C-17s for the IAF?

[amit]

man this heckling over price reminds me of buying cheap wrist watches from dharmatala, the vendor starts off at Rs 500/- and eventually settles for Rs 45.

Those were the days. Remember the ink pens, rip offs made in China - yes even in those days China was making counterfeits!

But if the $2.2 billion price tag is indeed true, then hats off to our Babus and their Chai-Biskoot negotiation tactics!

[putnanja]

$2.2 billion is probably just the fly away cost of each C-17, and a quick search on the web reveals that is the ballpark around which the USAF bought them too. The rest of the amount is for spares, training, etc

[amit]

$2.2 billion is probably just the fly away cost of each C-17, and a quick search on the web reveals that is the ballpark around which the USAF bought them too. The rest of the amount is for spares, training, etc

Dunno, you could be right. However, spares and training, more than doubles the cost? It doesn't seem right, it could be the $2.2 billion figure is wrong.

[svinayak]

Dunno, you could be right. However, spares and training, more than doubles the cost? It doesn't seem right, it could be the $2.2 billion figure is wrong.

They make more in spares and support deal
That is the nature of american business

[Viv S]

Dunno, you could be right. However, spares and training, more than doubles the cost? It doesn't seem right, it could be the $2.2 billion figure is wrong.

They make more in spares and support deal
That is the nature of american business

Everyone makes more in spares and support. But, to Americans' credit they spell it out before the order is signed. Contrast that with the Russian handling of the T-90 ToT, Gorshkov price, Brahmos ToT etc or the French intransigence over the Mirage upgrade.

[nelson]

^^
pay upfront for spares and support that will never be used because of some sanction or EULA/EUMA violation? wise indeed.
and how does any of the four instances given by you relate to spares and support?

[JimmyJ]

Ok, here goes an FMS Saga, this clearly shows that much improvements are required at the legal aspects while signing international defense deal.

Army chief warns against govt-to-govt deals with US

Singed by the troubles with past FMS contracts, the Army top brass is now discussing the possibility of hiring corporate lawyers well versed in international negotiations and contracts to come on board for scrutinizing the upcoming contract for howitzers, authoritative sources said. These lawyers would ensure that the past troubles are kept away, source said.

Gen Singh is believed to have pointed out to Antony Army's trouble with maintenance of a dozen weapon-locating radars bought from the US firm Raytheon. At times, up to two-thirds of the radars have been in want of maintenance, Army sources said.

Gen Singh's letter to Antony is an unusual step, and was "forced by the troubles we have with maintenance of the radar systems", an Army source said.

[Sanku]

^^^^
w.r.t. Chiefs article.

Wow the famed 24x7 support? And this much trouble for the pretty much the ONLY US equipment India operates?

A 100% strike rate. I must say the Americans dont disappoint and live up to the promises.

[amit]

^^
pay upfront for spares and support that will never be used because of some sanction or EULA/EUMA violation? wise indeed.
and how does any of the four instances given by you relate to spares and support?

Nelson ji,

A bit off topic here, but could you educate us as to how EUM violations could occur which would invite sanctions, especially in the case of the C-17?

I do hope you know that we now have a standard omnibus EUM with the US for any equipment that we purchase and that includes inspection at a place and time of India's choosing.

So I'd be really interested to know what could trigger sanctions and would India do such a thing, given it's past history with foreign military equipment.

Let's not bring out unnecessary Strawmen. If you read this thread you'll find some very legitimate (and convincing) issues which can be used to castigate the C-17 deal. It would be nice to stick to them that would result in an interesting debate.

[amit]

They make more in spares and support deal
That is the nature of american business

Acharya,

This is not to condone US actions. But the "They" here should include:

1) Russia,
2) France
3) Israel

and just about everyone else from whom we buy arms, besides, of course the Americans.

[amit]

Ok, here goes an FMS Saga, this clearly shows that much improvements are required at the legal aspects while signing international defense deal.

Army chief warns against govt-to-govt deals with US

Singed by the troubles with past FMS contracts, the Army top brass is now discussing the possibility of hiring corporate lawyers well versed in international negotiations and contracts to come on board for scrutinizing the upcoming contract for howitzers, authoritative sources said. These lawyers would ensure that the past troubles are kept away, source said.

I saw this para in the ToI story. Does the bolded portion mean that the Army believes the contract for the radars was badly (from India's PoV) negotiated?

This issue is important because a badly-negotiated is very different from the US renege on an existing contract.

It seems to me the Army chief is not saying don't buy US equipment via the FMS route, he seems to want better prepared negotiators to represent India - people who would understand the pitfalls of complicated international defence contracts "so that past troubles are kept away".

[nelson]

^^
pay upfront for spares and support that will never be used because of some sanction or EULA/EUMA violation? wise indeed.
and how does any of the four instances given by you relate to spares and support?

Nelson ji,

A bit off topic here, but could you educate us as to how EUM violations could occur which would invite sanctions, especially in the case of the C-17?
....

please read the two operatives separately as
"...spares and support that will never be used because of sanctions" :- there is never a guarantee that Buddha will not smile again.
"...spares and support that will never be used because of EULA/ EUMA violations" it is well known that EUMA/EULA authorises the COTUS to suspend support to buying country in variety of packages and action.

what with many rakshaks taking up cudgels for unkil... even wanting to dissect and read meanings into our army chief's position on a single FMS purchase. whither to?

[Philip]

In principle there is nothing wrong with a close friendly relationship with the US,provided it is based upon equal terms in deals that we have signed with other friendly nations both from the east and west.However,this is not what is happening with the MMS regime determined to sell the whole country lock,stock and barrel to Uncle Sam at Uncle Sam's prices too!MMS appears from his actions to be desperate to wrest from Pak the malodrous title of being the region's "rent boy".For the COAS to express his warning in such a direct manner is a sure sign of deep machinations by pro-US forces within the GOI and estabalishment wanting to ensure arms sales on a massive scale that will actually NOT provide us with the expected security and after sales guarantees on the weapon systems purchased.If a simple system like weapon locating radars can be a disastrous deal in retrospect,then why are we wanting to jump headlong in indecent haste with even more crucial deals that affect the security of tha nation even more? The COAS is fighting the vested interests mano-a-mano in the interests of the nation.He should be lauded by all for doing so!

[amit]

please read the two operatives separately as
"...spares and support that will never be used because of sanctions" :- there is never a guarantee that Buddha will not smile again.
"...spares and support that will never be used because of EULA/ EUMA violations" it is well known that EUMA/EULA authorises the COTUS to suspend support to buying country in variety of packages and action.

Boss what a leap of faith. Another Smiling Buddha linked with EULA/EUMA!

So, in effect what you're saying is that we should never buy US maal because we may at some future date do another Smiling Buddha? Hmm...

Just out of curiosity, I'd like to know your position on the C-130J Hercules planes we've bought or the P-8A Poseidon we are about to buy. Are they good or bad deals? Surely they would be equally affected when the link up between a future Smiling Buddha and EULA/EUMA is done?

what with many rakshaks taking up cudgels for unkil... even wanting to dissect and read meanings into our army chief's position on a single FMS purchase. whither to?

You know you should look a bit beyond such binary thought process. Do I take it that everyone who advocates buying the Il-76 are taking up cudgels for Russia?

You'd notice that both positions are equally bad because in neither case is anyone taking up the cudgels for India?

Or are you somehow trying to say the pro-Russian lobby is pro-Indian and the allegedly pro-US lobby is anti-Indian?

Really I'm confused what with many rakshaks coming up with such simplistic arguments?

You gotta get it into your system that folks who advocate the C-17 think (rightly or wrongly) its the best for India, just as the folks who think (again rightly or wrongly) Il-76 is a better bet do so because they think that's the best for India. And all the debate is about one set of folks trying to convince the other set.

If you don't and you question the motives/patriotism of people who's POV is different from yours then there's really no point in spending time discussing anything with you. And incidentally you can think whatever you like, I don't think thats skin off anyone's teeth.

Added later: I'd like to know what you think of some of the retired IAF officers who have advocated the buying of the C-17? Do you think they are taking up cudgels on behalf of unkil?

[amit]

read meanings into our army chief's position on a single FMS purchase. whither to?

Boss why don't you educate us as to the correct meaning of what the Army top brass meant by this:

now discussing the possibility of hiring corporate lawyers well versed in international negotiations and contracts to come on board for scrutinizing the upcoming contract for howitzers, authoritative sources said. These lawyers would ensure that the past troubles are kept away, source said.

[nelson]

^^
i again request to read "Sanctions" and "EUMA violations" separately as in my second post above. Sanctions due to major foreign policy decision of GOTUS and niggling penalties for puported EUMA violations are two disticnt possibilities brought out in the same sentence.

the issue of c-17 vs il 76 has been well discussed and it is generally accepted by the contributors here that both are in different class and c-17s cannot replace il-76 in its functions in IAF. among other reasons, because of the lack of requirement for replacing il-76 as of now.

c-17s may be the best available toy available in the market in its particular class, but tis not going to be of much use any time sooner, except to supplant unkil's designs.

as far as taking up cudgels for unkil is concerned, the thought was due to the dissection of army chief's remarks. nothing further than that.

[nrshah]

I hope army chief letter to AK with details of how 2/3rd (67% - Figure which is more than often used for russian hardware not functioning properly) WLR were not usable for maintenance issues have silenced the critics of Russians....

[nelson]

buying US maal or any videshi maal for defence forces, must be with as less number of strings attached to it as possible and should give value for money. it should start with the premise that limited resources available will be employed to purchase or procure those critical systems and services that have been required for long and are more critical for the defence forces to accomplish their mission in the plausible future.
the deal for c17s when it goes through, IMO, does not have that high a priority compared to half a dozen other (long needed) procurements, to warrant the huge cost with strings attached(risk).
no one in this forum has yet complained about procurement of Howitzers through FMS, because it is understood by one and all that the priority to be accorded for procuring Howitzers is very high. at the same time there is considerable dissension to the purchase of c17 through FMS because of the huge cost and perceived usefulness in warlike scenario.

there is no il-76 in picture when seen from this POV.

[amit]

it should start with the premise that limited resources available will be employed to purchase or procure those critical systems and services that have been required for long and are more critical for the defence forces to accomplish their mission in the plausible future.

And pray can you tell me who will make the call to decide which is a more critical system? The armed forces or some arm chair expert cum Internet warrior?

But wait this has been discussed before, but I'll nevertheless ask you this once more.

It is widely accepted that India desperately needs Bofors type artillery pieces.

Now two question arise here.

1) Do you think we haven't been able to "procure those critical systems" because of a lack of money or due to some other reason?

2) Suppose we don't spend anything between $2.2 billion to $5.8 billion (that's the range we have) on the C-17s. Do you think that money would be immediately available for buying the howitzers and whatever other critical equipment we need?

And this lead us to the third question, who's answer would be a great education for me.

3) Can you list, say three items, which are "critical systems" which the armed forces need but which haven't been bought because there's a lack of funds?

You know you need to answer that if you think that the money spent on C-17s is more urgently needed to buy something which is more "critical".

And yes I agree to the point (that is if you are making it) that heavy howitzers are a more "critical" piece of equipment for the armed forces than the C-17s. But I'm not convinced that we are not getting them due to a lack of money.


Bottomline: You can argue with evidence that C-17 is not the best buy for the IAF and there are alternatives which give a better bang for the buck such as Il76. But you can't say that C-17 is a bad buy because the IAF doesn't need a heavy lifter of that class. Sorry boss I don't think you (or most of us here) can make that judgment especially when it seems a lot of IAF folks think it needs the heavy lifter and they are going for trials in India.

[Sanku]

I strongly appreciate those who are well aware of their limitation and declare that they dont have the ablity to make educated guessed of what Indian forces need. To be aware of your limitations is a great thing.

However I hope those worthies speak only for themselves and do not seek to extrapolate their limitations and interests in such discussion to other posters.

It is a good habit to speak only for yourself and let others say what they are saying.

[amit]

I strongly appreciate those who are well aware of their limitation and declare that they dont have the ablity to make educated guessed of what Indian forces need. To be aware of your limitations is a great thing.

However I hope those worthies speak only for themselves and do not seek to extrapolate their limitations and interests in such discussion to other posters.

It is a good habit to speak only for yourself and let others say what they are saying.

Itchy fingers Sanku ji?

Not everyone is born an expert you know. Most become one by dint of hard work and understanding one's limitations. Yes I wouldn't want to second guess what's the Armed Forces actual requirements are, especially after they have made known what they want.

But then we have that wonderful phrase: Rushing in where Angels fear to thread...

That makes BRF so much more entertaining.

[Surya]

Our MOD's lack of legal skills was also mentioned with respect to the Hawk debacle

So it is not a US thingy only although the US definitely has more irritating rules.



But its good that the Army chief has made a strong statement. The old gunner chief did zilch.

[Sanku]

So it is not a US thingy only although the US definitely has more irritating rules.
.

Why now? The question is very important. I do not believe that Chiefs make a statement casually.

[Gilles]

I suspect that part of the inflated price of IAF C-17 is because IAF wants to create a large enough reserve of spares to account for the days when some 2-bit senator gets off from the wrong side of the bed and promptly cuts off supplies to IAF.

That and the fact that all C-17 customers so far have signed a 20 year In Service Support contract with Boeing. India is expected to do the same.

In fact read this interesting article on the The C-17 Globemaster III Sustainment Partnership

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/did ... hip-02756/

This is most likely what the IAF will sign up for in addition to the purchase of the 10 C-17s. All foreign customers who bought C-17s so far have signed up for it and the UAE has already announced it had also.

[Surya]

I think the Chief is finally trying to right so many wrongs. The previous 2 chiefs were totally useless.

And with the Arty having suffered so much - the chief may not want it to suffer anymore with some new guns which cannot be used as needed.

Thats my guess - but I will dig - although what comes up may not be for public consumption

[nelson]

it should start with the premise that limited resources available will be employed to purchase or procure those critical systems and services that have been required for long and are more critical for the defence forces to accomplish their mission in the plausible future.

And pray can you tell me who will make the call to decide which is a more critical system? The armed forces or some arm chair expert cum Internet warrior?

whoever makes the decision! i have the right to question it. and affect the decision in my own small way. why else would i waste time trying to get some of my thoughts to the fore?

It is widely accepted that India desperately needs Bofors type artillery pieces.

Now two question arise here.

1) Do you think we haven't been able to "procure those critical systems" because of a lack of money or due to some other reason?

2) Suppose we don't spend anything between $2.2 billion to $5.8 billion (that's the range we have) on the C-17s. Do you think that money would be immediately available for buying the howitzers and whatever other critical equipment we need?

then why have a defence budget and an outlay for capital acquisition? once the need is established by the forces the govt should go about procuring all that is required.

IMO, c-17s would rank far lower in the list of priorities of the armed forces, if it is there at all. now the PMO's or Foreign Office priorities might be different and that is what is being questioned. whenever this deal happens, it will be at the cost of more mundane and basic requirements. it will be luxury at the cost of necessity.

And this lead us to the third question, who's answer would be a great education for me.

3) Can you list, say three items, which are "critical systems" which the armed forces need but which haven't been bought because there's a lack of funds?

You know you need to answer that if you think that the money spent on C-17s is more urgently needed to buy something which is more "critical".

would you mind to scroll back a couple of pages to know that.

[Gilles]

any source for the PS-90 news ?

The Perm PS-90 was certified as a Chapter IV compliant engine only in 2007. It powers the Il-96-300, the Tu-204, the Tu-214 and the upgraded IL-76. The PS-90 was certified for the IL-76 only in 2006. That is only 4 years ago.

A Perm Engine Press release.

http://www.avid.ru/eng/pr/news/948/

According to the results of work in 2009 ten Russian aircrafts equipped with Perm PS-90A engines were first put into service. They were installed on three Тu-214 and two Тu-204-100 aircrafts as well as on Il-96-300, Il-96-400Т, Тu-204-300, Тu-204С and Il-76 aircrafts.

That is a total of 26 engines in a year, plus a few military orders that are not mentionned. That probably reflects the PS-90 production rate.

In 2010 "United Engine- Building Corporation " is planning to put 12 civil aircrafts into service. Even for the present time half of these aircrafts are equipped with Perm PS-90A engines. Even six 4-engined aircraft represents 24 engines.

It's important for us that the aircrafts with Perm engines can be put into service on time and so OJSC "Perm Engine Co." tries to strictly follow the delivery schedule of its engines to its customers. According to the production plan, this year OJSC "Perm Engine Co." shall produce engines, which, as per contract obligations, should be delivered both in 2010 and 2011.

In Aug 2007, Perm announced it had signed a contract with Silk Way for the sale of engines for a third Il-76TD-90.

http://www.avid.ru/eng/pr/news/588/

Well Silk Way's third brand new IL-76 was finally delivered to Silk Way airlines in May 2009 with D-30KP engines instead of the PS-90s. Why ? Probably because the aircraft was ready but the engines were not.

http://www.silkway-airlines.com/news.asp?pid=21

Here is the aircraft (Reg 4K-AZ70, fuselage number 9310) being towed to the runway in Tashkent in May 2009 for its delivery flight.

http://spotters.net.ua/file/?id=22230

Here is the same aircraft (4K-AZ70) in Silk Way livery (picture taken in June 2009)



Silk Way takes delivery of two PS-90 powered IL-76s and then receives the third one, which was supposed to be fitted with PS-90s with D-30KPs instead ? This is why I think that the factory that produces the PS-90s has a hard time keeping up with orders.

[Kersi D]

man this heckling over price reminds me of buying cheap wrist watches from dharmatala, the vendor starts off at Rs 500/- and eventually settles for Rs 45.

Those were the days. Remember the ink pens, rip offs made in China - yes even in those days China was making counterfeits!

But if the $2.2 billion price tag is indeed true, then hats off to our Babus and their Chai-Biskoot negotiation tactics!

Me thinks that for US$ 2.2 billion or US$ 5.xyz billion one get get a HELL OF A LOT of chai and biskoot !!!!!!
Must be chai with JW Blue label

K

[arnab]

I find this all very interesting. So far, the IA has made the following statements.

1. 80 % of our Tanks are night blind (yet not a peep about the 'worthiness' of existing acquisitions. We are told 'past is past' IA is lookting to the 'future' MBT)

2. IA wants to replace INSAS systems because they are not good enough (as if on cue Russia is testing newer versions of the AK series)

3. IA warns on executing better contract negotiations under FMS, as they have suffered on the servicability of WLRs (occassions where 2/3rds don't work at a time).

No wonder MMS has been saying - war is not an option Of course, 150 years ago, Abraham Lincoln had written to Gen McCllelan asking if he could borrow the army for a while, as the General does not seem to be using it. But then MMS is no Abe.

[shiv]

man this heckling over price reminds me of buying cheap wrist watches from dharmatala, the vendor starts off at Rs 500/- and eventually settles for Rs 45.

Those were the days. Remember the ink pens, rip offs made in China - yes even in those days China was making counterfeits!

Well I bought a laptop for my daughter 3 months ago and the China made charger conked out, and warranty promised to deliver a replacement in 48 working hours (after the weekend). Since it was urgent I went ahead and bought a spare charger from my usual supplier. Now here's the mystery. The new charger I bought was marked Rs 4800, but I paid Rs 1200 (which is normal with my usual supplier). The replacement charger that eventually arrived came with a price marked as Rs 350.

One never knows wtf is going on - and this is with seemingly "hi-tech" stuff.

But I have noticed similar issues with German made high tech medical equipment. Often the same "cottage industry" in Germany assemble the equipment and supply it to various companies. If you buy the stuff from a known brand name like Storz, they charge a bomb but provide after sales support. If you buy from a fly-by-night operator like Deepak Kohli you pay 1/3 the price but no support.

The situation with high tech instruments (such as those for Laparoscopic surgery) is even more murky. German made resterilizable instruments that cost Rs 12,000 each are avalable with variable reliability. Similar Indian instruments cost Rs 1500 each and can be serviced - their reliability is similar or lower. American made/supplied instruments for the same job cost Rs 8000 apiece but are supposedly "disposable" and should be discarded after one use. But they are of excellent quality and they are used for more than one procedure after resterilization - not just in India but in the "West" as well. In the US you will have your pants sued off if you are caught doing that.

Sorry to go OT - but pricing issues are really weird when you start digging deep. The thing is an aircraft will have thousands of sub-systems (such as wiring, glass panes or toilet taps) supplied by subcontractors who charge low rates because of the bulk orders they get. When suppliers get greedy and their game is revealeveryd they lose business - like the famous "US $1500 B-52 toilet seat story. I think the China craze took off when the Chinese realised that they could play this game better.

But still - the C 17 will be one massive and expensive "experiment" in the sense that I am sure the aircraft will be useful for India but only time will tell how useful and cost effective they are going to be in the long term. Will the US really meet its commitments? On the other hand, we will never know unless we try them. Why we should "try US supplied stuff" by spending so much is a moot point. But for sheer brochure advertised capability it is difficult to match the C-17.

[Gilles]

Brand new IL-76s being built at the Aviastar factory in Russia:

[amit]

Gilles do you have a date for the photos?

[Surya]

That really is one hyperactive production line


One forlorn shell sitting out there

[Sanku]

Shells have emotions? Perhaps it was just a loner who is withdrawn in its own shell?

[Surya]

Does not have enough to withdraw into its own shell yet

Probably waiting for the next part to be machined after the money is deposited

[Cain Marko]

Good enough for India anyway, which starts out getting fighters like MKI and LCA at a meagre 8 units per year!

CM.

[Singha]

where are the people ? out to lunch or left for the local tavern?

[Rahul M]

I do wonder what that enigmatic 476 means.

[Gilles]

Gilles do you have a date for the photos?

I don't know but they were posted on a Russian Forum in Jan of this year.

Here: http://www.forum-avia.ru/forum/5/5/1006 ... 55_2.shtml

[svinayak]

Acharya,

This is not to condone US actions. But the "They" here should include:

1) Russia,
2) France
3) Israel

and just about everyone else from whom we buy arms, besides, of course the Americans.

I know this personally since I do pricing and negotiations with customers directly. I know the margins and lot of massa companies make upto 30% or more in revenues from support deals.