Viv S wrote:
44 Squadron started converting from the An-12 to the Il-76 in 1985. 30 years is a rather long time for a 'gap' to persist.
Viv S. Please dont do this. You are using one sq to speak for IAF?
First supersonics converted from Mig 21 to Mig 29. So IAF replaced Mig 21 with Mig 29.
I feel like banging my head on the wall here. My god.
An 12s were finally all retired in the 90s the last being June 93.
Ils were in by in 1985.
All this while MTA was supposed to come, but just like the AJT it has taken forever, I guess it was not blest by the right backing like C 17.
And its your opinion that the IAF doesn't need the C-17's airlift ability and that the USAF decision was based on extravagance. There is nothing to suggest that the IAF shares that opinion.
And I cant care a fig. US can do what ever it wants.
India does things a different way.
Again that's Gilles opinion.
For you everything is an opinion, maybe perhaps etc. What can anyone say. In any case I dont care.
The process for acquisition started in 2008 with the first aircraft being delivered earliest by 2012. What sort of song and dance would you have felt necessary in order to justify the purchase.
Yes Viv S, you expect us to believe that 5.8 billion $ in two years out of thin air is not fast.
Arnab wants us to believe 5.8 billion for 10 birds is cheap and wants proof.
Sorry boss live your own world. I live in the real India.
(Compare C 17s with MTA, C 17s materialized in two years when IAF was not talking about it, HAL MTA is plagued for 10 years now)
but no HAL MTA would not be fast tracked C 17 must be brought today.
Bah humbug ptachh....
If people want to buy this snake oil, their choice, I wont be buying it.
What sort of hulla was created before ... say the recent order for an additional three Phalcons.
That is because you were probably not around to notice. The AWACS make/purchase debate has been around for ever. And unlike the time of tanks I am not going to spoon feed you.
[quote[
Why is impossible that the IAF identified a requirement, identified an aircraft after a 'thorough study' (according to ACM PV Naik), pitched it to the MoD, which first sanctioned it and is negotiating with Boeing on the IAF's behalf. Where is the evidence of foul play?[/quote]
Because there is no trace, and in India there always is.
You want to believe in immaculate conception? I say there was sex involved.
^^^ You're offering the dismantling of this WWII era tank as an example of how the Il-76 can be used to ferry the turret and hull separately? I think a more contemporary example is in order.
No intelligent one. I am offering this as an example of how tanks can be dismantled and put back together. And this is but one example since you cant find even one.
This is not about Il 76 alone (stop obsessing)
In any case, YOU I know are "hum nahi manege" when it comes to clear cut data which flies in the face of your belief system. (such as two years for 5.8 billion $ is biz as usual)
You just keep surprising me with your recalcitrance that all.
It seems to me(I don't know if others have gleaned a different meaning) you're saying the C-17 purchase is wrong because the HAL is not involved in its production. Is that correct?
Viv S, are you really capable of such comprehension of simple words?
This is NOT what I said what I said was CRYSTAL CLEAR and consisted of 4 points taken together, of which the above was not a point but half a point.
I'm basing that 'fraudulent statement' simply on the fact that the IAF settled on the A-330 for its MRTT requirement instead of the Il-78 which is cheaper and has relatively new units already in service with the IAF. Didn't hear any outrage when that decision was made. Only MoF (and the US lobby I hear) seemed to have a problem.
Wow, Viv S. Please give your "possibilities" a break. If you look (which you wont, and if you do you wont find, and if you find you will not agree with) you will find tons of Il 76 thumbs up statements by the IAF.
Please spare us statements like "IAF does not like Il 76 because it chose Airbus in a competitive tendor"
WOW!!
Viv S, for me it is truly impossible to discuss ANYTHING logical with a person who exhibits even one statement of that order.
And you have made three or four such insights so far
So I agree based on the same logic as
"IAF does not like Il 76 because it chose Airbus in a competitive tender"
C 17 is a right choice.