for people who claim that US gifts to pakistan doesn't alter the military balance, why should even one Indian citizen die due to these gifts from US to Pakis? Will the US accept it if India sells any arms to Cuba? Why did it even protest selling of arms from Russia to Venezuela?

Which fighter would you select for the IAF's MRCA?