Vote for the MRCA

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.

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

Poll ended at 30 Aug 2009 02:08

Boeing F/A-18 Super Hornet
31
12%
Lockheed Martin F-16IN Super Viper
10
4%
Eurofighter Typhoon
44
17%
Saab Gripen NG
13
5%
RAC MiG MiG-35
46
18%
Dassault Rafale
109
43%
 
Total votes: 253

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

Re: Vote for the MRCA

Postby SaiK » 18 Aug 2009 22:12

lets choose the top 3 rather select only 1. Lets not discuss here.

we did this already.. and we did get the top 3. why vote again?

rachit
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 7
Joined: 05 May 2008 16:49
Location: London

Re: Vote for the MRCA

Postby rachit » 18 Aug 2009 23:37

i want to vote...how do u vote?!?!

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7740
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Vote for the MRCA

Postby nachiket » 19 Aug 2009 00:14

rachit wrote:i want to vote...how do u vote?!?!

Click on the radio button (small circular thing next to your favorite aircraft's name) and then click on submit .
You'll find this at the top of the page.

enqyoob
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2658
Joined: 06 Jul 2008 20:25

Re: Vote for the MRCA

Postby enqyoob » 19 Aug 2009 03:36

I must register my protest that the JF-17 Thundaar is not being considered.

John Snow
BRFite
Posts: 1941
Joined: 03 Feb 2006 00:44

Re: Vote for the MRCA

Postby John Snow » 19 Aug 2009 03:38

Thundaar is a winnaar so no need to vote

Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8012
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Re: Vote for the MRCA

Postby Gerard » 19 Aug 2009 04:51

narayanan wrote:I must register my protest that the JF-17 Thundaar is not being considered.


Boss, that will be in the re-tendering process / next RFP (after CBI enquiry and blacklisting of Boeing/Dassault/Lockeed/SAAB)

abhiti
BRFite
Posts: 248
Joined: 26 Apr 2009 00:39

Re: Vote for the MRCA

Postby abhiti » 19 Aug 2009 05:39

narayanan wrote:I must register my protest that the JF-17 Thundaar is not being considered.


+5 (I vote with all five fingers in protest) :rotfl:

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

Re: Vote for the MRCA

Postby putnanja » 19 Aug 2009 10:03

Anant wrote:Compared to the US, the French have armed the Pakistanis even more. I reference the Agostas, the Mirages, the Atlantique and whatever else French they have. The Pakistanis have gotten little since alzheimed Ronald Raygun let office. The only thing they are getting is more soya f-16's and I think artillery and the orions. Personally, I think the US should send them 0. Will that happen overnight? No. But as the US loses more troops in Afghanistan and they realize the land of the pure is involved you can better believe that more arms will evaporate. Also as China becomes stronger, they will realize that they finally have to let India become the natural superpower that is its ultimate course in destiny. So I being a SH homer am looking forward to seeing it in IAF roundels. Go Super Hornet all the way. :wink:


er, seriously out of topic, but the US has given away arms for free, worth almost $3 billion. Now, if the paki state was to invest that much, it would have sunk faster than PNS ghazi.

Not just aircraft, but thousands of anti-tank missiles (2000 TOW missiles), Harpoon missiles, Phalanx weapon system, helicopters with night fighting capabilities etc. Even the US CRS report said that most of the aid given to pakistan was for weapons which will be used against India and has no role in anti-terrorist warfare.

Plus factor in US' double standards about being very very sensitive to any arms transfer to cuba/venezuela/bolivia etc while liberally supplying arms to Pakistan which has fought 4 wars against India and is continuing to support ant-India terrorists still.

US Military Aid to Pakistan Misses Its al-Qaeda Target

... But rather than use the more than $7 billion in U.S. military aid to bolster its counter-terrorism capabilities, Pakistan has spent the bulk of it on heavy arms, aircraft and equipment that U.S. officials say are far more suited for conventional warfare with India, its regional rival.
...
...
Reluctant to offend a crucial ally, the United States has placed few conditions on the military aid, part of a larger package of U.S. aid and payments totaling more than $10 billion. As a result, Pakistan used much of it to acquire big-ticket weapons systems and other items to shore up its conventional defense capabilities, U.S. officials said.

The Defense Security Cooperation Agency, which oversees U.S. weapons transfers, said that shipments to Pakistan since the Sept. 11 attacks had included some equipment that could be useful in pursuing militants in the tribal areas, including 4,000 radios and 12 refurbished attack helicopters. But even those items went to the regular army, the agency said, and are unlikely to be shared with the Frontier Corps, which falls under a separate branch of the Pakistani government.

The majority of Pakistan's purchases have been of items that would be difficult to deploy in counterinsurgency fights, including harpoon missiles designed to sink warships, F-16 fighter jets, maritime surveillance aircraft and refurbished howitzers that have to be towed into position.
....
...
The Pentagon has budgeted $55 million in counter-narcotics funds for the Frontier Corps this year to pay for night-vision equipment and communications gear. But the Pentagon is also seeking additional funding in a separate category that could be used for weapons. Officials declined to discuss specifics. :roll:
...

k prasad
BRFite
Posts: 660
Joined: 21 Oct 2007 17:38
Location: Somewhere over the Rainbow
Contact:

Re: Vote for the MRCA

Postby k prasad » 19 Aug 2009 11:24

nachiket wrote:
abhiti wrote:You wouldn't guess by the amount of discussion on MRCA thread on Mig 35 and F-18 that Rafale will be a front runner. Seems like there is a silent majority on the forum.


Ah I think I may know why. You have to say which aircraft you want to see win in this thread. The other thread is about realistic chances. The rafale is so expensive it is unlikely to win. The Mig-35 is cheap and the GOI seems to be enamored by massaland right now. So the discussion on Mig-35 and superbug.


Ajai Shukla has rated EF, F-16 and 18 way down in the sweeps, with the Gripen on top, and the 35 behind. Rafale is the dark horse.

One wonders why. Knowing him, one is sure that he has info that is hitherto unknown, and has a finger on the IAF pulse in all probability... odd if true, since we've been thinking the Effs will be good contenders.


govardhanks wrote:I just don't know much technical data. but just want to ask everyone. Tell the name of the a/c which only india can have and neither pakis or chinese will be able to get them. ???? :(

Pakis already have F16( AESA radar etc. can make the difference). French Rafale can also be offered to them if they pay for it(If rafale fails to win the deal then pakis wil try to get them!!) and all fallows the same. :eek:


Either way for us, wrt Rafale, Pakis will lose - if we buy the Rafale, bad for TSP. If we reject it and France offers it to our beloveds, then they'll burn their pockets buying it. Good for us again :twisted:

adel ansari
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 21
Joined: 18 Aug 2009 17:43

Re: Vote for the MRCA

Postby adel ansari » 19 Aug 2009 11:39

Hi!! Rahul..
I believe you are the Moderator, I am new here.. Can you explain what is BR Fite - Trainee and oldie.. and is it only time based untill I upgrade to oldie or I have to post some amount of comments to become one..
Thanks ...

k prasad
BRFite
Posts: 660
Joined: 21 Oct 2007 17:38
Location: Somewhere over the Rainbow
Contact:

Re: Vote for the MRCA

Postby k prasad » 19 Aug 2009 11:41

akash wrote:Hi!! Rahul..
I believe you are the Moderator, I am new here.. Can you explain what is BR Fite - Trainee and oldie.. and is it only time based untill I upgrade to oldie or I have to post some amount of comments to become one..
Thanks ...


I'm taking the liberty of answering Rahul, if thats ok with u (+1 post for me :-))

upto 100 posts, one is a trainee... after that, just a BRFite. Any other epithet is just the grace of the mighty gods of this corner of the e-world.

adel ansari
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 21
Joined: 18 Aug 2009 17:43

Re: Vote for the MRCA

Postby adel ansari » 19 Aug 2009 11:48

Thanks .. Prasad.. (one more for me... 97 more to go..haha).
Its great to be here...

nikhil_p
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 378
Joined: 07 Oct 2006 19:59
Location: Sukhoi/Sukhoi (Jaguars gone :( )Gali, pune

Re: Vote for the MRCA

Postby nikhil_p » 19 Aug 2009 21:57

Hacktually heat all dhepends upon bheech khompany gives more chai-biskoot (of the golden colour variety)......

Nirmal
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 81
Joined: 05 Jul 2005 15:51
Location: London, United Kingdom
Contact:

Re: Vote for the MRCA

Postby Nirmal » 19 Aug 2009 22:14

nikhil_p wrote:Hacktually heat all dhepends upon bheech khompany gives more chai-biskoot (of the golden colour variety)......

It is being wispered that all six contenders will pass the muster. Cusrtosey my local chaiwalla. It is the Politics that will settle this selection. It could be between US,EU and Russia. The latter is on the loosing ground at present.

Ted Kotcheff
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 12
Joined: 26 Jul 2009 02:54

Re: Vote for the MRCA

Postby Ted Kotcheff » 19 Aug 2009 23:09

Nirmal wrote:It could be between US,EU and Russia.

:roll:

Rafale FTW.

VijayKumarSinha
BRFite
Posts: 185
Joined: 16 Aug 2009 21:22

Re: Vote for the MRCA

Postby VijayKumarSinha » 20 Aug 2009 00:43

I think this is our opportunity to get the best technology out there and to get the technology that we can use in indigenous products which I think would be possible through Typhoon and Mig-35 respectively. This is our opportunity to get German and British engineering in one machine. If we are able to have the assemblies of every new eurofighter or even just the one that we will purchase, how exactly will they hold back spare parts for us, when we need it most which is during war time?

We not only need to look at the cost of ownership but also changing alliances during the next 40 years. In that regard I think Russia will continue to be our steadfast ally. Although, they have pretty much sold a lot of high tech equipment to China and continue to do so and that is our only concern with Russia. France is and has always been mostly concerned with just selling their equipment. They will sell that to Pakistan tomorrow if P-land had the mulas(not mullahs, that they have in plenty). And make no mistake with the kind of aid that P-tan is getting they will recover from their economic debacle and as history shows they will once again come back and try to stick that knife in our back i.e, if we do not first dismantle that country first.


U.S. has always been more concerned with controlling their allies for their own benefit. Take the case of F-16's now dubbed as “vintage” that they have already supplied to Pakistan who is their "closest ally" in their "war on terror". U.S is refusing to upgrade the planes of its closest ally! What does it tell us about U.S? Also, Pakination is in the process of upgrading its F-16's through other countries like Turkey. So what is the point of having this plane which our enemy already has and with which we will have to fight it with one hand tied behind our back. Let us suppose that we have F-16's right now and tomorrow a war breaks out with Pakistan. There is no way in hell that when we start running short on munitions and parts for this plane that U.S. will supply us that. The same goes for F-18's. We should be saying 'Thank you, come again!' to the U.S. on this one.


It is not so much about the cost of ownership over a long period of time instead; it is about of being able to use whatever equipment you have effectively when the time comes.
Through mig-35 we will get a lot of useful technology at our disposal which we can use in upgrading the 35’s ourselves and maybe also in the future development of LCA’s or other aircraft. But more importantly it might also hold back Russia in selling these to our very loveable bhai China.

Gripen is just another F-16 kind of aircraft; it doesn’t give us any strategic advantage at all. Also, it has U.S. parts in it that just brings up all the issues that I have mentioned before.

Since I had only one vote I voted for the Typhoon. But, if I could have my way here I would want that the MRCA contract be extended to 200 planes with us buying a 100 Typhoons and a 100 MIG-35’s

KrishG
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 1290
Joined: 25 Nov 2008 20:43
Location: Land of Trala-la

Re: Vote for the MRCA

Postby KrishG » 20 Aug 2009 01:11

abhiti wrote:
narayanan wrote:I must register my protest that the JF-17 Thundaar is not being considered.


+5 (I vote with all five fingers in protest) :rotfl:


I also protest against not featuring 'Kaleen' the Flying Carpet, in the list.

GeorgeWelch
BRFite
Posts: 1393
Joined: 12 Jun 2009 09:31

Re: Vote for the MRCA

Postby GeorgeWelch » 20 Aug 2009 04:31

VijayKumarSinha wrote:Pakistan who is their "closest ally" in their "war on terror". U.S is refusing to upgrade the planes of its closest ally!


Closest ally? Hardly. More like necessary evil.

VijayKumarSinha wrote:What does it tell us about U.S?


That they care more about India than Pakistan? (which is where advanced F-16s would be targeted)

So the US is refusing to upgrade Pakistan F-16s (not embargoing, just not selling upgrades) while simultaneously offering India top-of-the-line equipment.

I think the message is pretty clear.

VijayKumarSinha wrote:Through mig-35 we will get a lot of useful technology at our disposal which we can use in upgrading the 35’s ourselves and maybe also in the future development of LCA’s or other aircraft.


What useful technology can you get from MiG-35 that you can't get from FGFA/MCA?

Katare
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2579
Joined: 02 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: Vote for the MRCA

Postby Katare » 20 Aug 2009 06:27

BRF poll direction so far -

1) BRF prefers a non-American Aircraft
2) BRF preferes a twin engined Aircraft

enqyoob
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2658
Joined: 06 Jul 2008 20:25

Re: Vote for the MRCA

Postby enqyoob » 20 Aug 2009 06:41

Well... in my case, only because both US offers are for 1970s vintage airframes with maybe updated electronics, and maybe 1-generation old engines. Neither the F-22 nor the F-35 are on offer. Look in Readers' Digest circa 1976 and you will a writeup on the F-16. F/A-18 was the one that lost that competition as the YF-17, IIRC. Now both have have undergone quite a few upgrades (like on the F/A-18 to fix the problem of the tails falling off, and the "sudden wing stall" and the "pilot-induced wing rock", and the F-16 to improve high angle of attack recovery) but you cannot change the fact that the airframes are 1970s.

Of course, each F-22 costs as much as a Bollywood herrowine.

GeorgeWelch
BRFite
Posts: 1393
Joined: 12 Jun 2009 09:31

Re: Vote for the MRCA

Postby GeorgeWelch » 20 Aug 2009 06:49

narayanan wrote:but you cannot change the fact that the airframes are 1970s.


Just like the MiG-35 and the Su-30MKI?

(PS: The SH is a completely new airframe from 1995)

enqyoob
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2658
Joined: 06 Jul 2008 20:25

Re: Vote for the MRCA

Postby enqyoob » 20 Aug 2009 07:14

Sorry to post OT here, but I do not believe the argument that the Su-35 or MiG 35 airframes are old designs of the 1970s. Comrades Mikoyan, Gurevich and Sukhoi may have been doodling the beautiful flowing shapes when they went to the Bolshoi Ballet, but the airframe shapes are much newer than the Soviet 1970s shapes. (OK, I see that the Su27 first flew in 1977..... maybe, following Soviet custom, that one was an Su-7 with a 2 in front of it..?)

To understand this, one needs to look at the panic that occurred in the mid 1990s about supermaneuverability. The Pogachev Cobra maneuver executed by the Su-27 did not become known until mid 1990s, and caused a very large flutter (no pun intended) because neither the F-16 nor any other western aircraft could come close to matching the nose-pointing control that the the Su-27 demonstrated at extreme angles of attack. This issue did not become significant until engine thrust/weight ratio reached the level where such maneuvers were feasible, so 1970s airframes were simply not designed to do anything of the sort. When it was demonstrated it scared people because it implied a huge advantage in getting behind the other guy to fire heat-seeking missiles.

There were many things tried with the F-16 to match these maneuvers. The baseline F-16 could not come anywhere close to what Pogachev and his buddies demonstrated. The results are in the published literature.

The F-15s (twin-tailed, twin engined) could reach somewhat high angles of attack, but also suffered similar problems. The Soviet planes had fins on the underside that enabled nose pointing at 90 degrees and greater angles of attack, quite impossible to do without these fins.

The appropriate 1970s Soviet airframes were Mig 23 and 25, and some Su airframes.

As for Su-30 MKI, which airplanes of 1970s vintage ever demonstrated decoupled maneuvers such as those possible with multi-d.o.f. thrust vectoring?

About the SuperHornet being a completely new airframe - well... something had to be done after the original F/A-18 design started losing its vertical tails due to buffeting caused by bursting of the LEX vortices, and after Sudden Wing Stall started appearing. The USN was really not happy with the initial F-18, but they needed an F-14 replacement. The initial F/18 did not do anything very well. I think what is new about the SuperHornet is composite manufacturing/assembly technology mastered at Boeing plants. Somehow I doubt very much whether this technology is coming to India, because there are a lot of very expensive frames, jigs and assembly techniques associated with it. The SH may also be bulkier and have beefed-up vertical tails along with the greater payload and range.

For india, the maneuverability of the newer Su and Mig designs becomes important in negotiating the canyons and valleys of the Himalayas, for instance the approach to Skardu, or any operations in Northern Arunachal.

The supermaneuverability panic ended with the development of all-aspect AAMs, but those are only placed on "REAL" frontline jockeys.

The SH, I understand is per Wikipedia,
"about 20% larger, 7,000 lb (3,000 kg) heavier empty, and 15,000 lb (6,800 kg) heavier at maximum weight than the original Hornet. The Super Hornet carries 33% more internal fuel,[18] increasing mission range by 41% and endurance by 50% over the "Legacy" Hornet. The empty weight of the Super Hornet is about 11,000 lb (5,000 kg) less than that of the F-14 Tomcat that it replaced, while approaching, but not matching its payload / range.[19]

GeorgeWelch
BRFite
Posts: 1393
Joined: 12 Jun 2009 09:31

Re: Vote for the MRCA

Postby GeorgeWelch » 20 Aug 2009 08:35

narayanan wrote:Sorry to post OT here, but I do not believe the argument that the Su-35 or MiG 35 airframes are old designs of the 1970s.


And yet they are, believe it or not.

narayanan wrote:but the airframe shapes are much newer than the Soviet 1970s shapes.


They are Soviet 1970s shapes.

narayanan wrote:To understand this, one needs to look at the panic that occurred in the mid 1990s about supermaneuverability.


There was no 'panic'. It was almost universally dismissed as an 'airshow maneuver' of limited tactical value.


narayanan wrote:As for Su-30 MKI, which airplanes of 1970s vintage ever demonstrated decoupled maneuvers such as those possible with multi-d.o.f. thrust vectoring?


So slapping thrust vectoring on is all that is required to take a plane from being 'an ancient 70s design' to a modern superfighter?

narayanan wrote:About the SuperHornet being a completely new airframe - well... something had to be done after the original F/A-18 design started losing its vertical tails due to buffeting caused by bursting of the LEX vortices


The origin of the SH had nothing to do with 'losing vertical tails'. In fact I think you are referring to a problem that was new to the SH and fixed during development. Obviously nothing was seriously wrong with the original Hornets because they are looking at extending their lives to 10,000 hours. (In comparison the original MiG-29 has a theoretical service life of 2,500 hours)

narayanan wrote:I think what is new about the SuperHornet is composite manufacturing/assembly technology mastered at Boeing plants.


Well that and the shape and the size. When you have different size, different shape and different parts, you have a different plane.

narayanan wrote:Somehow I doubt very much whether this technology is coming to India, because there are a lot of very expensive frames, jigs and assembly techniques associated with it.


That is a requirement of the RFP, so yes, it will be coming to India if the SH is selected.

narayanan wrote:For india, the maneuverability of the newer Su and Mig designs becomes important in negotiating the canyons and valleys of the Himalayas, for instance the approach to Skardu, or any operations in Northern Arunachal.


No, the limiting factor when doing terrain following is your radar and software and safety margins. All modern fighters are more than physically capable of following any terrain in the world.

narayanan wrote:The supermaneuverability panic ended with the development of all-aspect AAMs, but those are only placed on "REAL" frontline jockeys.


You mean like those in the MRCA competition?

VijayKumarSinha
BRFite
Posts: 185
Joined: 16 Aug 2009 21:22

Re: Vote for the MRCA

Postby VijayKumarSinha » 20 Aug 2009 08:57

Hello George Welch,

Do you mind me asking if you are Indian or American?

GeorgeWelch wrote:Closest ally? Hardly. More like necessary evil.


It is not I who came up with that term. Its Obama and Bush who at every opportunity have shouted from the roof tops how much they value their friendship with Pakistan. We are really at odds with any country in this world who is the friend of Pakistan. And with Billions of dollars in economic and military aid it is only too clear how close an ally they are to them.


GeorgeWelch wrote:That they care more about India than Pakistan? (which is where advanced F-16s would be targeted)

So the US is refusing to upgrade Pakistan F-16s (not embargoing, just not selling upgrades) while simultaneously offering India top-of-the-line equipment.

I think the message is pretty clear.


They are targeting India this time because for political and economic reasons India would be a better customer this time. But as i said before, what is to say that if tomorrow we had a disagreement they will just stop upgrading OUR planes?
Do you actually think for a second that we buy any of that stuff that you just said?
The truth is Mr. Welch that not so long ago Jimmy Carter stood with the Shah of Iran and made a toast (forgeting that Iran was deeply Islamic and that drinking was prohibited) to the eternal friendship and cooperation between their two nations. Also, not so long ago another american president declared that same country is part of an axis of evil. Not to mention that these two events have occured well within a span of 40 years. What is to say that if India was to fall to bad times America will turn its back on us and forget anything about a deal that was supposed to viable for 40 years.

So Mr. Welch U.S.A has a history of shunning its allies in a very short span of time given that history and understanding that this deal is meant to be for 40 years I think you shouldn't be terribly surprised if we take a pass on your weapons which is now only 2nd class to the Americans. Not to mention that it is the U.S of A that for the last 60 years has provided Pakistan with all the weapons that it needed to fight India. In short it has played India against Pakistan and now wants to play India against China.

GeorgeWelch wrote:What useful technology can you get from MiG-35 that you can't get from FGFA/MCA?


Over here, I don't know what you are talking about. Yes we are developing an FGFA with Russia. but that doesn't mean that they are going to just hand us all their technical knowhow over night. The Brahmos is an example of that. The process of creating a new gen aircraft is a long process. On the other hand if we do get MIG-35's then there will be a complete TOT within a span of few years. Once again, there is a generous TOT here unlike with the American planes for which only param Brahma knows how many strings would be attached to it. Another example of the strings that are part of american equipment is the Nuclear agreement just signed with U.S, where they can inspect so many of our reactors and got knows what else.

Long story short American political establishment doesn't take a moral stand by which the subsequent administrations adhere to. They just do what they think is right for a particular moment.

Also, as another guy noted before, the general consensus on this forum is that we don't want American equipment this time.

Thankoo, come Again!


p.s. Did LM or Boeing send you here to pitch for the American aircrafts? Give it a rest dude, why are you being such a bible salesman when we have said that we don't want them! I still love hollywood movies though! Got any of those to sell?

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

Re: Vote for the MRCA

Postby AmitR » 20 Aug 2009 09:50

VijayKumarSinha wrote:Hello George Welch,

Do you mind me asking if you are Indian or American?

Also, as another guy noted before, the general consensus on this forum is that we don't want American equipment this time.

Thankoo, come Again!


p.s. Did LM or Boeing send you here to pitch for the American aircrafts? Give it a rest dude, why are you being such a bible salesman when we have said that we don't want them! I still love hollywood movies though! Got any of those to sell?

:( :(
I think Indians tend to get too emotional on every issue. George Welch brings a different perspective to this entire debate and it should be welcomed. Our attempts to brand everyone who does not agree to our view as some sort of agent or salesman shows us in poor light. IMHO George has been countering all the allegations made against the Fteens in a logical and clear manner. Going by our method of childish argument he can brand us as Russian agents of Sukhoi and MiG.

Anant
BRFite
Posts: 270
Joined: 02 May 1999 11:31
Location: Iowa City, Iowa
Contact:

Re: Vote for the MRCA

Postby Anant » 20 Aug 2009 10:00

VKS,

Why are you attacking George? It's one thing to attack someone on the merits, it is another thing to attack someone on your perceived biases or past badacts. I don't see George making any ad hominem attacks on you, and as far as I know and the rules allow, BR is inclusive to other nationalities as long as the rules of the forum are followed. I didn't notice anything that he said which was anti-Indian. I am sure the moderators know what they are doing and will police the thread appropriately. I'll add this though, the IAF ultimately shortlisted these planes (including 2 American vendors) based on their perceived needs and capabilities. Let them (the IAF) make their decision appropriately; we all know this involves both military capabilities and political realities regardless of the vendor chosen. As is the often paraphrased quote of Lord Palmerston goes ""Nations have no permanent friends and no permanent enemies. Only permanent interests." So let the logical arguments go on and cut out the vitriol. CM, Narayanan and George, among others, I've enjoyed your posts and am learning a lot. Keep up the good work.

Patrick Cusack
BRFite
Posts: 112
Joined: 11 Aug 2009 21:01

Re: Vote for the MRCA

Postby Patrick Cusack » 20 Aug 2009 10:28

Primary focus for India should be to locate engine partner - choice is between US or France F-18 /Rafaele. Need to avoid smokies altogether.

GeorgeWelch
BRFite
Posts: 1393
Joined: 12 Jun 2009 09:31

Re: Vote for the MRCA

Postby GeorgeWelch » 20 Aug 2009 11:43

VijayKumarSinha wrote:Do you mind me asking if you are Indian or American?


American, like the real George Welch.

VijayKumarSinha wrote:
GeorgeWelch wrote:Closest ally? Hardly. More like necessary evil.


It is not I who came up with that term. Its Obama and Bush who at every opportunity have shouted from the roof tops how much they value their friendship with Pakistan.


It's diplomatic speak. We do need Pakistan right now, but I think everyone realizes that this is not a long-term relationship.

On the other hand India is viewed a more long-term 'natural ally'.

Actions speak louder than words, and the US has not been making their best tech available to Pakistan like they have with India.

I wrote a long reply addressing many of your misunderstandings, but I really don't want to make this a political thread so I will just leave it at that.

krishnan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7342
Joined: 07 Oct 2005 12:58
Location: 13° 04' N , 80° 17' E

Re: Vote for the MRCA

Postby krishnan » 20 Aug 2009 12:10

We have all seen how much US respects and treats its so called ALLIES

Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Re: Vote for the MRCA

Postby Sanku » 20 Aug 2009 12:20

narayanan wrote:Cobra maneuver executed by the Su-27 did not become known until mid 1990s, and caused a very large flutter (no pun intended)


Nieeeeceeeeee......

b_patel
BRFite
Posts: 150
Joined: 22 Feb 2009 04:08

Re: Vote for the MRCA

Postby b_patel » 20 Aug 2009 13:09

We have all seen how much US respects and treats its so called ALLIES

What examples do you have?

GeorgeWelch
BRFite
Posts: 1393
Joined: 12 Jun 2009 09:31

Re: Vote for the MRCA

Postby GeorgeWelch » 20 Aug 2009 13:10

krishnan wrote:We have all seen how much US respects and treats its so called ALLIES


The US has given more real support to its allies than anyone else in the last 50 years.

The French in Vietnam, Israel, the Brits in the Falklands, Taiwan, Columbia vs FARC, etc.

And if you want to talk about Iran, well Iran held US embassy staff hostage for over a year. Pulling a stunt like that will have a negative impact on your relations, just like it would with any other country in the world.

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.

govardhanks
BRFite
Posts: 220
Joined: 08 Jun 2009 23:12
Location: Earth

Re: Vote for the MRCA

Postby govardhanks » 20 Aug 2009 13:37

GeorgeWelch wrote:On the other hand India is viewed a more long-term 'natural ally'.

Actions speak louder than words, and the US has not been making their best tech available to Pakistan like they have with India.

I wrote a long reply addressing many of your misunderstandings, but I really don't want to make this a political thread so I will just leave it at that.


sir you are speaking to the 100 crore people everyone's view is different. Patience sir!
The same people will stand in queue for american visa!! :)
Its really hard to impress India but once you did they will fallow you.( I think u know who impressed in past). It takes time , stay cool.
"People who are working for world peace will meet at the same point"

(Top secret :D )
Finally you can reach us through one of your friend who has impressed us very much and is much in same condition as we are.. :D

Muppalla
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7089
Joined: 12 Jun 1999 11:31

Re: Vote for the MRCA

Postby Muppalla » 20 Aug 2009 16:57

I voted for Rafale.

PratikDas
BRFite
Posts: 1927
Joined: 06 Feb 2009 07:46
Contact:

Re: Vote for the MRCA

Postby PratikDas » 21 Aug 2009 00:47

GeorgeWelch 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"? Thanks for being India's friend, mate!

Take your propaganda elsewhere.

Added later: Just in case you need a refresher and you trust your own former Air Force Secretary and USNews: Why China Helped Countries Like Pakistan, North Korea Build Nuclear Bombs

VijayKumarSinha
BRFite
Posts: 185
Joined: 16 Aug 2009 21:22

Re: Vote for the MRCA

Postby VijayKumarSinha » 21 Aug 2009 00:59

hi Anant and AmitR,

Maybe I should have put a few similes in my post :shock: because I wasn't being emotional or making an ad hominem attack on him. I guess Americans do have a much better sense of humour than us. :lol: and I will start putting smilies as I think they seem to work. I wanted to know whether he is Indian or American because what he was saying was not in Indian interest.

I hate to say this, but it seemed to me that you were basically coming to his rescue when
he didn't need any rescuing and that is an Indian tendency of bending over backwards to accommodate foreigners. Maybe we should take a leaf out of BCCI's book on how to run our business successfully without having to go out of our way every time to please foreign countries. 8)
Also, since you quoted a brit let me quote an American Jorge Hirsch for you, "India could indeed be bought off by US incentives like the Indo-US nuclear deal, because its shortsighted leaders don't recognize that they are committing national suicide by entering into this nuclear deal with the US."



GW,
If the best American technology was being made available than it would be the F-22’s and the F-35’s that would be made available now :) , just like they have been made available to Norway, Australia, Turkey and a bunch of other countries. Not the 16’s and 18’s which are meant to be replaced in 16 years in the U.S. The 16’s and the 18’s will just keep India languishing on the technology front, while keeping the American production line moving for at least another sixteen aircrafts. :roll: And since we all know that in the end it will be the politcal considerations that will decide which way this deal will swing, It might not have a been a bad idea for you to put your reply here to clear my "misunderstanding :P "

I also want to say that Saudi Arabia has already bought the Typhoon over the Raphael.

Once again, I have nothing against the procurement of American weapons. Its just that this time around there is better stuff on the market and I believe that the American sales pitch is drowning out all those other voices.

About an earlier post,
I believe going to foreign countries to earn a living doesn’t mean anything other than that is the way you have chosen to earn a living. You might like a few things about them and thats why you are there but you might also dislike a few things such as their foreign policy! It doesn’t mean you lose your identity over night. Just like Americans or people from any other country might come to India to do business doesn’t mean they like everything about us and cease to be Americans when they get our Visa. They are here to do business and we are doing the same over there. 8)

GeorgeWelch
BRFite
Posts: 1393
Joined: 12 Jun 2009 09:31

Re: Vote for the MRCA

Postby GeorgeWelch » 21 Aug 2009 01:20

VijayKumarSinha wrote:If the best American technology was being made available than it would be the F-22’s and the F-35’s that would be made available now :) , just like they have been made available to Norway, Australia, Turkey and a bunch of other countries.


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

However fighters are just one area.

The P-8 for instance is the very best.

VijayKumarSinha wrote:The 16’s and the 18’s will just keep India languishing behind on the technology front


No more than any of the other MRCA competitors.

GeorgeWelch
BRFite
Posts: 1393
Joined: 12 Jun 2009 09:31

Re: Vote for the MRCA

Postby GeorgeWelch » 21 Aug 2009 01:30

PratikDas wrote:
GeorgeWelch 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

PratikDas
BRFite
Posts: 1927
Joined: 06 Feb 2009 07:46
Contact:

Re: Vote for the MRCA

Postby PratikDas » 21 Aug 2009 01:33

GeorgeWelch 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. :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

Take your propaganda elsewhere, George Welch.

GeorgeWelch
BRFite
Posts: 1393
Joined: 12 Jun 2009 09:31

Re: Vote for the MRCA

Postby GeorgeWelch » 21 Aug 2009 01:36

PratikDas wrote:
GeorgeWelch wrote: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. :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:


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.


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests