C-17s for the IAF?

[Sanku]

Nothing per se, except if your military decides it's the best equipment for the job, it would be silly to deny your armed forces the best tools simply because of some paranoid fears.

Thats the problem, too many assumptions
1) Military has decided that it is the best equipment for the job, and by best I am sure we are talking about best by far. Not merely a slightly better option
2) Military decision is paramount and sacrosanct, that is GoI can not and does not have the right and reason to bring in any more overriding factors.
3) The fears are paranoid.

Considering that we (those rejecting the matter out of hand) probably do not agree on any three of the inherent assumptions in a otherwise valid statement, there is no sense what so ever in trying to debate that point.

[GeorgeWelch]

Then the White House starts to complain that the US Congress, not happy with shoving C-17s down the throats of other countries who have no use for it

You start out so well, then you slip in your usual BIG FAT LIE

Hear it from Mr Obama himself then. Call him a lier (although it kills me to use Fox news to press an argument)

http://www.fox2now.com/news/ktvi-c-17-o ... 5273.story

I can't watch the video right now, but there's nothing in the story about other countries, much less shoving it down the throats of other countries.

It was entirely about the DOMESTIC budget.

[Gilles]

I can't watch the video right now, but there's nothing in the story about other countries, much less shoving it down the throats of other countries.

It was entirely about the DOMESTIC budget.

Ok, I see what your problem is with my post, its just a typo, I corrected it

"Then the White House starts to complain that the US Congress (not happy with shoving C-17s down the throats of other countries who have no use for it) is shoving C-17s down the throat of the US Air Force, who doesn't want or need any more but who is getting new ones anyway, just to keep those Boeing plants going.........

I had commas instead of parentheses. Happy? Am I telling the truth now? I never meant to claim that the White House had complained that the US Congress was shoving C-17s down the throats of other countries. In any case, that is not really Congress' job, its State Departments, and the White house would never complain of such a thing in the first place.......

[GeorgeWelch]

Ok, I see what your problem is with my post, its just a typo, I corrected it

"Then the White House starts to complain that the US Congress (not happy with shoving C-17s down the throats of other countries who have no use for it) is shoving C-17s down the throat of the US Air Force, who doesn't want or need any more but who is getting new ones anyway, just to keep those Boeing plants going.........

I had commas instead of parentheses. Happy? Am I telling the truth now?

NO

The whole parenthetical statement needs to go

1. Who is unhappy with selling C-17s to other countries?
2. Why do you say they have no use for it? Do you know their strategic requirements? Are you in a position to judge their military needs?
3. Where do you get that they are forcing ('shoving down their throat') any country to buy it?

[Gilles]

The whole parenthetical statement needs to go

1. Who is unhappy with selling C-17s to other countries?
2. Why do you say they have no use for it? Do you know their strategic requirements? Are you in a position to judge their military needs?
3. Where do you get that they are forcing ('shoving down their throat') any country to buy it?

See my post on the previous page, the one that starts with "From the creation of the first large US strategic airlifter in the sixties......"

In it, I explain how after 40 years of C-141 operation, 30 years of C-5 operation, 15 years of C-17 operation, not a single country had ever purchased strategic aircraft from the US, and suddenly, in 2006, when the line C-17 is about to shut down, everyone and their mother suddenly want to buy one...... you saw President Obama say it himself, even your own US Air Force no longer want any, yet more have been imposed on them every year since.....2006.

And you claim countries are not pushed to purchase them? I'm certain they had a referendum over the issue in Qatar and the UAE..... QATAR and the UAE ? Its funny! Are you not laughing right now GeorgeWelch ?

[GeorgeWelch]

See my post on the previous page, the one that starts with "From the creation of the first large US strategic airlifter in the sixties......"

Two big events happened that changed the market.

1. The GWOT changed a lot of country's perspectives on what military operations might entail. Previously it focused on stopping the Zerg rush across Germany. Now militarys have a more global perspective.

2. The tsunami. It embarrassed some countries that they had to rely on the US or foreign charters to move their supplies. Some countries *cough*Qatar*cough* thought future aid opportunities would be a good way to advertise their contributions and generate goodwill. In all cases being able to sell the humanitarian relief potential helped move it past obstacles to traditional military sales.

In it, I explain how after 40 years of C-141 operation, 30 years of C-5 operation, 15 years of C-17 operation, not a single country had ever purchased strategic aircraft from the US

And your explanation is that the US is suddenly infinitely more persuasive than it was? Get real. Times have changed. Countries have decided they want their own strategic transports.

[Gilles]

Two big events happened that changed the market.

1. The GWOT

Began in 2001.

2. The tsunami.

December 2004.

Here are the real catalysts.

- A Dec 28 2005 Washington Post article, informs us that the Boeing C-17 plant does not have enough orders to stay open beyond 2008. The article explains that Boeing is not lobbying too hard in Washington by fear that the Pentagon may decide to invest in a Lockheed C-5B upgrade program instead of buying more C-17s, of which the Air Force ordered 180.

- On January 20, 2006, Lockheed receives a contract to upgrade existing Lockheed C-5 Galaxys.

- On February 3 2006, the USA' 2006 Quadrennial Defense Review is released and the USAF mobility study decides to cap Boeing C-17 production at 180 units and mothball the production line in 2008.

- On March 3rd 2006, Australia announces it will purchase 4 Boeing C-17s. First overseas client.

- Around March 10th 2006, Boeing sends 150 of its C-17 suppliers to Washington to lobby for the C-17.

- On April 5th and 6th, CADSI organized its annual CANSEC military show at Ottawa where a Boeing C-17 was on display.

- On May 11 2006, Boeing issues a press release stating that Canada is running out of time for ordering C-17s.

- On June 22 2006, after heated debate about the C-17 purchase, Canadian Parliament closes for the summer. No more opposition to worry about until Sept 18 2006.

- On July 4 2006 Canada announces the single source purchase of 4 Boeing C-17s (second foreign customer)

- On July 13, 2006, Boeing orders its supplier to stop work as of Aug 18 if no further orders are received.

- On August 4th 2006, the UK announces that not only will it purchase the 4 Boeing C-17s that it leased, but it ordered a 5th aircraft (third foreign customer)

- On August 18 2006 Boeing announces that is no further orders are received, that production will end in 2009, resulting in the loss of 5,500 direct jobs in the US, plus another 25,000 jobs from nationwide suppliers in 700 companies and 42 States.

- On September 12th 2006, NATO announces that some NATO members pooled together to purchase 4 Boeing C-7s (4th customer)

- In December 2006, under intense pressure and lobbying, the Pentagon reluctantly announces an order for an additional 10 Boeing C-17s, putting total USAF orders at 190.

[GeorgeWelch]

Two big events happened that changed the market.

1. The GWOT

Began in 2001.

2. The tsunami.

December 2004.

Yup, just about enough time to start changing attitudes and getting the gears of government in motion

Here are the real catalysts.

Basically, you're just reiterating the C-17s successful sales campaigns ::shrug::

Yup the C-17 has racked up quite a few sales:
Canada: 4
Australia: 4
SALIS: 3
UK: 7
Qatar: 2
UAE: 6

Plus potential sales to Saudi Arabia and India

It takes a special kind of paranoia to spin a successful international sales campaign into an event of global oppression.

Yes, the threat of line closure might have prompted a few governments to go ahead and commit instead of dawdling a while longer.

But in the end, they bought them because they felt it served their interests, no one else's.

[Gilles]

[
[
Basically, you're just reiterating the C-17s successful sales campaigns ::shrug::

Yup the C-17 has racked up quite a few sales:
Canada: 4
Australia: 4
SALIS: 3 (Not SALIS, SAT)
UK: 7
Qatar: 2
UAE: 6

Plus potential sales to Saudi Arabia and India

It takes a special kind of paranoia to spin a successful international sales campaign into an event of global oppression.

Yes, the threat of line closure might have prompted a few governments to go ahead and commit instead of dawdling a while longer.

But in the end, they bought them because they felt it served their interests, no one else's.

Or Boeing after 15 years of zero sales finally fired the VP of marketing and hired a top notch marketing exec in Jan 2006, one that they stole away from Google or Microsoft.........(don't Google that one, I just made it up)

Ok GeorgeWelch, I'll let that one go. I pressed my point, you made yours.

[Nair]

As for best equipment for the job, i guess if IAF decided its interested F-22 (no denying the best of the lot), would it be on the table? The answer to that is my answer to why India should stick to Russians even if it means compromising rather than ditching them for the Americans.

I never said US equipment was best for everything.

F-22 isn't for sale to anyone, so PAK-FA is a perfectly reasonable thing to do.

But sometimes US equipment is the best for the job.

My only point is that it shouldn't be dismissed out of hand.

American equipment is best in almost everything as much as one nation can lead in military equipment.

The C-17 is not dismissed out of hand which is why India is buying it. I don't understand some of the posters here.The cold war is long over.India is not a client state of anyone.Why should not her armed forces buy the best they can afford.If it is American so be it.

[Brahmananda]

weapons are tools and they will be used to defend our nation and in our case its our strategy to be defensive, hence we wont start a fight but we'll end it. Taking out defensive stance into account any attack has to come from our enemy and we will retaliate, this gives us credibility and we usually go by the book. Do you really think we are going to formulate a strategy once we have been attacked, thats ludacris, the moment we see a ballistic missile heading our way, you can be sure our strategy is getting ready to be launched as well. Do you really think we'll wait for a nuke to be dropped on us or even to be intercepted. We'll fire almost as quickly as we spot one heading our way.

So many people here make India look so weak by constantly ranting about how the US is bent on messing up India and how buying 10 planes from US is going to mess up our nation. They fail to see the countless corrupt deals that have built our relation with the Russians. They keep ranting and ranting. Why again i ask do people bother when the IAF wants something, why is it that you think everything while dealing with US is political, why cant you actually believe that may be the IAf actually tested and wants it. Just like the P-8 was selected on demand by the navy. You certainly cant deny IAF testing it, the MOD didnt talk about the c-17 till the IAF recognized that need. Why compare IL-76 to C-17, they are both in a different league. They'll continue treating us alike a 3rd world country because the mentality is third world, can;t expect better from a nation which still is knee deep in caste beliefs and other old traditions. There is no dignity of labour, the poor are given names like Dalits and there is mass in-equality in the country.

The deal is iminent still they talk about we shouldn't deal with US, well if some one here has the power to stop the deal, well stop it and stop boring us here with your bs. Besides the power to rant no one here has the power to stop the deal so why bother? All the nay sayers your continuous critisism wont stop it, it repeat it wont stop, we'll buy the 10 and probably even order 10 more because we do hold options for 10 more. We are already discussing ordering 6 more c-130J in options. For the rest nor you or i have the power to stop it. so lets talk about how to deal with them and what should be part of the deal and how they should execute it and not whether to buy because they'll sign the deal soon.

There is no much entropy here, that is wastage of energy. not needed. C-17 is IAF's choice and not your choice, you may not want it but IAF is not you and you are not IAF or the MOD. You may not trust the politics of this nation well we are a democracy if you dont trust the politics then you shouldnt trust the people either because believe it or not the politics reflects the people's choice. If the political choice is corrupt its may be because a majority of the citizens are corrupt.

I repeat IAF wants this the mod is certainly not going to use it to send their family members on those flights, they are meant for the IAF and they will used whenever needed and in any circumstances.

[Gilles]

So lets talk about how to deal with them and what should be part of the deal and how they should execute it and not whether to buy because they'll sign the deal soon.

Ok. Once purchased, India, like all the other C-17 owners in the World, will sign, in addition to the several billion dollar purchase price, a several billion dollar contract with Boeing to join the The Global C-17 Sustainment Partnership which will cover C-17 maintenance over the life of the airframes. You will get excellent top-notch service and your C-17s will have the best dispatch reliability of any aircraft in the IAF. Your generals will be tickled pink at such efficiency, an efficiency that one could only dream about when it came to Russian aircraft. Basically, Boeing and Boeing engineers will take charge of all the maintenance aspect of IAF C-17s. You will have Americans living and working at Indian Air Force bases, 24/7, 365 days a year. IAF technicians will only check tire pressure, oil level and clean bugs off the windshields. But of course, Boeing engineers and technicians (who will never ever be Indian citizens) will first swear allegiance to India and vow never to repeat to nosey CIA-types what they see or hear on or about IAF bases. Whats there to worry about anyway, since these people are India's friends.

http://www.linecom.com/component/conten ... /9631.html

I hope my new discourse is what you wanted to hear, my dear Brahmananda?

[Gilles]

So lets talk about how to deal with them and what should be part of the deal and how they should execute it and not whether to buy because they'll sign the deal soon.

As per your request. Let me continue.....

Have we talked about ITAR yet ? Do you know what ITAR is? Do you know that the C-17 is subject to ITAR?

Well its seems that some Boeing people were already actively teaching Indians on how to live with ITAR restrictions, less than 2 weeks ago in ND.

http://www.comnetconferences.com/OCR/Sp ... market.pdf

I wrote about ITAR on my Blog:

http://boeingc17.blogspot.com/2007/01/i ... -arms.html

http://boeingc17.blogspot.com/2007/02/help-wanted.html

http://boeingc17.blogspot.com/2007/03/c ... n-and.html

This next post is the text of the opening remarks made by Mr. Kenneth Rowe, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, I.M.P. Group International Inc.(Canada's largest military aircraft in-service support company) before the Standing Committee on National Defence (Canadian MPs that oversee defence matters)

"I know of no other developed country in the world that compromises its security and sovereign control of military assets by giving the management of them to foreign commercial companies that are subject to their own governments' foreign policies and controls, as we are currently experiencing with I.T.A.R.S. despite our friendly relations."

Well soon, there will be India......

But please, read on.....

http://boeingc17.blogspot.com/2009/03/m ... nding.html

[GeorgeWelch]

Basically, Boeing and Boeing engineers will take charge of all the maintenance aspect of IAF C-17s. You will have Americans living and working at Indian Air Force bases, 24/7, 365 days a year. IAF technicians will only check tire pressure, oil level and clean bugs off the windshields.

False again.

Indian engineers would perform all flight-line maintenance.

Boeing would only be responsible for depot-level maintenance, which could be setup at 1 location anywhere you want.

[munna]

Why C-17 is not likely to be selected: Christine Fair

Although Pakistanis point to their "all-weather friend" China, it is U.S. -- not Chinese -- assistance that will help Pakistan maintain conventional parity with its chief nemesis, India. The platforms that China is willing to sell are unlikely to be an effective counterweight to India's evolving capabilities.

George, for us Indians Pakistan is what Soviet Union was to US during cold war. The twain shall not meet-the fastest way of knocking your product out of the market is to sell you wares to Pakistan. Your plane may be the best in the world but clearly you lack national consensus to be our long term partners. You as a nation can make a perfectly legitimate choice to ally with that monstrosity of a nation and we reserve the right to reject US wares. Maybe you should donate some to Pak as in any case they don't buy stuff but they do accept aid.

[Gilles]

Basically, Boeing and Boeing engineers will take charge of all the maintenance aspect of IAF C-17s. You will have Americans living and working at Indian Air Force bases, 24/7, 365 days a year. IAF technicians will only check tire pressure, oil level and clean bugs off the windshields.

False again.

Indian engineers would perform all flight-line maintenance.

Boeing would only be responsible for depot-level maintenance, which could be setup at 1 location anywhere you want.

Indian technicians will only do as much maintenance on the C-17 as US ITAR laws will allow.

[shiv]

Well I'm no expert but this is how things happen between India and foreign suppliers. ..

The agreement is reached after a period ranging from 1 year to 20 years of negotiations. Indians will do all servicing up to one level and beyond that the supplier will have to do it.

But by then, India has either supported Bechuanaland's quest for nuclear power or the supplier has gone out of business and so the next level does not get done by the supplier.

India then cannibalizes parts to keep half the equipment working while the Base Repair Depots work furiously to come up with alternative spares. That eventually gets done and the original agreement by now is ripped to shreds.

A new agreement is then reached, or India quietly retires the old set and goes for something new. And the cycle of life goes on...

[GeorgeWelch]

Indian technicians will only do as much maintenance on the C-17 as US ITAR laws will allow.

You're confused about how ITAR works.

All those rights are included with the FMS

[chetak]

American equipment is best in almost everything as much as one nation can lead in military equipment.

The C-17 is not dismissed out of hand which is why India is buying it. I don't understand some of the posters here.The cold war is long over.India is not a client state of anyone.Why should not her armed forces buy the best they can afford.If it is American so be it.

Welcome Nair ji,

As far as the GOTUS is concerned the cold war is not over. They want India to pay for daring to thwart them in the earlier days.
They want us to accommodate them in every whichway without question because their world vision is supreme and cannot be questioned by a mere third world country. The pakis are squealing in pain and frustration of being raped over once again for a few baubles.
The US wants us to give up things to the pakis that we have fought for decades to protect at great national cost so that they can withdraw from the afghan mess and leave a festering sore for us to tackle. Obama is certainly not your friend and neither is the GOTUS.

This fabulous aircraft has racked up a mere 26 numbers in GLOBAL sales and is being touted as the next best thing to sliced bread.

Are these not client states? Every one of them is being led by the nose by the great US!!

Canada: 4
Australia: 4
SALIS: 3 (Not SALIS, SAT) ?
UK: 7
Qatar: 2
UAE: 6

Plus potential sales to Saudi Arabia and India

India is about to enter into a similar state of supreme bliss.

Who says that the C-17 or other US made equipment is the best in the world? This is pure BS. And an expensive marketing scam.

Take a look at the Antonovs and other russian aircraft as well as those of other countries. They are at the very least as good if not actually better.

[GeorgeWelch]

They want India to pay for daring to thwart them in the earlier days.

You can come out of your tinfoil room anytime you want . . .

[JimmyJ]

So many people here make India look so weak by constantly ranting about how the US is bent on messing up India and how buying 10 planes from US is going to mess up our nation. They fail to see the countless corrupt deals that have built our relation with the Russians. They keep ranting and ranting.There is no dignity of labour, the poor are given names like Dalits and there is mass in-equality in the country.

The deal is iminent still they talk about we shouldn't deal with US, well if some one here has the power to stop the deal, well stop it and stop boring us here with your bs.

For one, you need to do a poll to see how many people here are in support of buying equipments from US after signing EUMA when US also arms Pakistan. I do not belong to the "us" in your post and this discussion has brought some interesting points too. If you still feel bored there is only one option available.

As the Indian nationalism rises with the economy, there will be lot more people who would expect the world leaders to treat them as equals which I believe can already be seen in the new JV with the Russians, at least a small start. But the US history is not so, even Britain has to face this. Buying 10 planes won't hurt us, but buying 10 in each and every deal will add up to a great number of systems brought from the US and if in the time of crisis they deny as the service for it then we are screwed, I hope you wouldn't call this as pure rant.

[Gilles]

Indian technicians will only do as much maintenance on the C-17 as US ITAR laws will allow.

You're confused about how ITAR works.

All those rights are included with the FMS

Understanding ITAR and FMS is so complex that some people have made a career out of it.

That is also why, in anticipations of US military sales to India of such items such as the C-130J, the P-8 and the C-17, there are firms like this one (http://www.comnetconferences.com/OCR/Sp ... market.pdf) who come to India to teach Indians how to conform with US ITAR laws.

Some of the Regulations can be found here: http://www.dsca.mil/samm/

There is also a Website where questions about US laws can be asked on-line, and all previous questions and replies are posted. Very interesting for those who would like to educate themselves on the complexities of FMS and ITAR

https://akss.dau.mil/askaprof-akss/qlis ... shField=20

But without going into details, US military hardware come with many, many many strings. You are going to pay for it. You are going to have use of it. But you will never have full control of it, because you will always have to conform to all these US rules.

[Shalav]

I repeat IAF wants this the mod is certainly not going to use it to send their family members on those flights, they are meant for the IAF and they will used whenever needed and in any circumstances.

So what? The IAF wants a lot of things - it doesn't mean they should get all of it. India's citizens and govt. have every right to question what is perceived as frivolous expenditure.

What is the strategic imperative for the C17? Its definitely not for domestic use, since our logistics are well covered by rail. It is definitely not tactical use. If aircraft like these are used for tactical purposes, that means something has gone wrong somewhere and these are being used as a last resort.

If not for tactical purposes then that raises the question - Which country are we going to send our "expeditionary forces"? Who is the IAF planning to invade? I see nothing from them justifying this VERY EXPENSIVE sanction prone purchase.

They just have to answer a simple question - why do they need this particular aircraft instead of cheaper alternatives? What advantages of this particular aircraft completely overrides the risk of them becoming 13,500 crore hangar queens.

Will the IAF chief still stand behind his recommendation if by force of circumstance these aircraft become subject to US led sanctions in the future? Will he put his pension on the line behind his guarantee? Will his subordinates do so? I think not!

/rant on

As a citizen I am becoming very concerned about the high cost "best of brochure" wish-lists emanating from the IA and IAF. Particularly when 'phoren' stuff is the only item which will satisfy a particular GQSR.

I am saddened the country is set to spend $ 3,000,000,000 on these unreliable aircraft. A better use would have been to put the savings from that 13,500 crores into primary education, or even NREGS for Gods sake! (In that vein - a 2,000 crore savings from the purchase of a cheaper alternative will provide 5 days more of employment for every citizen entitled to it under NREGS act! That means crores of Indian citizens will benefit instead of foreigners)

The desi media has completely failed its citizens again! Instead of asking tough questions like this, we are bombarded with rating seeking breathless journalism about which film star thinks the IPL was not fair to the pak!

/rant off

[GeorgeWelch]

What is the strategic imperative for the C17? Its definitely not for domestic use, since our logistics are well covered by rail.

Kashmir Railway isn't scheduled to be finished till 2017.

And even then, rail does not necessarily go everywhere you want.

It is definitely not tactical use. If aircraft like these are used for tactical purposes, that means something has gone wrong somewhere and these are being used as a last resort.

Hope for the best, plan for the worst.

Which country are we going to send our "expeditionary forces"? Who is the IAF planning to invade?

One never knows. You've already sent T-72s to Sri Lanka.

Beyond that, India does have peacekeeping operations around the world.

I see nothing from them justifying this VERY EXPENSIVE

Expensive compared to what? There are no cheaper options.

Even new build An-124s are estimated to cost just as much, and that's before any work has actually started on them! (we all know how reliable Russian price estimates are)

They just have to answer a simple question - why do they need this particular aircraft instead of cheaper alternatives?

What cheaper alternatives?

[GeorgeWelch]

Understanding ITAR and FMS is so complex that some people have made a career out of it.

It is complex, but it mainly has to do with ensuring adequate security to prevent certain items going to an outside (ie not India or US) nation.

It has nothing to do with preventing India from doing maintenance on the plane, which is what you said.

If the maintenance information is controlled by ITAR, permission to transfer will be granted through FMS. Once India has the information, they will be free to use it, they just must ensure adequate controls to prevent unauthorized access (ie by China).

[Gilles]

If the maintenance information is controlled by ITAR, permission to transfer will be granted through FMS. Once India has the information, they will be free to use it, they just must ensure adequate controls to prevent unauthorized access (ie by China).

US supervised and monitored controls. With Conditions.

ITAR access laws are based on "place of birth" (among other things). If one is born in a country that is ITAR blacklisted, you are not ITAR compliant.

In Canada, our Governor General, Mrs Michaelle Jean, the symbolic head of Sate and head of the Canadian Forces, representative of the Queen in Canada, was born in Haiti, a country on the ITAR blacklist. She is not ITAR compliant. Her predecessor, Mrs Clarke, was an immigrant from China. She came to Canada as a baby around WW-II. She was not ITAR compliant either.

Even if your parents are both Indians but you were born in one of these countries:

http://www.firstar.eu/BLACKLIST/embargo.htm

you are not ITAR compliant and probably wont be allowed near a C-17, or a P-8. Is that correct GeorgeWelch or am I confused still?

In Canada, people who had been working in a Bell Helicopter factory for many years were "transfered" because some of them were born in a Blacklisted country. Don't be surprised when some pencil pusher from the IAF starts asking all IAF personnel who are going to be in contact with P8s and C-17s a copy of their birth certificate to submit to Uncle Sam soon. Am I correct GeorgeWelch ?

[ldev]

Gilles,

Unlike Canada, India is not a nation of immigrants. Very very few Indians were born outside of India especially in those countries which are on the US blacklist so the chances of someone in the IAF being born in Sudan, Iran, Pakistan etc. are virtually nonexistent.

[Gilles]

Gilles,

Unlike Canada, India is not a nation of immigrants. Very very few Indians were born outside of India especially in those countries which are on the US blacklist so the chances of someone in the IAF being born in Sudan, Iran, Pakistan etc. are virtually nonexistent.

Pakistan is OK. The terrorist nations are the likes of Cuba, Venezuela, Vietnam, Syria.....

You see, the list does not reflect reality, but rather, US Foreign Policy. The strings I was referring to......

[Ashish J]

Gilles,

Unlike Canada, India is not a nation of immigrants. Very very few Indians were born outside of India especially in those countries which are on the US blacklist so the chances of someone in the IAF being born in Sudan, Iran, Pakistan etc. are virtually nonexistent.

Pakistan is OK. The terrorist nations are the likes of Cuba, Venezuela, Vietnam, Syria.....

You see, the list does not reflect reality, but rather, US Foreign Policy. The strings I was referring to......

[Ashish J]

Gilles,

Unlike Canada, India is not a nation of immigrants. Very very few Indians were born outside of India especially in those countries which are on the US blacklist so the chances of someone in the IAF being born in Sudan, Iran, Pakistan etc. are virtually nonexistent.

Pakistan is OK. The terrorist nations are the likes of Cuba, Venezuela, Vietnam, Syria.....

You see, the list does not reflect reality, but rather, US Foreign Policy. The strings I was referring to......[/quote]


[/quote]

Sorry 4 dat,,but dosent it show how crude is today's intl politics..??
Pakistan not on that list??

[Karan Dixit]

This is a political decision. And, that does not necessarily mean, it is a bad decision. US has lobbied on behalf of India in NSG. They are expecting something in return. US has always wanted India to buy bigger ticket items from them. C17 is a kind of high-ticket item they want to sell. Patriots are another set of useless weapons that India will have to purchase. But that is how the politics work. You give some. You take some. After the C17 deal is over, India should ask US to lift the ban on purchase of high-tech items (non-military ones).

We have a problem at our hand. We have two hostile countries across our northeast and northwest borders. A good chunk of India’s border with Pakistan lies on the Himalayas. India’s entire border with China lies on the Himalayas. Let us leave Pakistan aside for a while because India has good roads and railways going that way and, Pakistan does not have more infrastructure in the border area than India. But China is not the same story. China has built lots of roads along Indo – China border. This includes illegally occupied Tibet. Do we have matching capacity? Answer is no. First of all I am not attempting to create any hysteria. And, I am certainly not looking forward to a war with China. But, I am a realistic man. So I propose that India be prepared. Keep in mind both China and Pakistan have attacked India unprovoked. There is no guarantee that either of them will not do it again. This calls for creation of strategically located military airbases throughout northeast. From these airbases, spider web roads can be built leading to the frontier. This approach is much more feasible than building long highways through intimidating Himalayan peaks. I am not saying that India should not build highways and railways. On the contrary, I think India should but while that is being done, airbases and spider web roads should also be built and it should be done real fast to make sure that Indian army has means to deploy soldiers where they are needed. When it comes to deployment, the bigger is better. Once the soldiers are deployed, they will need to be supplied with ration and ammunition; also rotation and redeployment of troops will be necessary at some point as well. So, the need is there. I do not know if C17 is right or wrong for the job. But I do know that Indian army needs some means to transport itself through Himalayas. Roads and rails are not there as of yet. Only other option is air. It is cheaper and faster.

[GeorgeWelch]

Even if your parents are both Indians but you were born in one of these countries:

http://www.firstar.eu/BLACKLIST/embargo.htm

you are not ITAR compliant and probably wont be allowed near a C-17, or a P-8. Is that correct GeorgeWelch or am I confused still?

You might not like it from a personal-rights standpoint or whatever, but from a strategic point of view, I'm sure India has enough native-born Indians that they can deal with it.

[Gilles]

Even if your parents are both Indians but you were born in one of these countries:

http://www.firstar.eu/BLACKLIST/embargo.htm

you are not ITAR compliant and probably wont be allowed near a C-17, or a P-8. Is that correct GeorgeWelch or am I confused still?

You might not like it from a personal-rights standpoint or whatever, but from a strategic point of view, I'm sure India has enough native-born Indians that they can deal with it.

Not like it! Thats an understatement. What I hate the most is that the "country of birth" clauses of ITAR would be illegal if they were applied as is inside of the United States to US citizens. They are Anti-constitutional. In the United States, it is illegal to segregate based on country of origin. But while the United States applies these high moral standards to its own citizens within its own borders, it throws them out the window when it comes to other countries (even its closest allies like Canada), and has no problem whatsoever to imposing such measures to other countries where such measures may also be anti-constitutional.

Canadian companies find themselves between a rock in a hard place because of that. For example, a Canadian-based GM plant had a contract for building armoured vehicles (or components thereof) for the US military. It required that the plant workers be "ITAR compliant". In order to get the contract, the company had to get rid of long time employees who, although Canadian citizens, were born in some of the blacklisted countries. These employees then took their Canadian employer to court and won.

http://travel.nytimes.com/2006/12/12/bu ... html?fta=y

However, how does an applicant prove that his application was not retained because his place of birth was on the Blacklist? That is very hard to prove.

So Canadian companies have to chose between applying Canadian law, and not getting the US contract, or getting the contract and violating the rights of its "blacklist-born" employees and having to settle in court.

http://www.blakes.com/english/view_disc.asp?ID=883

Back to Military Aircraft. Canada recently bought US C-17s, C-130Js and CH-47Fs, all of which are subject to ITAR. In the past, all heavy maintenance of US-built military hardware was done in Canada by Canadian In Service Support (ISS) companies. This is the Case of our F-18s, our C-130E and C-130H, our P-3s.

Recently however, Canada, before allowing any Canadian ISS companies to be able to to obtain maintenance contracts for the new aircraft which are subject to ITAR, has to ascertain that the companies are "ITAR compliant", which is illegal here. So what does our ministry of Defence do, to by-pass this thorny problem? They simply hand out all contracts which are subject to ITAR to US companies. Problem resolved. Canadian Aeronautical Industry gets crumbs.

This has become such a worldwide problem (not of course in places like Saudi Arabia, Qatar or UAE where even local women are second class citizens) that non-American defence companies now Advertise "ITAR-free" hardware for sale, as a sales advantage.

Here are some examples of "ITAR free" things for sale.

http://cs.astrium.eads.net/sp/Spacecraf ... phaBus.htm

http://www.thalesgroup.com/assets/0/93/ ... gType=2057

ITAR can also affect your exports. Spain learned that the hard way recently. Mr Chavez of Venezuela decided to buy Spanish-built CASA aircraft and small gunboats from Spain. Both items, allthough built in Spain, contained US made components which were suject to ITAR. Venezuela being a nation that sponsors terrorism according to the White House, the US blocked the sale. Spain had to consider either cancelling the sale or removing US components and replacing them with non-US. It was too complicated and the sale was cancelled. Venezuela turned to Russia for the items.....

This is a translation of a French article:

http://www.watchingamerica.com/dedefense000001.html

ITAR and FMS are the same can of worms. India will learn it the hard way I'm afraid.

I document all I write GeorgeWelch. Go ahead and call me a liar again.

[svinayak]

ITAR can also affect your exports. Spain learned that the hard way recently. Mr Chavez of Venezuela decided to buy Spanish-built CASA aircraft and small gunboats from Spain. Both items, allthough built in Spain, contained US made components which were suject to ITAR. Venezuela being a nation that sponsors terrorism according to the White House, the US blocked the sale. Spain had to consider either cancelling the sale or removing US components and replacing them with non-US. It was too complicated and the sale was cancelled. Venezuela turned to Russia for the items.....

ITAR and FMS are the same can of worms. India will learn it the hard way I'm afraid.

I document all I write GeorgeWelch. Go ahead and call me a liar again.

India has been subject to ITAR created sanctions for the last 40 years on its space industry ISRO and lots of other industries. India has built completely its space industry with non-ITAR business eco system within the country and outside the country.
Indian industry also has avoided as much as possible ITAR regulated companies and countries. India may want to consider banning companies which are ITAR certified to work inside the country.

[GeorgeWelch]

India will learn it the hard way I'm afraid.

Learn what? I don't believe they have the same issues with discriminating by country of birth that Canada does.

As far as not being able to resell without approval, that is well understood.

India has smart people believe it or not, they will understand the rules before any purchase is made. No 'learning the hard way' required.

I document all I write GeorgeWelch.

Except when you don't.

Go ahead and call me a liar again.

Fear not, when the situation calls for it, I will.

The funny thing is that many times the 'documentation' you provide directly contradicts what you say.

Ah well, just a good reminder that we must always examine claims carefully.

[chetak]

ITAR can also affect your exports. Spain learned that the hard way recently. Mr Chavez of Venezuela decided to buy Spanish-built CASA aircraft and small gunboats from Spain. Both items, allthough built in Spain, contained US made components which were suject to ITAR. Venezuela being a nation that sponsors terrorism according to the White House, the US blocked the sale. Spain had to consider either cancelling the sale or removing US components and replacing them with non-US. It was too complicated and the sale was cancelled. Venezuela turned to Russia for the items.....

ITAR and FMS are the same can of worms. India will learn it the hard way I'm afraid.

I document all I write GeorgeWelch. Go ahead and call me a liar again.

India has been subject to ITAR created sanctions for the last 40 years on its space industry ISRO and lots of other industries. India has built completely its space industry with non-ITAR business eco system within the country and outside the country.
Indian industry also has avoided as much as possible ITAR regulated companies and countries. India may want to consider banning companies which are ITAR certified to work inside the country.

We have a US fanboy who is urging us to fashion a noose and put it
around our own necks! and a miniscule Indian cheer leading team which wants us to smile while doing it.

We must listen to the fanboy as he knows what's best for the heathens, like all americans.

C-17s to India are as useful as tits on a bull, period. We can have no strategic ambitions. The last one went out with our departed nehru gandhi family product. We have learned to concentrate on economic growth and abjure foolish adventures.

[GeorgeWelch]

We have a US fanboy who is urging us to fashion a noose and put it
around our own necks!

What noose?

Saying you can't have North Korean born people work on the jets is hardly a noose.

Saying you can't resell it 20 years later without approval is hardly a noose, especially considering India tends to hang on to equipment till it's completely worn out.

C-17s to India are as useful as tits on a bull, period. We can have no strategic ambitions.

You have no understanding of your own strategic situation.

If there were a major 'incident' with China and you needed lots of equipment up there yesterday, something like the C-17 would be very, very useful.

[svinayak]

India has been subject to ITAR created sanctions for the last 40 years on its space industry ISRO and lots of other industries. India has built completely its space industry with non-ITAR business eco system within the country and outside the country.
Indian industry also has avoided as much as possible ITAR regulated companies and countries. India may want to consider banning companies which are ITAR certified to work inside the country.

We have a US fanboy who is urging us to fashion a noose and put it
around our own necks! and a miniscule Indian cheer leading team which wants us to smile while doing it.

We must listen to the fanboy as he knows what's best for the heathens, like all americans.

C-17s to India are as useful as tits on a bull, period. We can have no strategic ambitions. The last one went out with our departed nehru gandhi family product. We have learned to concentrate on economic growth and abjure foolish adventures.

India and Indians have gone through too much of this Sh*t for 50 years that it will never want to get entangled with remotely anything like this. India should have a blacklist of those ITAR certified companies and actively undermine them. Also armaments made with ITAR certified companies must be target of Indian military during conflict.

[chiragAS]

The russian birds even if they are junk they can be modified customised without even taking the OEM's
help. no fu&^ing agreements bind it. they Sell their equipments. Americans say they are selling them but actually they are like leasing them. (and that too for billions yikes!!!)
you can't do this, you can't do that, etc etc etc the list goes on..................

wow, Euma done, CISMOA soon, ITAR related documents done i guess atleast for 130s and p8Is .
these are the main agreements, we should record the smaller ones also.
hmm.. i guess another zillion agreements will be signed when the F-18 is selected.
and dont think you can wriggle out of the agreements (they are iron clad in conjuction with all types of electronic spying equipments preinstalled in all birds and machines to make sure it is religiously followed)

and now the 100% FDI in defence ?? cool.
Goodbye India, Welcome USA

all US fan boys cheers you and your likes in Government of India has succeeded to buy fancy touch screen control P8I's, C-130s, C-17s and soon F-18s to protect our great nation.
(agains paki C130s, F-16s etc )

One by one we will all be raped.
and then you guys can say like Obama "Yes we can !! "

[chetak]

quote="chetak" C-17s to India are as useful as tits on a bull, period. We can have no strategic ambitions.

You have no understanding of your own strategic situation.

If there were a major 'incident' with China and you needed lots of equipment up there yesterday, something like the C-17 would be very, very useful.

Now I really have to wonder. You guys have been aligned with the chinese against us for ever. Especially now that they have you by the purse strings, if not something more intimate!

The C-17s are to help us or the chinese?

I am sure that there is a special place in hell for nixon and his pals like zbigniew brzezinski Sunk by a third world lady.