Indian Military Aviation

[Pratik_S]

Firstly, I am shocked to hear that Il-76 feet will be decommissioning. How many Il-78s IAF has is not known but I would guess around 20(or more, just a guess) would be true. They entered service in the 80s and considering the life span of atleast 30 years they have around 10 years left in them. Plus its easy to increase the life span of cargo planes with upgrades and overhaul.

The the life cycle cost also depends upon the numbers, the more you own- cheaper would be to maintain them. Agreed that A-330 is more efficient and requires less maintenance but the spares will cost us more, where as the spares of the IL-78 will cost us less.

Suppose we buy 6 A330's, IAF will train 6 sets of crew members to fly them, other crews won't be able to fly them and these crews won't be able to fly other planes. This could cause trouble. There are many pilots and ground crews trained to maintain the Il platform hence anybody of them would be able to handle the Il. Plus it would be cheaper to train the new pilots because of the existing knowledge.

If they can put the probe assemble on the nose than it won't be much difficult to maneuver the aircraft. Frankly i can't comment on this, its just speculation on my part.

As I said the IN will form a sizable air fleet in the coming years and it will need its own refuelers. It cant depend on the IAF as IAF will need their refuelers for feed their own fleet. 12 refuelers for a fleet of 800-900 fighters is less.

AFAIK the USN depends on the ANG and not the USAF to refuel their birds.

I personally would love to see the A330 in the IAF but there should be concrete plans have more of those.

[chetak]

A probe on the C-17 is never going to happen.

1. Trying to maneuver a big plane to get it to hook onto the drogue is very difficult and error-prone
2. A hose can barely transfer fuel fast enough to make any progress
3. The C-17 maintenance and sustainment program relies on everyone having the exact same version of the plane. Everyone receives the same upgrades and fixes, there is no customization.

For the P-8 the navy can put up its own competition as it is their asset not IAF's and anyways if they wish to maintain a fleet of 200 aircrafts of which half will be fighters they will need refuellers.

The AF and Navy are all on the same team. For the navy to buy refuellers just for the P-8s would be fiscally irresponsible. The USN will rely on USAF to refuel it's P-8s and the USAF relies on the USN to provide jammer support. There's no need to buy duplicate platforms for each service.

If a Tu 142 can refuel air to air, why not the C-17?

If the customer wanted a fueling probe on the C-17, why should the manufacturer object?

A foreign customer of the C-17 may or may not accept or even be offered all modifications from the C-17 maintenance and sustainment program.

It would not be so difficult to make any probe fitted on the P8s / C-17s compatible with our IL 78s.

And again, why not buy aerial refuelers for the Navy and be done with it? Their projected fleet of aircraft will justify such tankers both operationally and logistically. With one or two such aerial fuel top ups the carrier borne aircraft can rejoin the carrier far out to sea without much worries about weather or diversions. Or even attack from extreme standoff range and be refueled on the way home?

[SivaVijay]

NRUAV,LiveFist

there seems to be wing tips for weapons, will this be our first UAV to be armed?

[GeorgeWelch]

Firstly, I am shocked to hear that Il-76 feet will be decommissioning.

Sorry, didn't mean the whole fleet. Just that of the initial 24, supposedly only 17 remain, and those are in bad shape and need a mid-life update

How many Il-78s IAF has is not known

Six

Plus 1 A50 with 5 more on order. So eventually 29 frames in some sort of condition

Plus its easy to increase the life span of cargo planes with upgrades and overhaul.

Which is why choosing the more efficient aircraft makes sense, you will have a long time to recoup any initial investment

The the life cycle cost also depends upon the numbers, the more you own- cheaper would be to maintain them.

To a point . . .

Agreed that A-330 is more efficient and requires less maintenance but the spares will cost us more, where as the spares of the IL-78 will cost us less.

Disagree, A330 spares are widely available and will be for decades. Il-76, not so much

Suppose we buy 6 A330's, IAF will train 6 sets of crew members to fly them, other crews won't be able to fly them and these crews won't be able to fly other planes. This could cause trouble.

Not really . . .

There are many pilots and ground crews trained to maintain the Il platform hence anybody of them would be able to handle the Il.

Don't forget the A-50 subfleet uses different engines, so they aren't all common anyways . . .

[Jagan]

Just that of the initial 24, supposedly only 17 remain, and those are in bad shape and need a mid-life update

I think this was due to a mistake due to some old reports. The total number of Il-76s procured has always been 17 and not 24. And the 17 were spread among 44 Sqn , 25 Sqn, and ARC (2 aircraft)

[GeorgeWelch]

If a Tu 142 can refuel air to air, why not the C-17?

I didn't say hose couldn't work for large aircraft, I said it didn't work well. You will be more likely to not connect with the tanker in the first place, you won't be able to transfer as much fuel off the tanker after you do.

If the customer wanted a fueling probe on the C-17, why should the manufacturer object?

It's not Boeing that would object, it's India's finance department.

By the time India paid the full development and manufacturing cost, it probably would have been cheaper to just get the A330

And again, why not buy aerial refuelers for the Navy and be done with it?

Be done with what? If the IAF does get standard C-17s (the only C-17 it will possibly get), will it rely on the Navy to refuel them?

Their projected fleet of aircraft will justify such tankers both operationally and logistically. With one or two such aerial fuel top ups the carrier borne aircraft can rejoin the carrier far out to sea without much worries about weather or diversions.

The P-8 isn't a carrier-based plane, which is why it makes sense to be refueled by the IAF and not the Navy

[GeorgeWelch]

Just that of the initial 24, supposedly only 17 remain, and those are in bad shape and need a mid-life update

I think this was due to a mistake due to some old reports. The total number of Il-76s procured has always been 17 and not 24. And the 17 were spread among 44 Sqn , 25 Sqn, and ARC (2 aircraft)

Could be, I'm not terribly familiary with IAF procurement history

[Jagan]

I'm not terribly familiary with IAF procurement history

cant blame you. even I thought it was 24 for a very very very long time.

[GeorgeWelch]

From the Aerofax book on the Il-76

24 aircraft were reportedly delivered.
However, only 17 have been identified by the c/ns; the rest
(K2903/K, K3001 through K3005 and K3015) are a mystery, since they
cannot be slotted into the production list!

Registration Version Gin Fin Notes
K2661 IL-76MD 0053458722 4401 Coded 'A'
K2662 IL-76MD 0053458725 4402 Coded 'B', N044 Sqn
K2663 IL-76MD 0053458731 4403 Coded 'C', No 44 Sqn
K2664 IL-76MD 0053461849 4703 Coded 'D', named Kartika
K2665 IL-76MD 0053462856 4704 Coded 'E', named Rohini
K2666 IL-76MD 0053462857 4705 Coded 'F'
K2878 IL-76MD 0063465970 5003 Coded 'G'
K2879 IL-76MD 0063465973 5004 Coded 'H', No 44 Sqn
K2901 IL-76MD 0073478343 5906
K2902 IL-76MD 0073478353 5909 Coded'M'
K2999 IL-76MD 0073480410 6103 Coded 'U'
K3000 IL-76MD 0073480419 6105 Coded'M'
K3012 IL-76MD 0083487614 6604
K3013 IL-76MD 0083488629 6608
K3014 IL-76MD 0093491750 6908
K3077 IL-76MD 0093496892 7303 Coded 'V'
K3078 IL-76MD 0093496912 7308 Coded 'W', named Nubra

[Jagan]

From the Aerofax book on the Il-76

24 aircraft were reportedly delivered.
However, only 17 have been identified by the c/ns; the rest
(K2903/K, K3001 through K3005 and K3015) are a mystery, since they
cannot be slotted into the production list!

exactly ... because they never existed.

neat list btw. thanks for typing that up.

[shiv]

All these confusing acronyms are a pain, but I can't imagine how and why a LUH would be the same as an LOH.

I mean yes both are helicopters and a Light Utility Helicopter can also be used as a Light Observation Helicopter - I can't deny that, but I believe that the meaning of the two acronyms is quite different in the Indian context. It is one thing for police to fly around watching traffic over SP road in Bangalore - but its is a different beast you need for evacuating a casualty from Siachen. An LOH can be any one of those little two-man helos that hover around whose name and identification I am not even familiar with nowadays although for some reason the name "Hughes" keeps appearing in my minds eye. A utility helicopter has to have greater utility than that.

[arun]

So the VVIP’s of our country, the definition of which will no doubt on grounds of “security” be stretched to include members of the Nehru-Gandhi family, will get to wallow in the lap of luxury in their AW-101 helicopters while the defence needs of the country are overlooked.

Our Raksha Mantri A.K. Anthony on why the MRTT deal was scrapped but at the same time the AW-101 VVIP transport helicopter deal was approved:

MoF said no, so scrapped refueller deal: Antony

Manu Pubby
Posted: Tuesday , Feb 16, 2010 at 0254 hrs New Delhi:

Defence Minister A K Antony on Monday said that despite repeated requests by the Indian Air Force (IAF), the Ministry of Finance (MoF) scuttled a mega tender to procure mid-air tankers to support fighter operations but cleared another contract to procure VVIP choppers because of the “changed security scenario. …………………..

Indian Express

[arun]

^^^ X Posted. Same story, better headline:

VVIP? Yes; IAF? No

Defence minister A.K. Antony today said the finance ministry had rejected an Indian Air Force proposal to buy mid-air refuellers for its fighter aircraft but had approved the move to buy sophisticated helicopters for VVIPs.

[Pratik_S]

@GeorgeWelch
Sorry, I meant the number of Il-76s IAF has was not known to me, I know IAF purchased 6 Il-78s a few years back.

There are no media reports regarding the decommissioning, people believe that C-17s are being purchased to replace the Il-76 but its not likely since the Il-76s are around 25years old and their life span could be increased by another 15 years so I don't think the IAF will just retire the Il-76 yet.

Which is why choosing the more efficient aircraft makes sense, you will have a long time to recoup any initial investment

Agreed

Disagree, A330 spares are widely available and will be for decades. Il-76, not so much

The point is not availability, but cost effectiveness, Russia and other operators are going have the Il-76 for sum time to come and hence spares will be available. Buying Il spares will be cheaper than A330 spares because of economics of scale.

Not really . . .

Why???

Don't forget the A-50 subfleet uses different engines, so they aren't all common anyways . . .

Different engines wont make the A50 Phalcon platform a new aircraft, all the other things will be still common.

[chetak]

If a Tu 142 can refuel air to air, why not the C-17?

I didn't say hose couldn't work for large aircraft, I said it didn't work well. You will be more likely to not connect with the tanker in the first place, you won't be able to transfer as much fuel off the tanker after you do.

Boss, Hose is the only kind of aerial refueling available in India right now, like it or not!

Why would it be difficult to connect?? The TU refuels off a hose!
Something wrong with the delicate darling C-17?

The wake nor the turbulence of either aircraft is going to affect the hose refueling process. Where exactly do you see the problem or is it just a manifestation of the "not invented here" syndrome?

If the customer wanted a fueling probe on the C-17, why should the manufacturer object?

It's not Boeing that would object, it's India's finance department.



Why would the finance object to a strategic modification? and frankly how are they involved? If the concerned service budgeted it properly, it would very easily go through.
When they objected to the Airbus tankers, it was probably a diplomatic brushoff. Its just some panting middleman snake oil salesman peddling or the french grabbing for their share of the "colonial" market



By the time India paid the full development and manufacturing cost, it probably would have been cheaper to just get the A330

And again, why not buy aerial refuelers for the Navy and be done with it?

Be done with what? If the IAF does get standard C-17s (the only C-17 it will possibly get), will it rely on the Navy to refuel them?

The fitment of a refueling probe is not exactly rocket science. It is available in kit form and can be integrated by the IAF/HAL right here in India. ASTE could test fly and certify like they have done numerous other mods refused repeat refused to us by so called "manufacturers"

The Navy will eventually get its own refuelers, sooner rather than later.

Their projected fleet of aircraft will justify such tankers both operationally and logistically. With one or two such aerial fuel top ups the carrier borne aircraft can rejoin the carrier far out to sea without much worries about weather or diversions.

The P-8 isn't a carrier-based plane, which is why it makes sense to be refueled by the IAF and not the Navy

Dude, whatever gave you the idea that I thought the P8 was carrier based?
It was neither implied nor stated in anything that I wrote. Aerial refueling usually takes place far away from base or carrier as the case may be

[GeorgeWelch]

Disagree, A330 spares are widely available and will be for decades. Il-76, not so much

The point is not availability, but cost effectiveness, Russia and other operators are going have the Il-76 for sum time to come and hence spares will be available. Buying Il spares will be cheaper than A330 spares because of economics of scale.

I'm not sure what economies of scale you are referring to . . .

More A330 have been and will be built than Il-76s meaning parts will be more abundant. More availability = cheaper prices. It is currently in production and will remain so for at least another decade. AFAIK the Il-76 isn't even in production at the moment. And the Russian record with spares availability leaves much to be desired.

Not really . . .

Why???

Remember the A330 only takes half as much crew. So you could increase the number of needed crew to be trained by 50% and still come out ahead.

Don't forget the A-50 subfleet uses different engines, so they aren't all common anyways . . .

Different engines wont make the A50 Phalcon platform a new aircraft, all the other things will be still common.

My point was only that there isn't necessarily as much commonality in the Il-76/78 fleet as one might believe, diminishing any perceived economies of scale

[GeorgeWelch]

Boss, Hose is the only kind of aerial refueling available in India right now, like it or not!

That's at the moment, but what about the future?

There is an opportunity to change that situation and it is my opinion that it should be grasped.

Why would it be difficult to connect?? The TU refuels off a hose!
Something wrong with the delicate darling C-17?

Simple physics. It is more difficult to do very small adjustments with a large airplane than with a small, maneuverable boom.

With a boom, the receiver just sits there while the boom operator flys the boom into position, it is a much easier task and thus much more likely to be successful

If you keep having mission aborts because you failed to connect with a hose, that has a direct impact on your operational ability.

The wake nor the turbulence of either aircraft is going to affect the hose refueling process. Where exactly do you see the problem or is it just a manifestation of the "not invented here" syndrome?

A large plane is simply more difficult to precisely maneuver the inches required for a successful connection. All that mass starts going one way, it's hard to stop on a dime.

By the time India paid the full development and manufacturing cost, it probably would have been cheaper to just get the A330

And again, why not buy aerial refuelers for the Navy and be done with it?

I don't understand your argument here. Are you saying the Navy should buy A330 instead of the Air Force? What difference does that make?

The fitment of a refueling probe is not exactly rocket science. It is available in kit form and can be integrated by the IAF/HAL right here in India. ASTE could test fly and certify like they have done numerous other mods refused repeat refused to us by so called "manufacturers"

Any such 'self-modification' would disqualify it from the C-17 Global Sustainment Partnership, which is a major selling point of the C-17 program

The P-8 isn't a carrier-based plane, which is why it makes sense to be refueled by the IAF and not the Navy

Dude, whatever gave you the idea that I thought the P8 was carrier based?
It was neither implied nor stated in anything that I wrote. Aerial refueling usually takes place far away from base or carrier as the case may be

My apologies for misunderstanding what you were saying. However as I mentioned earlier, I still don't understand what you're trying to get at.

[chetak]

My apologies for misunderstanding what you were saying. However as I mentioned earlier, I still don't understand what you're trying to get at.

GeorgeWelch saar,

We already have a tried and tested system operating in India. The Navy should go the same way and use the hose refueling system.

And get its own hose refuelers too.

We do not need to complicate things bringing the boom refueler.

We have a good number of IL 78 tankers and more in the pipeline hopefully and we should build on this. The drogue is around two feet plus in diameter and the standard probe is four inches and can transfer about 2000-2500 lbs per min. We can refuel multiple aircraft at the same time. Except in bad weather, if a pilot has repeated difficulty in sticking the probe into a two feet hole its better if he transfers to ATC duties.

The boom refueler though having a higher flow rate can handle only one aircraft at a time.

Both have inherent advantages and disadvantages.

The Indians have gone with the hose system. Leave it be.

We fully expect to be hit by US sanctions because obama or the next guy might like to smoke a different brand of cigarettes.

The US uses countries in asia like condoms. Use and throw.

So why do we need to tie ourselves down with Global Sustainment Partnership?? We do not want to get into global adventures with the US in any part of the world.

We we have seen our dear neighbor de fanged and de balled by the US. Now again being re fanged and re balled. They have forgotten what their jinnah given balls looked like with so many testicular and dental manipulations.

Should we expect any better?

We will not get tied down by things like "Global Sustainment Partnership" or crap like that. We followed a fairly independent foreign policy for many years and and lived to tell the tale.

The blokes in India like the US people but not the US government or its policies. The heavy handed peddling of US equipment and trying to tie us down with self serving communication or logistics or interoperability agreements or end user agreements and what not
is not helping.

How does India benefit?

Will we refuel in los angeles en route from Cochin to Karwar?

The US wants something close to diplomatic immunity for its grunts on R & R in India. What's so special about americans?

Sure, lets protect US interests but don't rape us in the bargain and that too on our dime. Now it not just yankee go home but yankee go home and take your self created mess with you.

[bijeet]

IAF MiG-27 fighter jet crashes in Bengal, pilot killed - Hindustan Times

[nachiket]

While we have been discussing the LUH/LOH...

Three Russian Ka-226 choppers in high-altitude India trials

[Suresh S]

chetak,
could not have said it any better myself.Agree totally

[GeorgeWelch]

chetak, you clearly do not understand what the GSP is about.

It has about zero relationship to whatever your ramblings imagine it to be.

[putnanja]

The Global C-17 Sustainment Partnership

...
...
Boeing has total system support responsibility for the big transport aircraft, including materiel management and depot maintenance, for fleets around the world. The goal is total aircraft sustainment support under a single contract, in order to achieve improvements in mission readiness, while reducing operating and support costs. The initial contract had an estimated total value of $4.9 billion, which is likely to grow as Boeing’s customer base grows in Australia (4), Britain (6), Canada (4), Qatar (2), and NATO (3).
...
...
The GSP makes Boeing responsible for providing consistent sustainment support at continuously raised benchmarked levels. Product support is thus managed through a long term performance-based partnership between Boeing and its C-17 customers, which now include the US Air Force, the British Royal Air Force, The Royal Australian Air Force, the Canadian Forces, and NATO.

Boeing provides more than spares and repairs on the C-17 through the GSP program. Around the globe, Boeing employees oversee the supply chain and provide technical and engineering support in the field to Air Force maintainers. Boeing teammates work to keep C-17s available for warfighters and humanitarian relief missions.

...
...

[Pratik_S]

I'm not sure what economies of scale you are referring to . . .

More A330 have been and will be built than Il-76s meaning parts will be more abundant. More availability = cheaper prices. It is currently in production and will remain so for at least another decade. AFAIK the Il-76 isn't even in production at the moment. And the Russian record with spares availability leaves much to be desired.

Agreed to you but, there are around 900 IL-76s in service plus 50+50 Il-78s and A50(Approx numbers) which is certainly more than the A330 platform which are around 700. The Il platform will stay in service with many countries including Russia for some time to come. You seem to have a notion that IL-76s have few days until retirement.
I was referring to this economics of scale: More birds of the same type---> More demand for spares----> Thus low cost

Remember the A330 only takes half as much crew. So you could increase the number of needed crew to be trained by 50% and still come out ahead.

Point noted, but these crew members will still exclusively fly only the A330, which is not good. If we buy IL-78, everybody has the same type of plane to fly and more importantly to maintain.

My point was only that there isn't necessarily as much commonality in the Il-76/78 fleet as one might believe, diminishing any perceived economies of scale

They still have similar avionics and instruments,tyres, may be hydraulics and loads of other smaller mechanical parts which we don't have any idea of. There is difference between them here and there because of different roles but basically they are "similar".

[Pratik_S]

While we have been discussing the LUH/LOH...

Three Russian Ka-226 choppers in high-altitude India trials

Ka-226 are a bit disappointing in performance, I prefer the AW-119 to win the competition

[GeorgeWelch]

there are around 900 IL-76s in service plus 50+50 Il-78s and A50(Approx numbers) which is certainly more than the A330 platform which are around 700.

The number to look at is that more than 1000 A330 have been ordered and another 370 A340s (which have a very high degree of commonality, they are built on the same line) have been ordered plus large numbers of orders continue to arrive.

And even more important is that the entire A330 fleet is newer, meaning that far more examples will remain in service decades from now when spares for the Il-76 will be getting scarce.

First flight of the A330 was 1992, first flight of the Il-76 was 1971

[Pratik_S]

Agreed thats true, but I made my point clear too.
As i said before, i prefer the A-330MRTT but only if there is firm commitment to purchase sizable number of units over a period of time.

[chetak]

chetak, you clearly do not understand what the GSP is about.

It has about zero relationship to whatever your ramblings imagine it to be.

Yes massa, we really do understand what GSP means. The question is do you? We surely don't want "boeing" engineers sitting in our bases. We have engineers aplenty and pretty good ones too.

We understand american willingness to sacrifice all others before their greed and ambition. Anything else pales into insignificance.

What ever good there is in the GSP , as per your understanding, is suspect in ours because sanctions will kill it as surely as the day follows night. The core of the american government is as anti Indian today as they ever were during that mother nixon's heydays. The more things change, the more they remain the same.

obama's glib oration is just so much window dressing. He is pushing for Indian boots to replace american and nato boots, as was the last cowboy.

The americans are looking out for themselves as always. We should look out for ourselves in something as important as airlift capability without anyone holding a gun to our head.

The nuke deal, P8s, artillery, C-17s, hercules and what not.

We must be idiots to put all our eggs in the same basket even after we learned a fairly harsh lesson.

[Craig Alpert]

Snip
The americans are looking out for themselves as always. We should look out for ourselves in something as important as airlift capability without anyone holding a gun to our head.

The nuke deal, P8s, artillery, C-17s, hercules and what not.

We must be idiots to put all our eggs in the same basket even after we learned a fairly harsh lesson.

is then why did India Invite Boeing and Lockeed Martin for the MMRCA tenders??? It's not as if the "massa" was dying to sell you the weapons, it was INVITED!!! The same goes wit the Nuke Deal and the Weapons Locating Radar and everything else!!! This is a forum where discussions are held about defence forces, NOT RANTINGS ABOUT US vs India. I stongly advise Mods intervene, before I start opening the guns from my end and start having a FRANK discussion wrt to India vs. USA!!!
As far as your engineers and their talent is concerned, it's a pity that most of them are on the payroll of LM and Boeing instead of working with ADA and developing a working Kaveri with revised specs and an Aesa Radar for the Indian Forces let alones seekers for missiles!!!!
Learn to show some respect to memebers who are NOT seeing eye to eye with you!!!

[putnanja]

"your engineers" etc, glad to know where you come from

Anyway, massa is dying to sell us weapons. it makes business sense and is also a lever to push India if required. And what chetak said does make sense as India has been at the receiving end of the sanctions and knows how it hurts. It was a political decision to invite US companies too. It is a given fact that US imposed sanctions on India, has been trying to influence India and has continued to support the pakis by giving them free arms. That those concerns play a part in defence purchase is no secret. It was our defence forces that were hurt the last time sanctions are imposed, and sanctions are still in place for quite a few of our companies. Please look at INdo-us thread for details.

As for "FRANK" discussions on Indo-US relations, that is what the Indo-US thread in strategic forum is for.

[Chinmayanand]

Chetak mian , donot get disheartened by the US cowboys and fanboys. You are right and you have your own constituency . As far as US is dying/not to sell its arms equipment to India , it's clearly visible. It is dying to sell weapons to India so that it can blackmail in future. Just because India has some american poodles running the show here, does not mean the common man can't see through the evil american designs. God save India.

[Craig Alpert]

"your engineers" etc, glad to know where you come from

Anyway, massa is dying to sell us weapons. it makes business sense and is also a lever to push India if required. And what chetak said does make sense as India has been at the receiving end of the sanctions and knows how it hurts. It was a political decision to invite US companies too. It is a given fact that US imposed sanctions on India, has been trying to influence India and has continued to support the pakis by giving them free arms. That those concerns play a part in defence purchase is no secret. It was our defence forces that were hurt the last time sanctions are imposed, and sanctions are still in place for quite a few of our companies. Please look at INdo-us thread for details.

As for "FRANK" discussions on Indo-US relations, that is what the Indo-US thread in strategic forum is for.

Hey, someone's gotta play the Devil's Advocate wheter you like it or not
I'm quite aware of the Sanctions, as I've done my History lesson. Been there, seen that and heard the arguments! The issue here is the tonal quality held in discussions!!! As you may see, I entice my opinions to myself (NOT!), but when someone oversteps their boundary, they need to be brought down a notch and back to reality!!!
No one's holding India by the balls! If they had a political will, PoK would have long belonged to India, there wouldn't be all talk and NO WALK after 26/11 or after the Parliament attack!!! The facts - 1) NO political will. 2)lack of preparedness and equipment to go to war with Pak and last but not the least 3) Not capable of covert ops! You may hate it to believe it, but these are the FACTS!! The US and their sanctions has got NOTHING to do with this!!! As an egineer myself here's free advise!! Make do with what you have, learn to IMPROVSIE!!!!
And as far as the Indo-Us Thread let's just say I don't wanna start WW3!

[Craig Alpert]

MBDA's Mistral Succeeds In ALH Dhruv's Weaponisation Tests

MBDA's Mistral twin-tube has reportedly been successful in the recent weapons tests of the ALH Dhruv, conducted in Leh. Four such packs would be mounted on the chopper.

MBDA is in talks with the Indian Navy for the PARS 3 LR to be mounted on the Kamov-31 and have also proposed it to Russia. There's another proposal for Mistral to be mounted on Ka-31 (two of them), while MDL's Scorpene's will have the Exocet SM 39 on them.

[Suresh S]

Snip
The americans are looking out for themselves as always. We should look out for ourselves in something as important as airlift capability without anyone holding a gun to our head.

The nuke deal, P8s, artillery, C-17s, hercules and what not.

We must be idiots to put all our eggs in the same basket even after we learned a fairly harsh lesson.

is then why did India Invite Boeing and Lockeed Martin for the MMRCA tenders??? It's not as if the "massa" was dying to sell you the weapons, it was INVITED!!! The same goes wit the Nuke Deal and the Weapons Locating Radar and everything else!!! This is a forum where discussions are held about defence forces, NOT RANTINGS ABOUT US vs India. I stongly advise Mods intervene, before I start opening the guns from my end and start having a FRANK discussion wrt to India vs. USA!!!
As far as your engineers and their talent is concerned, it's a pity that most of them are on the payroll of LM and Boeing instead of working with ADA and developing a working Kaveri with revised specs and an Aesa Radar for the Indian Forces let alones seekers for missiles!!!!
Learn to show some respect to memebers who are NOT seeing eye to eye with you!!!

Discussions about weapons can never be held without the underlying political currents so chetak,s comments are not rantings but a reflection of what many educated indians think including the ones like myself. He is just saying loudly what many of us think. We are all adults so no reason to get angry and start looking for the moderators at the drop of a hat.
As far as the talent of indian engineers is concerned their achievements around the world are enough proof that given the right environment they are second to none. Here is hoping that with more participation from indian private industry that these engineers would be working for them than Boeing and LM. Since you are at it craig alpert many high tech American companies are able to produce these weapons thanks to the brain power of many indian and other foreign engineers and do not ever question the talent of indian engineers.

And as for American companies not dying to get these indian contracts what was those stolen papers from indian defense ministery doing in LM offices in USA

[Craig Alpert]

Discussions about weapons can never be held without the underlying political currents so chetak,s comments are not rantings but a reflection of what many educated indians think including the ones like myself. He is just saying loudly what many of us think. We are all adults so no reason to get angry and start looking for the moderators at the drop of a hat.

No one's looking for Moderators at the drop of a hat!! First of all this shit has been discussed ample times, so there is no point in stating the obvious, in a thread that has NOTHING to do with MIL AVIATION!!!! (this is politics and their reprucusions!) To me these are RANTINGS! when someone goes at it umteen times!!!

As far as the talent of indian engineers is concerned their achievements around the world are enough proof that given the right environment they are second to none. Here is hoping that with more participation from indian private industry that these engineers would be working for them than Boeing and LM. Since you are at it craig alpert many high tech American companies are able to produce these weapons thanks to the brain power of many indian and other foreign engineers and do not ever question the talent of indian engineers.

Thank you for restating what I correctly pointed out!!! As an, "educated Indian" may I please advise you go back and read the sentence again and point out IF ANYWHERE I have questioned their Talents?? Why do you think I said that they are on the payroll of LM and boeing???

And as for American companies not dying to get these indian contracts what was those stolen papers from indian defense ministery doing in LM offices in USA

Gathering Intel If the Defense Ministery knows that papers are stolen and it is a breach of contract Why is LM not disqualified??? Since you clearly want me to go OT in this thread, after facing multiple sanctions and being "educated yindoos" why is it that LM is still being approached for the design and consultancy for a Naval LCA??? snahata itna sanatta kyo??? A billion plus people love Americans, what they hate is the American POLITICS!!!.. Defense deals are pure POLITICS!!! and if yours, chetak's, and everyone else's opinion's matter so god damn much, WHY is the MoD so GUNG HO about the US EQUPMENTS??? and Assitance??? even after getting a slap in their face
You may well say that the US want's to control India's freedom by providing weapons and putting sanctions, but the US NEVER approached it for weapon deals. The MoD SENT OUT RFP's to US and then the US started marketing their products!!! Case in point, Bell complained and pulled out of the helicopter deal, guess what it was cancelled, it did not go to 2nd vendor kyon??? The US is NOT holding India by the BALLS, it's free to take it's business elsewhere!!!

[putnanja]

Gathering Intel If the Defense Ministery knows that papers are stolen and it is a breach of contract Why is LM not disqualified??? Since you clearly want me to go OT in this thread, after facing multiple sanctions and being "educated yindoos" why is it that LM is still being approached for the design and consultancy for a Naval LCA??? snahata itna sanatta kyo??? A billion plus people love Americans, what they hate is the American POLITICS!!!.. Defense deals are pure POLITICS!!! and if yours, chetak's, and everyone else's opinion's matter so god damn much, WHY is the MoD so GUNG HO about the US EQUPMENTS??? and Assitance??? even after getting a slap in their face
You may well say that the US want's to control India's freedom by providing weapons and putting sanctions, but the US NEVER approached it for weapon deals. The MoD SENT OUT RFP's to US and then the US started marketing their products!!! Case in point, Bell complained and pulled out of the helicopter deal, guess what it was cancelled, it did not go to 2nd vendor kyon??? The US is NOT holding India by the BALLS, it's free to take it's business elsewhere!!!

The bolded part is all others are trying to say. The MRCA defence deal will most probably go to US irrespective of what IAF finally decides, as it is quid pro quo for the nuclear deal. People have their opinion, but politics overrides that. The purchase of Mirage, mig-29k and even Su-30 were all major political decisions at that time. The UPA govt for whatever reasons, feels that going with US is better and hence the MRCA tamasha. The same reason that LM was not held accountable for classified stealing files, but are still allowed in the competition.

The reason it affects Indian forces is that if and when India does decide to escalate with Pakistan, it is better to not be tied down because US wanted to protect its poodle. Why ground half the fleet to protect US interests? The way that the current US administration is approaching the region and its stand on nuclear deal etc, it is not going to be good for Indo-US relations. Of course, the UPA govt may not feel that way and may reward your government and your companies with contracts. The last time India went to war in Kargil, Russia and Israel supplied materials from their war reserve. Will your country do the same? It would be a blessing if they didn't utilize the situation to place sanctions on India to prevent "escalation to nuclear exchange" in order to protect their country.

[Craig Alpert]

IAF An-32 Upgrade Begins This Month, First Batch To Ukraine Soon

......................

Each of the 105 An-32s earmarked for the upgrade will be integrated with an tactical air collision avoidance system, ground proximity warning system, satellite navigation console, distance measuring equipment, new and upgraded radio altimeters, a whole new radar with two new large multifunction displays in the cockpit, a brand new oxygen handling and supply system, and most visibly, improved seats for crew members! A total of 25 new elements form a part of the upgrade. An Indian crew will station itself in the Ukraine starting next month and will remain there for a five-year period to test the upgraded fleet.

Antonov is also pitching its An-74 to the Navy, IAF and Coast Guard, and is holding discussions with HAL about system outsourcing.

[merlin]

We must be idiots to put all our eggs in the same basket even after we learned a fairly harsh lesson.

But isn't that precisely what MMS wants - to put all our eggs in one basket?

[Pratik_S]

Eggs---> One basket---> India---> Nah!

We must must take note that 70% of Indian hardware is of Russian origin which is getting old and obsolete. By replacing them again with just Russians would be putting all the eggs in one basket. Frankly India is doing right by buying ameriki products. You may never who Russia sides with in the future, maybe China. Keeping that into mind India is doing right by spreading its purchases over various countries like US, Israel, France, EU and ofcourse Russia.

India is considering the C-17 but at the same time developing MRTA, its buying Harpoons from US but still developing Bharmos with Russia, and so on

The govt is doing a great job of spreading risk and we should start appreciating that instead of shouting backstabbing with every move to purchase American stuff.

[chetak]

You may well say that the US want's to control India's freedom by providing weapons and putting sanctions, but the US NEVER approached it for weapon deals. The MoD SENT OUT RFP's to US and then the US started marketing their products!!! Case in point, Bell complained and pulled out of the helicopter deal, guess what it was cancelled, it did not go to 2nd vendor kyon??? The US is NOT holding India by the BALLS, it's free to take it's business elsewhere!!!

The power of suggestion is pretty powerful especially after the moth eaten nuke deal.

This sudden onrush of RFPs and salivating US weapon companies giving smirking presentations at the MOD is just a tad suspicious, don't you think?

Sure, such things did happen in the past but were very rare in the days before the nuke deal.

Peeping coyly from behind the curtain are the blushing brides of FMCT and NPT who will very smartly be trotted out once India is sufficiently enmeshed in obama's poetic prose and knee deep in mostly obsolescent US equipment.

Emasculation and evisceration in one fell swoop?

No wonder some of our own politicians cannot enter our parliament through the election route!!

Case in point, Bell complained and pulled out of the helicopter deal, guess what it was cancelled, it did not go to 2nd vendor kyon???

The US embassy is the best place for you to find the answer to this question!!

We already know the answer.