PAK-FA and FGFA Thread

[Manish_Sharma]

India doesn't plan to have any more dhamakas. There's no point really, our security is not imperilled by not undertaking more tests. Even then, this self-restraint is only temporary. Nobody can sanction a USD 10 Trn economy. Even at that level India will still have 5-6 times headroom to grow based on western levels of per capita GDP. If we don't grow enough economically, there's no point in whining, because we would've been our worst enemies. Break out of our economic non-performance and the world is literally our oyster.

For all kinds of new missiles coming up and to get maximum boom for the buck yes Bharat needs to test to its heart's content. mms was at helm so there was no chance of testing, as mms even opposed 'Shakti 2' during PVNR time and after Vajpayee tested mms spoke against it for months having debtate with Shri K.R. Malkani.

Your statement "India doesn't plan to have any more dhamakas." is non-intelligent one. Did BARC scientists inform they don't have any new design after chidambaram to test? Or all the possible parties - coalitions who might form the next govt. inform?

So in the interest of us buying US equipment list of compromises go on getting longer:

1.) We need to prepare against sanctions.......

2.) We should make the transactions correctly.....

3.) Bharat does not need to test.....

[Viv S]

When we test the nukes who gets their knickers in twist apart from cheen-pakistan? Its US. For Russkies even if they protest its more like a show instead of real angst. French openly supported us, Shri Jackques Chirac said something on lines of "France understands Bharat's compulsions....."

No one does. India is a nuclear power and that genie's not going back in the bottle. Everyone knows it including the US govt. Unfortunately, your opposition is based on faith rather than logic.

Why buy from such an enemy supporter? Let it continue with super expensive French and unreliable russians and deshi mix, at the most buy Israeli.

How far do you suppose the Chinese would have gotten without Russian assistance and equipment?

Where would the J-10, J-11 & J-20 be without Al-31s? Where would the JF-17 be without the RD-93? How effective would its air defences have been without access to Russian SAMs and technology? Without exposure to the Russian Kilo-class subs (it operates twelve), how advanced would its domestic SSK program have been? Do you think Russia couldn't have stopped the Varyag sale to China? Did Indian support for Russia over Crimea stop the S-400 sale to China?

With a (now) 25 year old western embargo, China certainly didn't have any significant technology coming their way from there. Was the strong French insistence on lifting the embargo in India's interest?

For all kinds of new missiles coming up and to get maximum boom for the buck yes Bharat needs to test to its heart's content. mms was at helm so there was no chance of testing, as mms even opposed 'Shakti 2' during PVNR time and after Vajpayee tested mms spoke against it for months having debtate with Shri K.R. Malkani.

All kinds of new missiles don't require all kinds of new warheads. Having a working nuclear deterrent is what matters and we do have one. If the world treats as the Israeli nuclear arsenal as credible (despite the lack of overt testing), the same certainly applies to the tested and demonstrated Indian one.

Also for the record, the moratorium on nuclear testing was declared by the NDA govt. Its futile to allege that it was forced upon the nation by the UPA. Like it or not there is a strategic and political consensus against testing in India.

[Manish_Sharma]

When we test the nukes who gets their knickers in twist apart from cheen-pakistan? Its US. For Russkies even if they protest its more like a show instead of real angst. French openly supported us, Shri Jackques Chirac said something on lines of "France understands Bharat's compulsions....."

No one does. India is a nuclear power and that genie's not going back in the bottle. Everyone knows it including the US govt. Unfortunately, your opposition is based on faith rather than logic.

Anger in clinton and their media + and that albrite lady was real. It'd still be there no matter who is in charge. Actually you're projecting your own faith upon me.

Here I make a statement:

"That I am 100% sure in case Bharatvarsh tests nuclear weapons no matter what administration or president ruling the US they'll certainly put crippling sanctions agains us."

Why can't you make such a statement in case you've so logically gamed US response? Doesn't your logic have that much substance? Instead of ishaarebaazi just come out and say it. So I'll archive the connection and when the event happens one of use will be proven wrong and can come back to gently "see I told you so...." to other.

All kinds of new missiles don't require all kinds of new warheads. Having a working nuclear deterrent is what matters and we do have one. If the world treats as the Israeli nuclear arsenal as credible (despite the lack of overt testing), the same certainly applies to the tested and demonstrated Indian one.

Yes but lighter - smaller and more tested warheads will be in Bharat's self interests. We don't just have to make it look credible in world's eyes, but they have to be thoroughly tested and actually working in all sorts of conditions. Good that you brought up "Israeli nuclear arsenal as credible", no matter whether one agrees or not Dr. Santhanan the test scientist has raised a doubt on the fizzle of TN and some future PM and cabinet should have the right to test again to make Bharat safer.

Also for the record, the moratorium on nuclear testing was declared by the NDA govt. Its futile to allege that it was forced upon the nation by the UPA. Like it or not there is a strategic and political consensus against testing in India.

Vajpayee declared moratorium immediately after second series of tests as Clinton was making all sorts of efforts to crush Bharatvarsh with snake tony blair working against us behind the scene. Shri Vajpayee had even written a personal secret letter to clinton that "our tests are not pakistan but china centric", and what did clinton do? He publicised the letter to whole world, china was inflamed. I remember how the communists and especially congi natwar lal had humiliated Vajpayee over writing that ridiculous letter. So much for US needing Bharat's help against china's rise. All false! The moratorium was a majboori for the time being.

[NRao]

What kind of preparation?

Your problem. You have that fear. Figure it out. China and Pakistan should be able to help - after all they did something and the US looked the other way.

What is the big deal I am still not sure. If you want to do something go do it. Why all this "wordplay"?


India has plenty of other real problems - politicians that are robbing the nation, people watching T-20 and doing not much else, IT depending on out sourcing rather build the nation.

And, forget the US, even BD, Nepal, SL, Maldives, etc do not have much respect for India.


Moving along ................

[Manish_Sharma]

Your problem. You have that fear. Figure it out. China and Pakistan should be able to help - after all they did something and the US looked the other way.

What is the big deal I am still not sure. If you want to do something go do it. Why all this "wordplay"?


Moving along ................

Who knows whose fear, mine or yours that US might fail to sell another item.

Nope i predict you can't move along. Your are stuck in this loop of supporting US and opposing others......

YAMO !!!

[NRao]

Why would I support the US?

India should buy the MiG-29K version for her AF, but it is the AF that has asked for other options.

India should buy the Rafale for MMRCA, but at a reasonable price.

Same for FGFA.


Do *NOT* buy the F-35, please. Not meant for you.

I was the one who stated that I hope the C series are sanction proof.

All up to India. Pay $20 billion for the Rafale, $35 billion for the FGFA, do whatever you please please.

But, I still do not get what is this fear about testing. What is going to happen? Sanctions. So, live through it. Your fear.

But do not go ask Russia or France or any other nation to support India for a seat at the SC.

[Cain Marko]

Okay, I for one don't intend to continue with this - rebutting each point from Viv or Brar or NR's posts is way too time consuming. My points have already been made about the Pakfa/FGFA, and I feel they still stand:

1) It is as yet too early to determine the utility of the FGFA JV - the main funding requirement (worth $ 6 billion) has not been signed yet. Reading the issue from the words of former ACM Browne, this is the most critical phase of negotiations, and am sure hard bargaining is going on. We will see how it pans out, at least I don't see anything worthwhile in open sources that makes me feel that this is a bad deal perse - one off articles every now and again based on "sources" do not indicate much, esp. when they come from the likes of Shukla, whose support for the JSF stands very clear. Some "bashing" in public sources via the IAF is likely considering they want to strike a hard bargain, at least this is contrary to the initial eagerness shown by them. All in all, I doubt the program is going to be dropped and question the merit of doing so based on such reports. Having said this, I can completely understand the trepidation in investing in such a JV - perhaps an MKI type purchase might be a better idea....

2) As far as the performance parameters of the Pakfa are concerned, at least flight performance wise, it is well ahead of the JSF. While questions are being raised about its signature reduction (IR and RF), I really think that such analysis can only be truly done when the final product is available - the definitive engine, finish, and other measures are "in play" as per SDB sources. Not too long ago, many people were bashing the very idea of a Russian 5gen a/c, I think they were unpleasantly surprised when the Pakfa actually flew, and most first impressions have been quite favorable. The fact that the flight test program is running at a rather decent speed, without any serious hiccups is an indicator (imho) of the commitment to the program by Russia. There is v.little doubt, at least in my mind that this bird will be very competitive vs. the F-22, let alone the JSF.

3) As far as geopolitical considerations go, there is increasing discontent with the Indo-US relationship, be it via India's stance on Iran and Ukraine, the DK issue or the USG's discomfort with the possibility of a new dispensation under Modi. The worry of sanctions has far from blown away over the last 10 years, and it seems, from the noises the BJP manifesto caused, that future nuke testing cannot be entirely ruled out. In any case, the BJP is known to be quite supportive of France and Russia, with whom relations tended to suffer under the Congress leadership. It would also quite safe to assume that the BJP has not forgotten the sanction era either - all in all, the JSF seems very unlikely at this point (caveat: unless something truly drastic happens in the near future).

4) Bottomline from India's POV remains - "how to stay strategically independent as far as possible?". Does the FGFA offer anything in terms of future platforms such as the AMCA? Will it provide operational independence - if something happens, say another fall out in Russia? Is $ 30 billion affordable over the next 20 years? I am not sure in terms of Qs 1 and 2, although I believe there was a report of a HAL/DRDO official saying that it will help in terms of the AMCA, but as far as the last q is concerned, a $ 30 billion investment over 15 years is doable for India financially.

[Cain Marko]

Okay, I for one don't intend to continue with this - rebutting each point from Viv or Brar or NR's posts is way too time consuming. My points have already been made about the Pakfa/FGFA, and I feel they still stand:

1) It is as yet too early to determine the utility of the FGFA JV - the main funding requirement (worth $ 6 billion) has not been signed yet. Reading the issue from the words of former ACM Browne, this is the most critical phase of negotiations, and am sure hard bargaining is going on. We will see how it pans out, at least I don't see anything worthwhile in open sources that makes me feel that this is a bad deal perse - one off articles every now and again based on "sources" do not indicate much, esp. when they come from the likes of Shukla, whose support for the JSF stands very clear. Some "bashing" in public sources via the IAF is likely considering they want to strike a hard bargain, at least this is contrary to the initial eagerness shown by them. All in all, I doubt the program is going to be dropped and question the merit of doing so based on such reports. Having said this, I can completely understand the trepidation in investing in such a JV - perhaps an MKI type purchase might be a better idea....

2) As far as the performance parameters of the Pakfa are concerned, at least flight performance wise, it is well ahead of the JSF. While questions are being raised about its signature reduction (IR and RF), I really think that such analysis can only be truly done when the final product is available - the definitive engine, finish, and other measures are "in play" as per SDB sources. Not too long ago, many people were bashing the very idea of a Russian 5gen a/c, I think they were unpleasantly surprised when the Pakfa actually flew, and most first impressions have been quite favorable. The fact that the flight test program is running at a rather decent speed, without any serious hiccups is an indicator (imho) of the commitment to the program by Russia. There is v.little doubt, at least in my mind that this bird will be very competitive vs. the F-22, let alone the JSF.

3) As far as geopolitical considerations go, there is increasing discontent with the Indo-US relationship, be it via India's stance on Iran and Ukraine, the DK issue or the USG's discomfort with the possibility of a new dispensation under Modi. The worry of sanctions has far from blown away over the last 10 years, and it seems, from the noises the BJP manifesto caused, that future nuke testing cannot be entirely ruled out. In any case, the BJP is known to be quite supportive of France and Russia, with whom relations tended to suffer under the Congress leadership. It would also quite safe to assume that the BJP has not forgotten the sanction era either - all in all, the JSF seems very unlikely at this point (caveat: unless something truly drastic happens in the near future).

4) Bottomline from India's POV remains - "how to stay strategically independent as far as possible?". Does the FGFA offer anything in terms of future platforms such as the AMCA? Will it provide operational independence - if something happens, say another fall out in Russia? Is $ 30 billion affordable over the next 20 years? I am not sure in terms of Qs 1 and 2, although I believe there was a report of a HAL/DRDO official saying that it will help in terms of the AMCA, but as far as the last q is concerned, a $ 30 billion investment over 15 years is doable for India financially.

[NRao]

Cain Marko,

First of all you are an oldie, a veteran of plenty of wars on BR.

Second there is *really* no need to make one post into two, to make your point.

[Cain Marko]

^ Rao saab, the double post, rest assured was not intentional (least of all to make a point) - just an inadvertent mistake - new keyboard and mouse might have something to do with it. Strangely, I am unable to delete it - it seems your rather prompt response will not allow me to delete either of the posts - so yes, it is all your fault

[Viv S]

Anger in clinton and their media + and that albrite lady was real. It'd still be there no matter who is in charge. Actually you're projecting your own faith upon me.

I have faith that the US will do what is in its best interest. But faith is grounded in logic.

Here I make a statement:

"That I am 100% sure in case Bharatvarsh tests nuclear weapons no matter what administration or president ruling the US they'll certainly put crippling sanctions agains us."

Why can't you make such a statement in case you've so logically gamed US response? Doesn't your logic have that much substance?

Have said it in dozens of posts. The US will not sanction India in the event we test quite simply because it can't afford to. And yes we'll see - but can you arrange a series of nuclear tests to settle this debate? (I can't )

However let me ask you a question now - if you were the US govt and were faced with a new series of Indian tests what would you do? (Assume that you have no affiliation to India)

Yes but lighter - smaller and more tested warheads will be in Bharat's self interests. We don't just have to make it look credible in world's eyes, but they have to be thoroughly tested and actually working in all sorts of conditions. Good that you brought up "Israeli nuclear arsenal as credible", no matter whether one agrees or not Dr. Santhanan the test scientist has raised a doubt on the fizzle of TN and some future PM and cabinet should have the right to test again to make Bharat safer.

How is it in our self interest to learn how to kill civilians more efficiently? How does the capability of killing millions with TN warheads instead of killing millions with boosted-fission warheads make our country safer?

At the peak of the Cold War, the USSR had nearly 40,000 nuclear warheads compared to less than 25,000 for the US. So did that make the Soviet 'more powerful' than the Americans?

Vajpayee declared moratorium immediately after second series of tests as Clinton was making all sorts of efforts to crush Bharatvarsh with snake tony blair working against us behind the scene. Shri Vajpayee had even written a personal secret letter to clinton that "our tests are not pakistan but china centric", and what did clinton do? He publicised the letter to whole world, china was inflamed. I remember how the communists and especially congi natwar lal had humiliated Vajpayee over writing that ridiculous letter. So much for US needing Bharat's help against china's rise. All false! The moratorium was a majboori for the time being.

The text of the letter.

First, while it controversially named China, the letter did not say that the test is 'not pakistan but china centric'.

Second, they had phones in 1998. And an actually confidential message would have been verbally conveyed through the Indian Ambassador.

Third, the prediction of 'China's rise' (which was a long way off) hadn't gained currency at the time, so yes the US didn't need India to help contain China.


BTW, I note that despite a vehement statement vis a vis the US ('Why buy from such an enemy supporter?'), you've maintained a studious silence on the issue of Russian military exports and technical assistance to China and the French lobbying in the matter of lifting of the EU arms embargo on China.

[Viv S]

The fact that the flight test program is running at a rather decent speed, without any serious hiccups is an indicator (imho) of the commitment to the program by Russia.

That's a .... bold statement. Do you know this for a fact?

[NRao]

It is as yet too early to determine the utility of the FGFA JV - the main funding requirement (worth $ 6 billion) has not been signed yet. Reading the issue from the words of former ACM Browne, this is the most critical phase of negotiations, and am sure hard bargaining is going on. We will see how it pans out, at least I don't see anything worthwhile in open sources that makes me feel that this is a bad deal perse

There are some pointers:

* The earlier estimate for $5.5 billion was actually for a two seat FGFA, which was expected to have a larger wing, etc. Major modifications - as was explained then
* Then sometime around 2012-13ish the entire picture changed. It went from a two seat, 240 or so planes to a single seat and 140 planes or so - due to "cost". So I would think the total of $30 was to go down
* And it was revealed that:

Pogosyan further insisted that both Russian and Indian versions “will be based not only on the same platform, but also have identical onboard systems and avionics.” Indian air force specialists had been involved in working out specification to the aircraft “from the very beginning and through all development phases.” He continued, “It may happen that in future there will be some specific [national] requirements for onboard systems or additional missions, but these would be formally agreed by both customers.” Pogosyan expects the FGFA to follow the Su-30MKI/MKM example, in which “the Indian and Malaysian air forces use the very same platform, with the difference confined to a few avionics items.”

* BUT, the cost of this plane's R&D went UP to $6 billion. Perplexing. The recs go down, but the cost goes up. Of course nothing is in open source - so we talk about wait-n-see
* The Indian team's contribution also went down - not much to change in a plane that is already designed and flying - I guess
* Meanwhile the "definitive" engine is years away - 2020 at the earliest. More on that later
* The latest - Russia is not prepared to test the PAK-FA due to a lack of facilities - so that expect some delays
* Meanwhile R&D contract that was supposed to be signed in 2012, the first FGFA plane out in 2015 (above article - per CAS Himself), has not been signed. IF India signs in 2014 (say 2015 now) extrapolating the first FGFA should be out in 2018
* With the "Definitive" engine to take birth in 2020, it should mean, IF everything in that engine worked, that a recertification of the first FGFA from 2021ish onwards
* How things pan out - I for one hope this thinking does not last beyond mid 2014. India cannot wait that long. Having said that I have no idea what the alternative is

So, I do see plenty that makes me wonder about this deal.

I feel that the FGFA would be the best in the Indian stable, but will not meet the expectations of the IAF when it comes to a good "5th Gen" plane.

- one off articles every now and again based on "sources" do not indicate much, esp. when they come from the likes of Shukla, whose support for the JSF stands very clear. Some "bashing" in public sources via the IAF is likely considering they want to strike a hard bargain, at least this is contrary to the initial eagerness shown by them. All in all, I doubt the program is going to be dropped and question the merit of doing so based on such reports. Having said this, I can completely understand the trepidation in investing in such a JV - perhaps an MKI type purchase might be a better idea....

I have no idea why "Shukla" needs to be brought into this picture. I have not read his article on the JSF (I had no interest in the JSF then), but this article is about a quote attributed to the IAF. Coloring that quote will not change the fact about what the IAF stated.

The quote - itself - adds to the list of concerns I have above.

Pogosyan further insisted that both Russian and Indian versions “will be based not only on the same platform, but also have identical onboard systems and avionics.

On "JV" - this is not. I see a FGFA as a squadron numbers filler. It will *not* help the Indian labs. And the modifications India is requesting - I for one - do not see them costing $6 billion.

____________________________

I would like India delaying their decision for another year. This goes against what I said above - that India cannot afford a delay, but my feel is that the Russians are taking India for a royal ride.

[Cain Marko]

The fact that the flight test program is running at a rather decent speed, without any serious hiccups is an indicator (imho) of the commitment to the program by Russia.

That's a .... bold statement. Do you know this for a fact?

I meant that within a particular context: The program AFAIK has not had any crashes, serious fleetwide groundings, lack of funding issues etc. As compared to other fighter development projects worldwide, the pace seems quite competitive, and is nothing like what happened with previous Russian efforts such as the S-37 or 1.42.

The Russians are backing this one to the hilt and are almost holding off all other AF acquisitions including the Su-35. The flight testing program had completed well over 500 flights in 3-4 years and the team seems confident enough to allow some rather aggressive air show maneuvers for mere prototypes, and then there was the 7 hour flight to Zhukovsky rather early on.

[NRao]

Why would one expect the PAK-FA to have problems now?

IAF’s has several reasons to close down the MoD with the Russian FGFA, but the top three reasons as recorded in the minutes of the meeting were as follows:

1) Russians’ reluctance to share the design information with India and Indian Air Force
2) The engines of the fighter AL-41F1 are not as appealing as they just the upgraded versions of Sukhoi’s 30 MKI AL-31’s engines.
3) The exorbitant expenses involved in the project, a whopping $6 billion is what India is shelling out to co-develop the project, which would mean that a large part of IAF capital would remain locked up.

The Russian officials did have their counter arguments where they mentioned that the radar and the Al-41F engine is temporary and they would be developed eventually.

They just delivered the EW suite. There is a huge amount of work still to be still done.



Then there is the "FGFA" - the first one was supposed to be out in 2015!!!!!

It is not a apple to apple comparison. This PAk-FA is too raw.

[NRao]

It is not that the India has not faced issues with the PAK-FA/FGFA deal:

The case for speeding up India's domestic fifth generation fighter projects

This is a recent article: March 13, 2014.

The IAF's plan to start inducting the FGFA from 2022 onwards hangs in the balance and it remains to be seen if the earlier hope of getting a prototype each in 2014, 2017 and 2019 for trials at the HAL manufacturing facility at Ozhar actually materializes on schedule

The above refers to actually expecting a PAK-FA to be delivered to India as a "FGFA". It is *that* bad. (The 2014 should be 2015, I think.)

The best I could find about what the $11 billion will produce:

The final R&D contract is estimated to be worth 11 billion dollars with India and Russia each bearing half of the said amount. The development contract includes the cost of designing the airframe, setting up infrastructure at Ozhar, prototype manufacturing and flight testing related development costs.

Another data point:

The Ministry of Defence (MOD) knows that the timeframes mentioned above are becoming dicey and it has now established a committee to assess the rise in costs indicated by the Russian side.

Painfully aware of the issues associated with the development of the FGFA, the IAF in 2012 pared down its requirement to just 144 single seat fighters from the earlier requirement of 166 twin-seaters and 48 single seat versions.

[NRao]

are almost holding off all other AF acquisitions including the Su-35

I just read - in the past week or so - that since they expect some delays in the PAK-FA they are ordering some other planes - I do not recall which ones tho.

And, as I said, we should expect some issues when the "definitive" stuff comes. May be a good expectation is to follow what we did with the MKI - get PAK-FA with the current set of "stuff" (like the Su-27) and then get the real FGFA. But there is plenty of scope for problems to surface.

[NRao]

Oh, while googling I found this out-of-this-world gem:

Mar, 2013 :: The dragon gets a bear hug

The Amur-1650 submarine is far more silent and powerful than the Kilo-class submarines the Indian Navy has in its inventory. India’s Su-30MKI will be no match for China’s Su-35 which is powered by a higher thrust engine and boasts a more sophisticated radar, avionics and weapons, according to a leading Russian military expert, Konstantin Makienko.

It will also mark the first time that Russia has supplied China with more powerful weapon platforms compared with Russian-built systems India has in its arsenals. In the past, the opposite was the rule.

Someone was concerned about sanctions. And supply of plane to the other neighbor.

3 Amurs and 100 Su-35s?

And, of course:

Putin Approves Sale of S-400 to China

Beat that US!!

________________________

And, if it were not for some EU restrictions, France would be merrily selling stuff to the Panda.

[Cain Marko]

Rao sir, what exactly is your point?

On the one hand you say the FGFA is too expensive, not worth it, not up to par (based on IAF's critique of course) and so on, but then you mention

Having said that I have no idea what the alternative is

.

And therein lies the rub. Yes, the IAF would love a goldplated 5gen a/c that the current pakfa probably is not. Yes, it is dearly expensive, and of the IAF has always wanted western, "expensive" deals, and we can't really blame them, but India has never been able to afford the same, be they Mirages 20 years ago or today's Rafales.

As a result, we go back to the same point I originally brought out: Considering the cost, tech requirements ("good enough" if not the very best), geo-political constraints (read sanctions) etc., Russia still offers the best deals.

Keep in mind that current MRCA contestants cost upwards of $ 20 billion for smaller numbers. And then India wants a say, limited as it might be, in design, integration, IPR, and even exports. And before we even consider the JSF and restart the whole discussion cycle again (and this is not specific to you), do consider that the last Saudi F-15 deal cost close to $ 30 billion for 84 units and upgrade of current fleet. As a former CNS said about the much maligned Gorky deal, to paraphrase, "show me where you can get an a/c carrier for this price, and I will write you a check right now". IOWs, Show me a 5G fighter you can buy 150 odd units of, for $ 30 billion and I will concede surprise.

The only other alternative I see is - AMCA. But that is a dicey proposition too - and I doubt the IAF wants to risk the "tip of its spear" on this program (rightly or wrongly).

About the JV business, I'll reserve judgment - let us see if the actual R&D contract is signed (and if so, for what specifics and price points - there is no doubt a lot of give and take going on).

[Cain Marko]

Oh, while googling I found this out-of-this-world gem:

Mar, 2013 :: The dragon gets a bear hug

The Amur-1650 submarine is far more silent and powerful than the Kilo-class submarines the Indian Navy has in its inventory. India’s Su-30MKI will be no match for China’s Su-35 which is powered by a higher thrust engine and boasts a more sophisticated radar, avionics and weapons, according to a leading Russian military expert, Konstantin Makienko.

It will also mark the first time that Russia has supplied China with more powerful weapon platforms compared with Russian-built systems India has in its arsenals. In the past, the opposite was the rule.

Someone was concerned about sanctions. And supply of plane to the other neighbor.

3 Amurs and 100 Su-35s?

Ayyo, not so fast sir - did you forget this bit from that gem?

If the deals go through, it will be for the first time in a decade that Russia has delivered offensive weapons to China.

As you might (or might not) know, such noises have come from the Russians/Chinese for years in the past - some Chinese fellows were even seen snooping around a Su-35 at an airshow. But to no avail. Btw, even if the Su-35 does make it to the Chinese, the Super 30 as well as Pakfa/FGFA will be once again, ahead of the curve.

And, of course:

Putin Approves Sale of S-400 to China

Beat that US!!

No need, it has them comfortably beaten - at least Russia extracts it's pound of flesh for each deal, the US just gives it away to TSP - big difference if you ask me.

Btw, the S-400 is more of an immediate threat and response to the UKR crisis, Russia's way of making it a little more interesting for the US 7th fleet fighters in the Pacific I suppose. JMT of course.
________________________

[Cain Marko]

are almost holding off all other AF acquisitions including the Su-35

I just read - in the past week or so - that since they expect some delays in the PAK-FA they are ordering some other planes - I do not recall which ones tho.

And, as I said, we should expect some issues when the "definitive" stuff comes. May be a good expectation is to follow what we did with the MKI - get PAK-FA with the current set of "stuff" (like the Su-27) and then get the real FGFA. But there is plenty of scope for problems to surface.

I am in agreement here, this might be the way to go - seems like a safe route. But still, Russkis are known to offer some real deal sweeteners such as "free aircraft carriers" every now and again, who know they may give a free Borei this time. Hard for babu (with burnt fingers and what not) to refuse such things..

In any case, here is a possibly positive scenario for India:

http://voiceofrussia.com/news/2014_05_0 ... haul-4859/

At least the Russkis see it as important enough to tom tom it in their "voice", wonder if that is any indication of things to come?

[Austin]

EU and US does supply a lot of Military Technology to China be it Engine , Sonars , ASW choppers etc from Europe or Nuclear Technology , Missile Guidance from US.

The Talk of we do not supply Military Technology to China is just Hot Gas to Keep the Mr Clean Image but the deep within they are already doing this for decades.

It very hard for EU and US to stop their companies from Dealing with China , Overtly or Covertly as most of Western Defence Companies are privately owned and they need profit to sustain their business and what better than China ...... All the Western Export Control Laws are just there to fool the Abdul's of the world.

Here is some good link to sources of Western Exports to China

Europe ---> European Companies Are Supplying China With Billions In Weapons And Military Technology

Special Report - Chinese military's secret to success: European engineering

US -----> China’s Military Employment of American Dual-Use Technologies Janes

China: U.S. Companies Sell Dual-Use Nuclear Equipment

This Company Admitted To Illegally Sending US Military Technology To China

Israel Not to be left behind

Report: Israel Passes U.S. Military Technology to China

Not to mention US does not even apply Cat 1 MTCR Sanctions on China and Saudi for openly selling the entire IRBM to Saudi .....but are more than pro-active on applying sanction on Russia and India for Cryo Technology that by any stretch of imagination has no military use

[TSJones]

we're fairly certain saudia arabia doesn't have nukes. also iran has irbms and is a threat to saudia arabia. so saudia arabia has irbms. big deal. everybody in the neighborhood has irbms. I think syria's got 'em. even oman. wtf!? And India has them. where is it written that the us must cooperate with India in all aspects? Nobody thinks India is going to be buying the JSF. so buy the pak-fa and be happy. or better yet build your own. that would be a far better investment IMHO. and oh btw, qatar has a patriot missle battery and so does kuwait. got a problem with that?

we've got some nice gear for sale. if you like it buy it. if not, don't.

I don't go into the pawn shop and start complaining about all the stolen merchandise they have for sale. if i don't like it idon't buy it and i hardly ever go into a pawn shop cuz i don't like their attitude anout things. my choice.

[nrshah]

can I (dare) suggest that pls agree that we disagree and close the discussion running for some time?
No new points are getting discussed and same points and long articles are getting posted and reposted and again posted.

[Viv S]

I meant that within a particular context: The program AFAIK has not had any crashes, serious fleetwide groundings, lack of funding issues etc. As compared to other fighter development projects worldwide, the pace seems quite competitive, and is nothing like what happened with previous Russian efforts such as the S-37 or 1.42.

'No crashes' - yes buts that not unusual nowadays

'Fleetwide groundings' - ?? they have only five prototypes

'Lack of funding issues' - perhaps not immediately. But Russian defence spending has continued to grow without proportional economic growth. The defence budget now accounts for over 20% of the federal budget (up from about 12% in 2010) with another 17% committed to internal security (link). That's an extremely unstable budget balance especially since growth will be negligible if not actually negative this year.

The Russians are backing this one to the hilt and are almost holding off all other AF acquisitions including the Su-35. The flight testing program had completed well over 500 flights in 3-4 years and the team seems confident enough to allow some rather aggressive air show maneuvers for mere prototypes, and then there was the 7 hour flight to Zhukovsky rather early on.

'Aggressive air show maneuvers' say very little about the level of avionics or stealth that aircraft will achieve, which is really the primary cause for concern here. I can only hope that we don't pay them anything, until they formally demonstrate all critical aspects of the promised performance & cost, to the IAF & MoD.

[Viv S]

can I (dare) suggest that pls agree that we disagree and close the discussion running for some time?
No new points are getting discussed and same points and long articles are getting posted and reposted and again posted.

Take a look at the old MMRCA threads.

[Austin]

we're fairly certain saudia arabia doesn't have nukes.

Who else bank rolls Pakistani Nuclear Program and the desire to have Sunni Nuclear Weapons

The question is not about Nukes any way .....its about illegal transfer of IRBM missile as a whole to Saudi and not applying MTCR sanctions on both countries when its a clear violation of Cat 1 sanctions.

On the contrary US was very quick to apply MTCR sanctions on India and Russia when Cryo Engine was transferred back in 90's and that had zero military applications.

Talk about Double Standards

[Austin]

But Russian defence spending has continued to grow without proportional economic growth. The defence budget now accounts for over 20% of the federal budget (up from about 12% in 2010) with another 17% committed to internal security (link). That's an extremely unstable budget balance especially since growth will be negligible if not actually negative this year.

Defence Spending is much of a function of Budget Revenue and Expenditure and less of GDP Growth.

So if you earn X amount and spend Y from Budget you have to make sure you borrow the difference or better build a balance budget.

Russian Budget is very much balanced with Deficit not more than 0.5 % of GDP most time it has got budget surplus and its Public Debt is very low at 12 % of GDP compared to say BRIC country that has around 45 % Debt or most Europe hovering at 80-90 % or US which is much greater than GDP.

So Defence Budget spending is affordable problem considering they have Balanced Budget , Low Debt and Surplus Reserves.

There are many countries that have negative growth or less growth under 1 % and very high Debt but they still spend more on defence or have been consistently spending more on Defence in past two decades.

BTW your figures are wrong , the total Defence Expenditure including Internal Defence Expenditure ( National Defence Expenditure ) is projected to rise to 20 % of Today Budget Expenditure in 2016

http://www.ato.ru/content/russian-defen ... grow-again

Defense expenditures will grow steadily as a proportion of the country’s overall budget from 15.6% in 2013 to 17.8% in 2014, 19.7% in 2015, and 20.6% in 2016. The defense budget will amount to 3.4% of Russia’s GDP in 2014, 3.8% in 2015, and 3.9% in 2016 – a significant increase from the 3.2% level reported in 2013.

[Viv S]

No need, it has them comfortably beaten - at least Russia extracts it's pound of flesh for each deal, the US just gives it away to TSP - big difference if you ask me.

Deliveries to Pakistan under the Foreign Military Funding heading equals about $2 billion since 2001. The remainder was under FMS. See here

And the loans and grants to the Pak govt weren't free either. $65 billion in economic losses and climbing. A new professional & hostile army to the north-west. Over 15,000 military casualties. Also while the US is pulling out of the Af-Pak region, Pakistan is left with a fractured society and a domestic insurgency that has supplanted India as the primary threat to the state.

Since 2001, their deployment on the LoC/IB has fallen to record lows while the strategic balance vis-a-vis India has tipped decisively in our favour. How much of that can be chalked up to US involvement as opposed to plain mismanagement... debatable.

Now India's military equation vis a vis China has definitely tipped in China's favour. Given that they haven't been able to build a reliable 4th gen mil turbofan, how much of that can we chalk up to Russia?

Btw, the S-400 is more of an immediate threat and response to the UKR crisis, Russia's way of making it a little more interesting for the US 7th fleet fighters in the Pacific I suppose. JMT of course.

Its most certainly a threat to us. But a more important question is - can we rely on the PAK FA to counter this supposedly 'anti-stealth' system?

[NRao]

Given that France, EU, US and Russia are either over or under the table passing technologies to the Chinese, the question I have is which plane (3/4/5 gen, whatever) is best for India to field against them?

I had asked the question if the FGFA could overcome a S400 system. Could a FGFA deal with this env?

I recall a French military person stating that if India were to buy the rafale India would *not* get the threat library built by France.

By extension I would not expect any other nation to part with such a library.

[NRao]

the US just gives it away to TSP - big difference if you ask me

Pure BS.

Even India is expecting things from A'stan for the support India is providing them.

You really think the US will give anything free?

[NRao]

Defence Spending is much of a function of Budget Revenue and Expenditure and less of GDP Growth.

So if you earn X amount and spend Y from Budget you have to make sure you borrow the difference or better build a balance budget.

Russian Budget is very much balanced with Deficit not more than 0.5 % of GDP most time it has got budget surplus and its Public Debt is very low at 12 % of GDP compared to say BRIC country that has around 45 % Debt or most Europe hovering at 80-90 % or US which is much greater than GDP.

So Defence Budget spending is affordable problem considering they have Balanced Budget , Low Debt and Surplus Reserves.

Plenty of ways to skin a cat.

However, my all time fav stat:

Russia will probably require an average Brent oil price of $117.8 a barrel this year to balance its budget, the fifth straight year it’s needed crude above $100 and compared with break-even prices of $90.3 for Saudi Arabia and $65 for Kazakhstan, Deutsche Bank AG said in a May 10 report.

Fivefold Increase

Russia has seen a more than a fivefold increase from 2006, when it needed Brent to average $21.4, according to Deutsche Bank. Brent is the benchmark used to price more than half of the world’s oil, including Urals.

Their budgets are "balanced" because the price of oil has helped them with it. This is not a sustainable model.

And a very disingenuous one if that is what they follow and do not say so.

Also recall a very, very well known Finance Minister resigned - a few years ago - because of disagreement with Def allocations.

[Viv S]

EU and US does supply a lot of Military Technology to China be it Engine , Sonars , ASW choppers etc from Europe or Nuclear Technology , Missile Guidance from US.

The Talk of we do not supply Military Technology to China is just Hot Gas to Keep the Mr Clean Image but the deep within they are already doing this for decades.

Just went through the links you posted. Turns out I certainly wasn't aware of the European exports to China. The US exports on the other hand seemed decidedly low grade stuff - jeeps, ATVs, Segways. And the only sale of controlled technology resulted in criminal prosecution for the company (P&WC).

Not to mention US does not even apply Cat 1 MTCR Sanctions on China and Saudi for openly selling the entire IRBM to Saudi .....but are more than pro-active on applying sanction on Russia and India for Cryo Technology that by any stretch of imagination has no military use

The IRBMs were sold in 1987, the same year that the MTCR was enacted. Unless the MTCR can be applied retrospectively it likely wasn't applicable.

From the web -

Verification and Compliance: The MTCR is an informal non-treaty association of governments sharing common interests, and therefore has no formal mechanism to enforce compliance. The implementation of the MTCR is dependent on the resolve of its Member States. The Member States usually deal with the implementation of the MTCR somewhat differently. The United States, being the most ardent MTCR participant, backs the implementation of the MTCR by a sanctions law, whereas other States have used a more low-profile approach. The only countries besides the nuclear-weapon states with long-range missiles or space-launch vehicles are India, Iran, Israel, Japan, and Saudi Arabia. China's sale of some tens of 3,000-km range DF-3 (CSS-2) missiles to Saudi Arabia in 1988 — the only transfer of missiles having a range greater than 600 km (aside from the US sale of Polaris and Trident missiles to Britain) — caused an international uproar and helped strengthen measures such as the MTCR. No further sales have occurred.

Most of this is ancient news. Since 2008 India is publicly committed to following MTCR export guidelines and since 2010 the US has officially supported Indian membership of the MTCR (although I'm not sure what's happening on that front).

[Austin]

How does it matter when the IRBM was sold and who is to confirm it wasnt sold after 1988 ( which BTW would mean those missile are 26 years old and unoperational which will likely not be the case so newer missile or its components would have been supplied over period of years to replace older ones which would invite Cat 2 sanctions )

The point is MTCR sanctions are applied selectively based on US interest and the same sanction were applied on India stating Cryogenic Engine would be used for Missile.

And the only sale of controlled technology resulted in criminal prosecution for the company (P&WC).

They just paid a token fine amount and was let go ...which is how pretty much US does with its company involved with violation of norms just pay some money and let them go free

[Viv S]

Defence Spending is much of a function of Budget Revenue and Expenditure and less of GDP Growth.

So if you earn X amount and spend Y from Budget you have to make sure you borrow the difference or better build a balance budget.

Russian Budget is very much balanced with Deficit not more than 0.5 % of GDP most time it has got budget surplus and its Public Debt is very low at 12 % of GDP compared to say BRIC country that has around 45 % Debt or most Europe hovering at 80-90 % or US which is much greater than GDP.

I'm not suggesting that their economy is going to collapse '91 fashion. The trouble here is that Putin needs to keep social spending high enough for his govt to retain public support. And with security spending consuming 37% of the budget, something's gotta give. Either they'll have to cut back on defence or run up the national debt (which leads to a new set of problems).

So Defence Budget spending is affordable problem considering they have Balanced Budget , Low Debt and Surplus Reserves.

They have low debt and surplus reserves as a result of conservative defence spending levels over the last decade (as well as the boom in the commodities market). The current spending spree on the other hand is a break from tradition. There's a good likelihood that it'll eventually scale it back.

BTW your figures are wrong , the total Defence Expenditure including Internal Defence Expenditure ( National Defence Expenditure ) is projected to rise to 20 % of Today Budget Expenditure in 2016

http://www.ato.ru/content/russian-defen ... grow-again

Those figures were taken from Jane's. The 'national defence expenditure' apparently doesn't account for internal security.

[Austin]

Ok I got what you are trying to say Internal Security as in Paramilitary Forces etc .... those are always under different entity , even in India MHA has a separate budget and a big one at that.

I'm not suggesting that their economy is going to collapse '91 fashion. The trouble here is that Putin needs to keep social spending high enough for his govt to retain public support. And with security spending consuming 37% of the budget, something's gotta give. Either they'll have to cut back on defence or run up the national debt (which leads to a new set of problems).

The budget is set till 2016 and the Budget Deficit is projected at 0.5 % of GDP ....also a low debt means even to catch up to BRICS level there is good reserve more than 3x times ....... ofcourse if the World Economy collapses as it happend in 2008 as is likely hood is high of US Economy Collapsing like 2008 then Oil Prices will fall drastically as it happened in 2008 and then it would affect budget revenue in significant way.

[Viv S]

How does it matter when the IRBM was sold and who is to confirm it wasnt sold after 1988 ( which BTW would mean those missile are 26 years old and unoperational which will likely not be the case so newer missile or its components would have been supplied over period of years to replace older ones which would invite Cat 2 sanctions )

Do we know for a fact that the missiles are operational and/or have received technical support from China?

The point is MTCR sanctions are applied selectively based on US interest and the same sanction were applied on India stating Cryogenic Engine would be used for Missile.

Agreed. But grudges aside, that 'selective' application is exactly why fresh sanctions are not an issue - US strategic interests are now and will continue to be determined by their geopolitical tussle against China for a long long time still.

And the only sale of controlled technology resulted in criminal prosecution for the company (P&WC).

They just paid a token fine amount and was let go ...which is how pretty much US does with its company involved with violation of norms just pay some money and let them go free

The fact that its the only significant case of embargo related American corporate malfeasance in recent times would suggest otherwise. Given that the objective is to deter this sort of action (which worked) and not to crush the company, the fine amount was sufficient.

[Viv S]

Ok I got what you are trying to say Internal Security as in Paramilitary Forces etc .... those are always under different entity , even in India MHA has a separate budget and a big one at that.

India's internal security budget is roughly Rs 60,000 crore. About 3.5% of the Union Budget.

The budget is set till 2016 and the Budget Deficit is projected at 0.5 % of GDP ....also a low debt means even to catch up to BRICS level there is good reserve more than 3x times ....... ofcourse if the World Economy collapses as it happend in 2008 as is likely hood is high of US Economy Collapsing like 2008 then Oil Prices will fall drastically as it happened in 2008 and then it would affect budget revenue in significant way.

The Russian economy is hugely dependent on the commodities market and proportionately susceptible to shocks in the commodities market. Its been overtaken by US as the world's biggest gas producer (exports are starting to Japan, SK and India) and we may see Europe diversifying its sources. The shale revolution in China is projected to reduce imports by upto half before the end of the decade. Its important for Russia therefore to reform its economy and reduce its excessive dependence on the export of natural resources. So far, it (like India) simply assumed that the boom would last for ever and went on upping spending.

[Austin]

India's internal security budget is roughly Rs 60,000 crore. About 3.5% of the Union Budget.

Yes yet we have 4.6 % Budget Deficit ... Hope you see the point .....the key is to get a balanced budget or as low as deficit as possible the rest is all on how you spend and earn.

The Russian economy is hugely dependent on the commodities market and proportionately susceptible to shocks in the commodities market. Its been overtaken by US as the world's biggest gas producer (exports are starting to Japan, SK and India) and we may see Europe diversifying its sources. The shale revolution in China is projected to reduce imports by upto half before the end of the decade. Its important for Russia therefore to reform its economy and reduce its excessive dependence on the export of natural resources. So far, it (like India) simply assumed that the boom would last for ever and went on upping spending.

I think you understand economics less than Defence , I can easily rebut these points be it Gas Exports , Shale Revolution , Too much dependent on resource coz we have discussed all this on Economy Thread in great detail .....but I will let it go since we are already on a tangent on this thread.

India like China has still growth potential so we will grow irrespective how deep dirt we stand today ...Russian economy are already advanced and it will grow slower ......so as long as the Oil/Gas price remains high ( and thats really not Russian only problem but also the entire Gulf ,Norway etc ) they would sail through... the only factor that remains when we have the next 2008 till then enjoy.

Never Mind my last post on this we covered all topics except the one the thread belongs to may be Admin can clear it.

[NRao]

The Russian economy is hugely dependent on the commodities market and proportionately susceptible to shocks in the commodities market. Its been overtaken by US as the world's biggest gas producer (exports are starting to Japan, SK and India) and we may see Europe diversifying its sources. The shale revolution in China is projected to reduce imports by upto half before the end of the decade. Its important for Russia therefore to reform its economy and reduce its excessive dependence on the export of natural resources. So far, it (like India) simply assumed that the boom would last for ever and went on upping spending.

In addition, Putin stated that Russia was dependent on oil up to 50%, most others estimate it to be higher at 60% and yet a few estimate it to be much higher.

Include the fact that their oil systems are old and no investment has been made to modernize it the story gets even more serious. There are a few more indicators that show that the Russian economy is not as healthy as it can be.

On balancing the budgets, Russia is one a very, very few nations that traditionally has balanced her budget and kept her external debt low. But that is not an indicator of good economic health.