MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

SidGupta · Post by **SidGupta** » 09 Feb 2011 23:36

A mathematical argument of this kind will always support 'cheaper' aircraft since it assumes that both aircrafts have similar combat effectiveness. Because on cost alone, the MiG35 wins hands down.

E.g Would you rather send 2 Su30MKIs or 4 Mirage2000s for a key mission?

It obviously ignores all other factors. Even if one was to ignore the subjective political-strategic factors, and just focus on objective quantifiable factors, the following would come into play:

- the Gripen NG with it's modified airframe and enhanced features is not ready 'off the shelf'.
If the Tejas FOC and mk2 is ready in time I.e dec 2012, do we really benefit from 126+ of similar light fighter Gripens? Only the F16 and the Rafale can reliably be inducted within the next 24 months.

- combat performance and record. The American birds score very high here

- integration, training and system familiarity. The Rafale scores highest, additionally Dassault is a key partner in Tejas design, and the SNECMA engine of the Rafale is also the base for the Kaveri engine for mk2 Tejas and the AMCA.

I think the Pakistan angle is too strong against the F16. it's going to be the Rafale or the F18 SH if they can sort through the legacy US political mess.

Jamie Boscardin · Post by **Jamie Boscardin** » 10 Feb 2011 00:18

SidGupta wrote:A mathematical argument of this kind will always support 'cheaper' aircraft since it assumes that both aircrafts have similar combat effectiveness. Because on cost alone, the MiG35 wins hands down.

Flyaway cost of Mig35 is surely the ideal L1, but not when you count the life-cycle cost.
IMHO, the whole talk about the life-cycle cost, something which IAF has not done before, could have been initiated to stop the Mig35 to proceed to stage2.
Russian fighters, specially the mig's come with a huge maintenance problems and as it turns out with its own share of headaches on the spare parts front.

I'm pretty sure, that Rafael & Typhoon will loose out if not in the DOD desk than on the finance ministry desk(cost), which really leaves the battle between the SH and NG. Question is, to go full americano or limit it to certain but key sub-systems, which in due course can be retrofitted back as our tech's improve.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 10 Feb 2011 00:43

I say, go full americano rather part americano, and get the contract documents drafted to make them support us openly whilst war with our enemies. In either case, americanos will chew our b@lls. Full would give us added political mileage., and ask for greater risk sharing on technology transfer direct from the soup-er power.

We have no idea what is in the minds of Rafale and EF2K to reduce costs. So hang on to your thought... EJ200 quotation came very close in to GE414 for tejas, hence they have learned their lessons. They are working out perhaps on the cost.

Doddel · Post by **Doddel** » 10 Feb 2011 00:52

SidGupta wrote:A mathematical argument of this kind will always support 'cheaper' aircraft since it assumes that both aircrafts have similar combat effectiveness. Because on cost alone, the MiG35 wins hands down.

Mathematics is something very useful... lets not ignore that. I didn't assume anything about the combat effectiveness. I just stated how some factors influence the number of aircraft that is possible with a finite amount of money. Isn't the support and cost per flight hour very high for the Mig35? Mig35 can not use roads as runways. Can you/someone make the same calculation with the Mig35? Maybe I can do it some other time.

SidGupta wrote:E.g Would you rather send 2 Su30MKIs or 4 Mirage2000s for a key mission?

That depends on what mission.

SidGupta wrote:It obviously ignores all other factors. Even if one was to ignore the subjective political-strategic factors, and just focus on objective quantifiable factors, the following would come into play:

- the Gripen NG with it's modified airframe and enhanced features is not ready 'off the shelf'.

But I think it is pretty close. But this is just speculations and guesses. The demo seemes to function pretty well. Please add more factors... I said that I did'nt use all factors because I don't know them or how big they are.

SidGupta wrote:If the Tejas FOC and mk2 is ready in time I.e dec 2012, do we really benefit from 126+ of similar light fighter Gripens? Only the F16 and the Rafale can reliably be inducted within the next 24 months.

Why not? It is a fighter that passed IAF's (and Brazil's) requirement. The IAF will probably be outnumbered so more fighters is better. Or it can be possible to buy less Gripen and use the money saved on the navy/army/fleet/research. Gripen is not light, it is more of a medium fighter, like the F-16. Two Gripen is heavier than one Rafale. Why is it so important that the aircraft has to be heavy?

SidGupta wrote:- combat performance and record. The American birds score very high here

I have'nt calculated with the combat effectivness. This should of course also be in the calculations. But then it will be much speculations because none of us really know which plane is the best and how big the difference is. All of the aircrafts seems good. It more interresting to calculate with those factors that we can measure.

SidGupta wrote:- integration, training and system familiarity. The Rafale scores highest, additionally Dassault is a key partner in Tejas design, and the SNECMA engine of the Rafale is also the base for the Kaveri engine for mk2 Tejas and the AMCA.

This will be a factor in the calculations, thus making the Rafale more cost effective. How big it is can be hard to guess... Do you have a guess how much money per airplane that can be saved?

/Doddel

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 10 Feb 2011 01:09

SaiK wrote:The signal to noise ratio is tending towards zero when one has to read so many in-lines and quoted discussions in any thread. For example, even if Philip's posts reasonably opposing views, is much more readable than this George vs. Viv ones. He scores, while the other heated signals gets lost in the presentation noise. A humble request onlee.

Well I'll shorten it to a bottomline then.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 10 Feb 2011 01:10

GeorgeWelch wrote:
Viv S wrote:The question wasn't rhetorical. I was looking for a specific figure. Is the sum far too high for a European consortium that includes India to pay?
It's far too high for Europe to be willing to spend it.

India might be willing, but that just leaves us where I originally said India will have to fund all upgrades itself.

<Well to shorten this debate by another six pages> - This seems to be the crux of the debate.

What you are claiming is that - Europe will not spend the money required to upgrade the EF - either due a lack of the same or an unwillingness to spend it on aircraft upgrades (vis-a-vis say ... MBT upgrades or new drones).

Well share your idea about the sum of money you expect will be required. A tentative figure will suffice. 'Far too high' and 'not nearly enough' are not tangible statements. Propose a figure (use the SH upgrade budget as a datum if required) and we'll lets see how realistic its is for the EF consortium (with a collective defence budget of $200 billion+) and India (with an expected defence budget of about $50 billion by 2015) to come up with that cash.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 10 Feb 2011 01:19

Saik, Which court are you going to sue in when you are already dead due to lcak of parts? This is not a contract issue. Ask Mubarak as to how he feels stabbed in the back for who knows what?

Arya Sumantra · Post by **Arya Sumantra** » 10 Feb 2011 03:18

Viv S wrote:
GeorgeWelch wrote: It's far too high for Europe to be willing to spend it.

India might be willing, but that just leaves us where I originally said India will have to fund all upgrades itself.
What you are claiming is that - Europe will not spend the money required to upgrade the EF - either due a lack of the same or an unwillingness to spend it on aircraft upgrades (vis-a-vis say ... MBT upgrades or new drones).

We are at the end of 4th gen of fighter planes and going into 5th gen. No amount of upgrades will turn any 4th gen into 5th gen. So all this talk about how unkil has money to fund upgrades and europe doesn't is just unkil's marketing gimmick. Generational obsolescence will not be overcome by any minor improvements from upgrades anyway.

srai · Post by **srai** » 10 Feb 2011 03:53

Arya Sumantra wrote:
Viv S wrote:quote="GeorgeWelch"
It's far too high for Europe to be willing to spend it.

India might be willing, but that just leaves us where I originally said India will have to fund all upgrades itself.
/quote

What you are claiming is that - Europe will not spend the money required to upgrade the EF - either due a lack of the same or an unwillingness to spend it on aircraft upgrades (vis-a-vis say ... MBT upgrades or new drones).
We are at the end of 4th gen of fighter planes and going into 5th gen. No amount of upgrades will turn any 4th gen into 5th gen. So all this talk about how unkil has money to fund upgrades and europe doesn't is just unkil's marketing gimmick. Generational obsolescence will not be overcome by any minor improvements from upgrades anyway.

What exactly is the definition for a 5th gen? It was really a marketing term coined by the US manufactures to sell F-22. But looking at JSF, it doesn't fit the F-22 version of what 5th gen means.

Arya Sumantra · Post by **Arya Sumantra** » 10 Feb 2011 04:26

^^ Not again. If you want definition read Craig Alpert's post on this page. http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... start=1440 And let's not play on fuzzyness of boundary separating 4th and 5th gen. People would have argued at such things even between 3rd and 4th gen.

Regardless of whether you believe the hype or whatever about 5th gen, it has to be built BOTTOM-UP structure wise to comply with stealth requirements. Shaping and dimensions are fixed. No matter how much you upgrade, a 4th gen will be 4th gen. So all this talk about who has money to fund subsequent versions of mmrca is irrelevant. Half way through the life of mmrca I for one(and perhaps others too) would not want India to waste money on upgrades of mmrca. Rather spend more on AMCA, FGFA and uavs at that time.

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 10 Feb 2011 05:03

Ajai Shukla's "sources" confirm its EF Vs Rafale (Vs Gripen)

European fighters lead MMRCA race
Business Standard - Ajai Shukla

In multiple interviews with MoD officials, IAF pilots and vendor representatives, Business Standard has learned exactly where the MMRCA race currently stands. None of the contenders have been officially eliminated in the IAF’s flight evaluation report, but the heavy liabilities that some are carrying have already reduced this contest to an all-European race.

The clearest performance was that of the Russian MiG-35, which has not shown up at all at Aero India 2011. After multiple problems during the flight evaluation trials, it is regarded by the IAF as little more than an upgraded MiG-29. The Russian fighter is effectively out of the race.
Only marginally less dismal was the Lockheed Martin F-16IN Super Viper, which travelled to Bangalore but did not participate in the inaugural aerobatics shoot-out.

Defence minister A K Antony insisted today that political considerations would play no part in the MMRCA selection, but his officials were less diplomatic. “The F-16 is in the race only in name; the US will not be allowed to supply the same aircraft to both India and Pakistan,” said a senior MoD official. “Besides, the F-16 has come to the end of its development cycle. There is no scope for improving it further.”

Lockheed Martin seems to know its India campaign is blighted. Over the past two months, company officials and even the Pentagon, the US defence headquarters, have shifted the focus to the F-35, the fifth generation stealth fighter that Lockheed Martin is developing. But while the Pentagon’s acquisition chief, Ashton Carter, has signalled American willingness to include India in the F-35 programme, the Indian MoD is not persuaded.

The other American contender, the F/A-18 Super Hornet, regaled spectators with a superb display of combat manoeuvring, Showcasing its history as a combat fighter, the F/A-18 was the only contender that flew with missiles fitted under its wings, which is avoided in aerobatics because of the resulting drag. But though the Super Hornet was the tightest turner, its aerobatics were conducted at slow speeds. That sluggishness is also true of its campaign in India.

“We scored the F/A-18 poorly during flight evaluation,” says an IAF officer who was closely involved.

That leaves the three European contenders: the Eurofighter (from a four-country consortium), the Dasault Rafale (from france) and the Saab Gripen (Sweden). Each of them put up a superb display of high-speed aerobatics, performing loops, barrel rolls, and spells of inverted flying that clearly pushed the boundaries of the aircrafts’ flight envelopes.

The Gripen showed enormous agility in its vertical handling, something that would allow it to climb above the enemy fighter in a dogfight, to an advantageous killing position. At the end of his display, the Gripen’s pilot displayed how little runway the fighter needs to land, stopping dead in barely 900 ft.

But IAF officers point out two key drawbacks to the Gripen’s campaign: “The Gripen’s AESA radar is the least developed of all the MMRCA contenders; and, being a single-engine fighter, it carries significantly less weaponry than the big twin-engine contenders.”

The twin-engine advantage was immediately evident when the Rafale and the Eurofighter took to the skies, lashing the spectators with a blast of sound. There was little to choose between both those aircraft, their High-G (sharp turn); High-Alpha (slow flying) aerobatics leaving the spectators clapping.

“The MMRCA contest is now between the Eurofighter and the Rafale,” says an IAF officer associated with the flight evaluation. “It will boil down to price. But if the MoD accepts a smaller fighter, with a radar that has some way to go, the economically-priced Gripen could be the dark horse that wins.”

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 10 Feb 2011 05:10

EADS opens India's first defense engineering centre - to create 20000 jobs.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 10 Feb 2011 05:15

ramana, to which court we may go if say France or Russia screw us? for that matter which court americanos go, if we stop paying them for all the imports we do?

good questions, that needs to be highlighted and part of the legal documents regarding jurisdictions. perhaps add liquidated damages, and holding of certain amount of money until all the parts and documents arrive for the 128 required.

w.r.t russkies, we had issues they not providing the documents for mki (ddm reports?). what did we do? so, keep say 20% or $2b on the commitment amount that only gets paid to the seller upon conditions satisfied.

now, I am not considering corruption at all here.
==
^^now that is unfair on super hornet being flown in full wing loaded configuration while the EU counterparts does flying displays without it?

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 10 Feb 2011 05:21

kmc_chacko wrote:India hopes to seal fighter jet deal by March 2012

I 'hope' that the news report below is true..

Multi-role jet deal in April, says Antony

Defence minister A K Antony on Wednesday said the Centre may close the medium multi-role combat aircraft (MMRCA) deal by April 2011.

Asked if the MMRCA deal would be influenced by the increasing role played by US in supporting India, Antony said, "Some more formalities are needed. We are progressing well. I am not an astrologer to say who will win the deal. But our policy is not country-centric. Further, there will be no political decision or interference over any defence acquisition, including the MMRCA."

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 10 Feb 2011 06:12

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_zUe7sq7m3h0/T ... 2Bwave.jpg

^^^

While the F-18E/F may not have a very noteworthy name in the 'Super Hornet', the same obviously doesn't hold for its pilots.

Juggi G · Post by **Juggi G** » 10 Feb 2011 06:12

MRCA Decision Likely by September, 2011
..:: India Strategic ::..

MRCA Decision Likely by September
By Gulshan Luthra
Published: Feburary 2011

Bangalore. India should select the Medium Multi Role Combat Aircraft (MMRCA) by mid-2011, or latest by September.

Releasing the Aero India special edition of India Strategic defence magazine on the opening day of the Aero India 2011 here, Chief of Air Staff of the Indian Air Force, Air Chief Marshal P V Naik, said that the progress of the evaluation process was going on satisfactorily and that he expected the decision by the middle of this year, or latest by August or September.

The Indian Air Force had completed the technical trials and submitted the report on time, and the process of evaluating the Transfer of Technology, Offsets and pricing was moving forward in the Ministry of Defence (MoD) appropriately, and he expected commercial negotiations also to begin very soon.

He did not say if any one or more aircraft had been down-selected or short-listed.

Air Chief Marshal Naik described the Tejas Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) as a milestone in developing indigenous aerospace capabilities.

GeorgeWelch · Post by **GeorgeWelch** » 10 Feb 2011 06:17

Arya Sumantra wrote:We are at the end of 4th gen of fighter planes and going into 5th gen. No amount of upgrades will turn any 4th gen into 5th gen. So all this talk about how unkil has money to fund upgrades and europe doesn't is just unkil's marketing gimmick. Generational obsolescence will not be overcome by any minor improvements from upgrades anyway.

Certainly I question the wisdom of investing so much into 4th gen fighters just as the 5th gen is arriving, but assuming you are, it becomes even more critical that they are kept updated with the absolute latest. True no upgrades will turn any of them into 5th gen planes, but that just makes avionics like better radar and better jamming that much more important.

Keep in mind that your thinking is a very powerful argument against the EF and Rafale. If all the contenders are 4th gen and inherently inferior to what's coming out, what's the point of spending 50% more for one over the other? If they're all going to be inferior, might as well save your money and go with the cheaper option.

srai · Post by **srai** » 10 Feb 2011 06:38

Arya Sumantra wrote:^^ Not again. If you want definition read Craig Alpert's post on this page. http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... start=1440 And let's not play on fuzzyness of boundary separating 4th and 5th gen. People would have argued at such things even between 3rd and 4th gen.

Regardless of whether you believe the hype or whatever about 5th gen, it has to be built BOTTOM-UP structure wise to comply with stealth requirements. Shaping and dimensions are fixed. No matter how much you upgrade, a 4th gen will be 4th gen. So all this talk about who has money to fund subsequent versions of mmrca is irrelevant. Half way through the life of mmrca I for one(and perhaps others too) would not want India to waste money on upgrades of mmrca. Rather spend more on AMCA, FGFA and uavs at that time.

I have read many definitions for 5th gen over the years and each year the boundary line becomes blurrier. Initially, yes the 5th gen sets of technologies (Stealth, Supercruise, Sensor Fusion, etc) are far apart from the previous generation aircrafts. However, most of these can be retroactively added to the previous gen aircraft. Apart from the inherent VLO design in the "5th gen", everything else is achievable in the current generation of 4++ combat aircrafts.

Also, you have to understand from the timeline perspective on what is possible. Yes, in an ideal condition, IAF should focus on inducting only the "5th gen" types such as the AMCA, FGFA and UCAVs. But this is not possible given where the R&D stage of these types are in currently. It will take 2017 for IOC to be achieved for PAK-FA (more for FGFA) and only first flight of AMCA would occur in 2017. This means realistically you are looking at post 2025 (2030+) for meaningful production run and induction (and not accounting for risks in R&D efforts). So a lot of 3rd and 4th gen planes will be around until (and post) 2030.

On the other hand, IAF, given its rapidly depleting force levels, requires aircrafts right away and relatively mature and proven "4th gen" aircrafts are available. Partially, IAF got into this current bind by waiting for the LCA (which was supposed to replace its aging 2nd gen MiG-21s). As with any major R&D effort, there is a likelihood of delays and other "not-meeting ASR" scenarios. Inducting "4th gen" aircrafts is not an ideal situation but one that is necessary given the current reality.

putnanja · Post by **putnanja** » 10 Feb 2011 07:34

European fighters lead MMRCA race

...
The clearest performance was that of the Russian MiG-35, which has not shown up at all at Aero India 2011. After multiple problems during the flight evaluation trials, it is regarded by the IAF as little more than an upgraded MiG-29. The Russian fighter is effectively out of the race.
Only marginally less dismal was the Lockheed Martin F-16IN Super Viper, which travelled to Bangalore but did not participate in the inaugural aerobatics shoot-out.

Defence minister A K Antony insisted today that political considerations would play no part in the MMRCA selection, but his officials were less diplomatic. “The F-16 is in the race only in name; the US will not be allowed to supply the same aircraft to both India and Pakistan,” said a senior MoD official. “Besides, the F-16 has come to the end of its development cycle. There is no scope for improving it further.”
...
....

The other American contender, the F/A-18 Super Hornet, regaled spectators with a superb display of combat manoeuvring, Showcasing its history as a combat fighter, the F/A-18 was the only contender that flew with missiles fitted under its wings, which is avoided in aerobatics because of the resulting drag. But though the Super Hornet was the tightest turner, its aerobatics were conducted at slow speeds. That sluggishness is also true of its campaign in India.

“We scored the F/A-18 poorly during flight evaluation,” says an IAF officer who was closely involved.
...
...
But IAF officers point out two key drawbacks to the Gripen’s campaign: “The Gripen’s AESA radar is the least developed of all the MMRCA contenders; and, being a single-engine fighter, it carries significantly less weaponry than the big twin-engine contenders.”
...
..

“The MMRCA contest is now between the Eurofighter and the Rafale,” says an IAF officer associated with the flight evaluation. “It will boil down to price. But if the MoD accepts a smaller fighter, with a radar that has some way to go, the economically-priced Gripen could be the dark horse that wins.
...

SriSri · Post by **SriSri** » 10 Feb 2011 08:40

Report of a press briefing by British Minister of Defence (Aero India Day 1) pitching for the Eurofighter..
Eurofighter Offers Full ToT for MMRCA; U.K. Rejects Eurofighter Naval in Favor of F-35 JSF

SidGupta · Post by **SidGupta** » 10 Feb 2011 09:56

Today's TOI also reporting that the MMRCA deal could be completed by April 2011, as per the Def Minister.

http://m.timesofindia.com/PDATOI/articl ... 464897.cms

*Fingers Crossed*

Honestly, would be happy with either of EF Typhoon, Rafale, Gripen or SHornet. The heart says Rafale, the brain says SHornet, the wallet says Gripen.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 10 Feb 2011 10:28

ramana wrote:Some expert was asked about the viability of multi-party (consortium) vs singe vendor supplier of the aircraft. The question was would a consortium be hostage to the parties political situation in their home countries.

putnanja , Your post has the context of my post. Its a question between the Euro and Rafale.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 10 Feb 2011 12:33

If its between Euro and Rafale , then I would vote for Rafale , its an aircraft produced by single country , IAF experience with French Aircraft is outstanding , French are not sanction happy folks and we have long working relationship with them , they do charge a lot but its always worth the money.

merlin · Post by **merlin** » 10 Feb 2011 13:28

But atleast they will be selling, not donating (with money coming from us).

Jamie Boscardin · Post by **Jamie Boscardin** » 10 Feb 2011 14:35

Marten wrote:If folks tend to the Gripen, their wallets and brains should actually say Tejas.
Am sure the French would be happy to sell us the Rafale and turn around and sell avionics to the Porkis. Nothing to say the others won't, but...

The point for Gripen is simple.
There are and will be 3 major decision makers in GOI, in the order of priority for any acquisition:
1. Finance Ministry
2. DOD
3. IAF

If we look at our tanker episode, EADS was passed by IAF and DOD after extensive trials bla bla bla.. The Finance ministry refused to sign it and deal got scrapped.
Their argument can be summed up like this:
"We do not understand, next gen tanker, breakthrough technology, long development scope etc. Any aircraft which meets your GSQR [can do the job] and is priced the lowest will pass my signature"
That's why I believe IAF came out with the life-cycle cost theory to do a tit-for-tat with the ruskies.

The recent episode with the Paki-US, where US is threatening to stop all diplomatic ties, gives me a warning bell that they are really not at all trustworthy.

SriSri · Post by **SriSri** » 10 Feb 2011 14:51

The recent episode with the Paki-US, where US is threatening to stop all diplomatic ties, gives me a warning bell that they are really not at all trustworthy.

Which episode is this? When the the U.S. threaten to cut off diplomatic ties with Pakistan?

anirban_aim · Post by **anirban_aim** » 10 Feb 2011 15:14

SriSri wrote:
The recent episode with the Paki-US, where US is threatening to stop all diplomatic ties, gives me a warning bell that they are really not at all trustworthy.
Which episode is this? When the the U.S. threaten to cut off diplomatic ties with Pakistan?

The "The Trigger Happy Shooting from the hip CIA-Diplomat" incident. But then againt its hardly an incident!!!. BTW the talk is of cutting aid and not ties. In times like this Khan finds Dictators much easier to handle.

They are not cutting any ties any time soon.

pandyan wrote:
shukla wrote:Ajai Shukla's "sources" confirm its EF Vs Rafale (Vs Gripen)
remember engine selection outcome? I wouldnt rule out F18. At price negotiation stage, atleast one american contender will be there; same thing with Gripen.

Second that

kit · Post by **kit** » 10 Feb 2011 15:17

Viv S wrote:http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_zUe7sq7m3h0/T ... 2Bwave.jpg

^^^

While the F-18E/F may not have a very noteworthy name in the 'Super Hornet', the same obviously doesn't hold for its pilots.

Mr Koko and Noob .. sorry Nob at the helm of the soopah hornet

kit · Post by **kit** » 10 Feb 2011 15:22

SriSri wrote:
The recent episode with the Paki-US, where US is threatening to stop all diplomatic ties, gives me a warning bell that they are really not at all trustworthy.
Which episode is this? When the the U.S. threaten to cut off diplomatic ties with Pakistan?

The James Bond did'nt quite make it out of Pakistan after his mission ., thats all.Just visualise any bond movie for the plot

nits · Post by **nits** » 10 Feb 2011 16:37

kit wrote:
SriSri wrote:Which episode is this? When the the U.S. threaten to cut off diplomatic ties with Pakistan?

The James Bond did'nt quite make it out of Pakistan after his mission ., thats all.Just visualise any bond movie for the plot

OT here; but to get above perspective check this - US lawmakers threaten to cut off aid to Pakistan

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 10 Feb 2011 16:53

Eurofighter partners invest in India even before the MMRCA selection

An acquisition of the Eurofighter Typhoon will create more than 20,000 high-skilled jobs in India and support the development of a self-reliant indigenous defence industry. India would gain access to a wide array of technologies from Europe's leading aerospace and defence companies avoiding over-dependence on a single source. Enzo Casolini, CEO of Eurofighter GmbH, emphasizes: “We are committed to Transfer of Technology because we want to enable India to manufacture this advanced combat aircraft itself and we want to see the country emerge as a truly global development partner.”

Jamie Boscardin · Post by **Jamie Boscardin** » 10 Feb 2011 17:16

anirban_aim wrote: The "The Trigger Happy Shooting from the hip CIA-Diplomat" incident. But then againt its hardly an incident!!!. BTW the talk is of cutting aid and not ties. In times like this Khan finds Dictators much easier to handle.

They are not cutting any ties any time soon.

Porkis and ties??
They are contract killers at the best, now the money is coming from US, so they are doing mujra US style, and they are proficient to expert level in doing Chinese Mujra porki style!!
That James Bond did a favour to the world by eliminating 2 terrorists, he is a HERO!

anirban_aim · Post by **anirban_aim** » 10 Feb 2011 17:31

chackojoseph wrote:Eurofighter partners invest in India even before the MMRCA selection

Enzo Casolini, CEO of Eurofighter GmbH, emphasizes: “We are committed to Transfer of Technology because we want to enable India to manufacture this advanced combat aircraft itself and we want to see the country emerge as a truly global development partner.”