Dismiss Notice
Welcome to IDF- Indian Defence Forum , register for free to join this friendly community of defence enthusiastic from around the world. Make your opinion heard and appreciated.

Pakistani / Turkish defence cooperation

Discussion in 'South Asia & SAARC' started by Sancho, Oct 25, 2017.

  1. Sancho

    Sancho Lt. Colonel Technical Analyst

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    Messages:
    5,558
    Likes Received:
    3,383
    http://quwa.org/2017/10/22/prime-minister-abbasi-confirms-t129-milgem-talks-turkey/

    @proud_indian

    See what I mean, while we keep talking and talking what we can do with our defence budget, they are getting things done at least on equal level, without that much money.

    What's even worse is, they got out of dependency from the US, with all the limitations it got them, by choosing reliable partners. We are getting into dependency to the US, by moving away from reliable partners.

    We are discussing how to develop trainers, they are exporting them.

    We talk about buying foreign helicopters, they about co-developing them.

    Our only NG fighter co-development is delayed. They now have 2 co-development options and can choose, which fits their purposes and budget better...
    ...
    ...
     
    Last edited: Oct 25, 2017
    T-123456, proud_indian and Agent_47 like this.
  2. ranadd

    ranadd 2nd Lieutant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2016
    Messages:
    320
    Likes Received:
    323
    Country Flag:
    India
    Well, army run the government there. So they pick wisely.

    Here, we have idiots running the governments. Colors change. But still idiots. “Hard work more important than Harvard”. Well, we bigger idiots vote them in. So...
     
    Wolfpack likes this.
  3. Gessler

    Gessler Lt. Colonel Technical Analyst

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2012
    Messages:
    9,738
    Likes Received:
    9,633
    Country Flag:
    India
    Erm...what exactly did they get done so far? The news about T129 purchase was doing the rounds for over 5 years.

    Last I checked, Pakistan just began taking deliveries of their new AH-1Z Vipers, partly paid for by the US Navy.

    China isn't a reliable partner of Pak - it is an all-consuming force that is eating up Pakistan's autonomy from the inside-out. Military, Economy, Infrastructure, and everything will be controlled by CPC sooner or later. In fact if you ask me, Pakistan would have had far more autonomy under US.

    And the only reason why Pakistan is okay with this is their paranoia about India (and the emerging India-US axis). The rule in Pak is that as long as you're willing to help them against India, you are free to bend them over as you wish.

    I wouldn't venture to call it 'dependency'.

    And speaking of dependency, it appears Pak will be in no position to buy these choppers unless Turkey provides a $1.5bn loan. And another $400mn for the MILGEM corvettes.

    Basically, YOU have to pay Pakistan upfront to have them 'buy' your stuff. The accumulated amount likely revolves around for decades and adds to Pakistan's circular debt.

    And when all is said and done, let's not forget the T129's engines are from Rolls-Royce/Honeywell. As are many other components & systems from US suppliers, which are extremely susceptible to sanctions. If Pak were to buy the WZ-10 in large numbers (afaik, they trialed out a couple birds but no news of it since then) then THAT would have been a major move away from US 'dependency'. But that's not happening at a tactical level - the F16 remains the primary PAF fighter and their plans for J-10B/FC-20 purchase seem to have been given a silent burial.

    Compare this to the much costlier Rafale deal which has actually translated into a contract, despite having taken a long time to fructify.

    They made a right call in locally producing the SAAB MFI-17 Supporter (the locally-made version known as Mushshak/Super Mushshak). I have some serious doubts about the 'customers' of these trainers, and the basis of how they are bought, but I'll give this one to you - HAL bungled up big time with a lot of trainer projects stuck in development hell for one reason or another.

    ?? What is there to co-develop? T129 ATAK is already operational.

    If you mean local production, I'll wait for when the Pakistanis are actually able to do more with the T129 than what India is doing with the Apache. Remember TATA produces the AH-64 fuselage in India.

    Even if you discount that, HAL has an unassailable lead on Pak when it comes to helicopters.

    Dhruv ALH
    LCH
    LUH

    Personally I don't really consider the TFX a serious project that can actually get anywhere....the FGFA (Phase-2) will be a world-beater whenever it comes. As of now we have two aircraft that are overall technologically superior to anything PAF has in hand (Su-30MKI production ongoing, Rafale about to arrive in couple years).

    Personally, I only see the Shenyang J-31/FC-31 as a viable aircraft for PAF. But that aircraft too is beset with engine issues - at the moment the prototypes still use MiG-29 engines (correct me if I'm wrong) which is laughable. The WS-10 and its variants receive priority as far as Chinese engine development/production goes, the WS-13 clearly takes a back seat. And even if we disregard all that - we still can't forget that these engines are massively inferior to Western models.
     
  4. BlackOpsIndia

    BlackOpsIndia Lieutenant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2016
    Messages:
    716
    Likes Received:
    1,352
    Country Flag:
    India
    Calling Turkey a reliable defence partner for Pak is like calling India a reliable partner for Vietnam.

    We both produce under development stuff that nobody else buy except the one who got has no money. That's not exactly reliability or capable defence partnership.

    Also the budget to Geo political ambition ratio of Pak is hilarious. They need Russia, large army, China, Turkey and all advance stuff on a budget that can barely feed the current army, that's the reason for many more years you will keep hearing Pakistan is in negotiations with this or that unless someone finance it and donate something for free.
     
    Wolfpack likes this.
  5. Sancho

    Sancho Lt. Colonel Technical Analyst

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    Messages:
    5,558
    Likes Received:
    3,383
    We are talking about defence and they got them new fighters, with stand off strike capabilities, AWACS, modern Frigates and AIP SSKs. While the US only sold 2nd hand or old stuff, with limited capabilities and numbers.
    Pakistan now has the freedom to add own or western weapons and techs, which they couldn't with US arms and that multiplies their tactics and strategies by far. That's why you are highly mistaken, of you belive the limit F16 is their prime fighter.

    We had the same freedom with Russian arms and got to that level with Israelis and Europeans over time too, but look at how many agreements we had to sign with the US, just to integrate our own communication systems into C130, C17 or P8. It is still not clear if they will provide any long range A2G weapon, which they haven't during MMRCA, customisation and tech transfer is limited or not allowed right away and I'm eagerly waiting to see more details on the limitations on the US drone.

    A reliable partner in defence, doesn't limit your capabilities, but helps you to get stronger!

    And they are still getting these loans, for whatever reasons and from multiple countries. So we can't simply say they have no money and can't keep up. They know how to get the money and they even are ahead of us in many parts of defence modernisation. Which shows us how inefficient we are, be it in procurement or development of arms and techs, when even the less capable enemy can do better.

    We have to step up our game, especially on the development side. All the failures and delays of own developments, got us way behind and we haven't used the chances for co-developments efficiently either.

    Not the T129, but possibly a 10t MRH as the article says.
    And still is not able to properly export them, not to mention that the helicopter section is the only successful field after decades of developments in the aero field of ADA, NAL and HAL and still, we will procure 100s of foreign helicopters now too.

    As long as they get support of BAE, Saab, or Airbus, there is no reason not to be successful, because Turkey is doing it the right way! Using their access to foreign arms designs or tech partners, while limiting their parts to what they actually can deliver (weapons, avionics...). They already selected partners for design, engines and where are we for AMCA? And this opens a new door for Pakistan as well, since China would limit them largely to Chinese radar and techs if they choose J31, while the TFX can get them latest European techs.
     
  6. stephen cohen

    stephen cohen Lieutenant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2016
    Messages:
    906
    Likes Received:
    1,187
    Country Flag:
    India
    Pak army is the Only reason why Pakistan is in such Deep Mess today

    You seem to be a devotee of Prasun Sen Gupta who believes that he is the ONLY wise
    man in India ; ask him to Come out on TV and stand in elections

    India's problem is Lack of Technology

    Hence we have to import everything

    That then leads to prioritisation of needs and demands

    Given our Huge needs ; every thing is Not possible in a short while

    Ten Years of Neglect and mess will take time to Sort out
     
  7. Gessler

    Gessler Lt. Colonel Technical Analyst

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2012
    Messages:
    9,738
    Likes Received:
    9,633
    Country Flag:
    India
    The US imposes serious limitations on quantum of technologies it sells to either India or Pak. And even then, you have to admit they have sold far more advanced & latest equipment to India (which still hasn't signed many of the foundational agreements) compared to what they've sold to Pak (which basically bent over for the US for the larger part of the Cold War and still does in many ways). This is partly thanks to our ability to pay amounts up front (not dependent on loans/credit lines opened by the seller) and partly due to the US need to stay competitive in a market dominated by Russians until then (and also partly because they want to prop us up against China).

    Pak has China to give it unrestricted/flexible tech? We have Russia & France.

    And guess what - we don't even need to surrender our economic future & political autonomy to either of those countries!

    No matter how you put it, we are in a better position internationally vis-a-vis Pakistan.

    But at what cost?

    In some specific aspects, yes. But that doesn't necessarily translate into a long-lasting status quo most of the time.

    For example, when we started inducting Su-30MKI, it was technologically superior to anything the Chinese PLAAF had. Today, that's not the case anymore.

    Small tactical advantages (thanks to timely decisions/quickened purchases etc.) may crop up here and there, but we need to keep perspective of the long-term plans and act according to that.

    Ah, didn't notice that.

    We don't build choppers with intention to export. We build them to meet our requirements. And the exports are not really a measure of success. IMO, the wide range of harsh environments and multitude of mission profiles that helicopters like Dhruv have executed over the years are success enough. Many of the highly-exported models like Eurocopter would possibly fail in such environments & altitudes.

    ....compared to no successes at all on the Pakistani side in the aero field (as far as development is concerned).

    That's just the way it is. We can't do everything at once - will need impossible amounts of funding for that. Defense production is not the only priority of the GoI, we have other concerns as well beyond military.

    But rest assured the quantum of helicopters produced by HAL (in various categories) will only increase from here on out and so far indications suggest the Mi-17 replacement could be Indian. We're already license producing turboshafts and even developing our own for future choppers. Pakistan is NOWHERE in comparison.

    The LUH is progressing nicely and that alone could constitute hundreds of orders from IAF/IA alone. Dhruv production run will cross 250 units. Add to that nearly 200 each of Rudra and LCH.

    Dude, we have order books for some nearly ~1,000 helicopters from HAL alone. The foreign purchases of Mi-17s, Chinooks & Apaches are small-scale as far as numbers go. All of the ones we buy off the shelf don't constitute even 50% of what we buy from HAL numbers-wise.

    And I'm not even counting local production (MII) plans for Naval MRH and NUH.

    And if TFX is really gonna go with all that European support....then good luck for Pakistan's plans of moving away from Western dependency.

    I'm trying to figure out how many billions the Turks will have to cough up to persuade Pakistan to stop window-shopping and do the actual shopping for once (wrt TFX).
     
    zebra7 and GSLV Mk III like this.
  8. Sancho

    Sancho Lt. Colonel Technical Analyst

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    Messages:
    5,558
    Likes Received:
    3,383


    Compared to PAK, not compared to anybody else. NATO countries and partners can customise F16s and F18s with other weapons or techs, can we?
    Gulf countries got SLAM-ER missiles to strike Iran if necessary, do we get them?
    If not there are limitations from the US to us and we have to compare it to what else we have on offer, not to what the US sells PAK.

    Just that the government is going away from Russia as a partner and might go for F16s instead of French Rafales. That's why we are moving towards more dependency and less freedom!

    I never said we wouldn't be, but that we don't use it to our advantage to full extend. Otherwise we would have used more joint developments in the LCA programme from the start and not only consultancy, after we messed it up.
    Even now for AMCA, there is no focus on teaming up with other countries or industrial partners, which shows how we waste our chances. MTA already got killed, which puts us into dependency to import more foreign aircrafts and if we mess up FGFA somehow, it only gets worse, maybe with F35 imports.

    How do you rate the cost for independence and freedom of customisations and indigenisation? Do you expect the F16 to even remotely reach the amount of indigenisation of the MKI?

    That's why the MKI gets an upgrade soon, to make it more capable than anything China has and why we badly need Su 57 to counter J20 too. Nothing the US is ready to provide us, will counter China in the same manner.

    They are exporting aircrafts and producing parts for export JF17s as well, so they already have success within their capabilities, with a fraction of the costs and development time. While we have pumped high amounts of money into several projects, with hardly any return and the only successful product, is the one that we made similar to what PAK or Turkey does, by teaming up with a foreign partner / based on a foreign platform.
     
  9. Gessler

    Gessler Lt. Colonel Technical Analyst

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2012
    Messages:
    9,738
    Likes Received:
    9,633
    Country Flag:
    India
    India is not a NATO/SEATO country.

    That remains to be seen. The SE MII is in a very nascent stage and drawing conclusions regarding such details at this point wouldn't get us anywhere, IMHO.

    Did we even ask for them?

    What US sells to UK/NATO/other, clearly 'subordinate' countries is frankly none of our business. Only thing we should concern ourselves with is: what we asked for, and what US is giving us. And ofcourse, also about what US is supplying our regional adversaries (already accounted for in my previous post. India did a LOT LESS for America than Pak, and yet received/offered technology that is clearly superior to anything Pak has in that category).

    In short, the value of Indian business is worth much more to the people in Washington than Pakistani 'business'...or, (cough) aid program.

    AFAIK, there is not a single major technology that Indian MoD/forces have put forth a proposal for so far, which has been outright rejected. Yes, there are conditions but that's the price of dealing with a superpower - and especially when the product they're offering has no competitor. And majority of the 'foundational agreements' India will be signing will be in order to get those techs which no other country is willing to or capable of giving us.

    Like a modern long range Maritime Patrol aircraft. Or EMALS.

    Simply put - no other country can ever DREAM of taking Russia's position as a strategic partner to India. Just because FGFA could be put in the freezer (till the time Phase-II tech is available/matured) does not mean India is moving away from Russia. We still have huge deals in the works: S400, Super-MKI upgrade, Adm. Grigorovich frigates, and of course who can forget Russia's cooperation in our nuclear submarine program?

    When the US is ready to offer India nuclear submarine tech (which will be never), THEN I will believe India is moving away from Russia.

    Until then, it's not happening. And the GoI knows as much.

    Nothing can stop IAF from having a minimum of 72 Rafales. As per Parikrama's info, recently even NSA Doval is warming to the idea of pushing Rafale ahead of any SE MII program.

    The LCA development was an exhibition of how not to manage a fighter aircraft program. No arguments about that. But also, let's not forget the period when we were making the Tejas was a tumultuous time as far as India's relations with the West went. Small scale joint activities here and there apart, there was pretty much no mechanism to engage the agencies & governments of India & major Western countries (especially Europe) to jointly work toward something of mutual value.

    But rest assured that attitude is changing. Initiatives are being taken.

    An example is the Safranized Kaveri project - which is already progressing at a brisk pace and holds great promise.

    AFAIK, there is a lot of potential for collaboration on both AMCA and IUSAV with the French in the near future. With the FGFA looking like it might be heading to the freezer, this possibility (Indo-French aircraft) could gather some mass IMO.

    Although it might look like it - it's my sincere belief that GoI is not simply blinded by American love. They are instead extremely wary of even the slightest changes in US outlook in the region and are carefully considering the benefits and risks of every move. Putting all the eggs in one basket is something India did not do even during the Cold War and it sure as hell isn't something we'd do today.

    That's just absurd. Putting a 'Pakistani made' stamp on Swedish-origin or Chinese-origin aircraft does not make them comparable to the level of aerospace industry in India.

    We make parts for S-92, C-130J, A330, CH-47, AH-64, F/A-18, and countless other military/civilian aircraft that are sold all over the world. And that's not even talking about the 1,000+ combat aircraft airframes built in India so far (MiG-21/23/27, Jaguar, Ajeet, Marut, Su-30MKI etc.), and hundreds of helicopters & transports. In comparison Pak has built what? A couple dozen JF-17 airframes? That's it....no helos, no transports, no nothing.

    Lol - I can't believe you even found it appropriate to compare the two industries.

    You need to acquire some additional perspective on this issue, bro.

    ...and a fraction of the capability.

    Explain?
     
    Last edited: Oct 25, 2017
    GSLV Mk III and GuardianRED like this.
  10. ranadd

    ranadd 2nd Lieutant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2016
    Messages:
    320
    Likes Received:
    323
    Country Flag:
    India
    Naive.

    True though.

    Improving and evolving the craft can be defined as technology. Just my definition, no need to argue with me.

    Indian establishment(government, labs, people) doesn’t understand it takes time to do things.

    They don’t believe in working together, sharing information, seeing big picture.

    All this is done to protect their position, not to let someone else grow, setting stretch goals and working towards it.

    Anyways...we live in silos. So what’s the point.
     
  11. Sancho

    Sancho Lt. Colonel Technical Analyst

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    Messages:
    5,558
    Likes Received:
    3,383
    I'm not talking about the SE, but about their offers in the MMRCA, where JSOW and the basic Harpoon was all that was on offer for our focus, compared to SLAM-ER for Gulf countries and cruise missiles for NATO partners. That's why Pakistan can't be the right measure for us, but at least what the Gulf countries get, if not more.

    Because they want something from us!!! Access to our defence market and our support against China. So they opened up to get advantages for them, not to help us against Pakistan. But what they offer is still far below what we have on offer from the Russians or Europeans. So it's on them to step up their offers at and not on us to be thankful to get slightly more than Pakistan (they get F16s, we have the same on offer, they get C130s, we do too, they get combat helicopters..., so the only difference is, that we can afford the more expensive US arms).

    Catapult technology was denied for years, long range missiles as said and we will see if signing the MCTR will have an effect on that now. F35 is still getting rejected, customisation and ToT are still the major concerns in every major licence production deal (even for Javelins). Not to mention that basic consultancy support was denied for the LCA programme on and on!

    The MoD and the PMO can, which are following the SPM as the priority route and which specifically created the SE tender in a way that keeps Rafale out. Even Air Chief Dhanoa confirmed that additional Rafales will be put back on the priority list, depending on available funds. So the F16s (sadly) have a real chance to come and take over the requirement Rafale had, which again makes us more dependent on the US.

    That's not true, since the roads for joint development with Russia, Israel and even France were still open. We just didn't used them and that was then, today we have even more options in Europe or east Asia, but again we fail to use the advantages.

    :smile: That's such a bad example buddy, because it's nothing that we wanted or initiated! We scrapped the Kaveri development, the French brought it back again, because it's convinient for them to divert minimum offsets that's all. It's not even a joint development!

    And that shows the difference! They export products that they at least partially own, we pride ourself to produce parts that are outsourced to us. That's why we praise MKIs, Do 228, Hawk and PC7s produced by HAL at Aero India, because other than that we only have Dhruv to show off.

    LCA
    Kaveri engine
    MMR
    IJT
    Saras
    RTA concepts and Hansa trainer

    All nonsatarters of our aviation industry.
     
  12. Gessler

    Gessler Lt. Colonel Technical Analyst

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2012
    Messages:
    9,738
    Likes Received:
    9,633
    Country Flag:
    India
    Gulf countries don't 'get' anything, they buy them with huge cash.

    In the MMRCA days, who had even heard of IAF getting SCALP-EG? All the articles about potential weapon loadouts were either hearsay or figments of the imagination.

    And even after both US jets were out of the competition, companies like Raytheon came forward saying that they're still willing to equip any of the shortlisted jets (Typhoon/Rafale) with their weapons if India wants.

    Of course. Who said otherwise?

    It's the same for Russia or France. Both sell us weapons because they want money. No one's gonna give us stuff for free because they want to help us against our enemies.

    Even the USSR came up with creative payment methods for India to buy their gear because they had the strategic goal of bringing us into Soviet fold, or at the very least prevent us from being absorbed into US/Western fold. We were their last opportunity to have a major friendly country in the South Asia/IOR.

    In which case we would be buying from Russia/France.

    Look back on ANY deal we made with the US, we only bought where we thought their offer was better/cheaper in the long run.

    I'm not being thankful - I am merely stating the facts.

    We're not buying anything on anyone's donations or loans. They give us gear, we give them money. Transaction complete. Nothing to be grateful for.

    Same is true for Russia even - they're not providing us tech out of the goodness of their hearts. They do it because they are strapped for cash. It's the same reason why they provide Klimov engines for JF-17. They need the money - but they keep a limit over the type & level of tech they sell to Pak because while they are hungry for money, they're not stupid. They don't want to close the big cash valve in order to open a small cash valve.

    Lol - that is some way of looking at things. It is WE who initiate the contracts, dude. Not the US.

    Who announced a requirement for Single-Engine fighter? India or US?
    Who sent RFIs/RFPs for C-130J?
    Who announced requirement for an attack helicopter? India or US?

    Now, you may ask why US is offering only F-16 in the SE MII and not F-35? After all JSF too is a SE fighter? The answer is simple - Lockheed knows thet even if they can beat the competition capability-wise, the F35 will be kicked out of the window when it comes to pricing, which will kill the deal for them. Don't want that.

    Hence, F-16. If it's any consolation, the most advanced F-16 yet.

    I'm afraid I didn't follow. Can you elaborate? India only initiated actual engagement with US for carrier technologies only this decade AFAIK, and the US was pretty open to the idea of EMALS for India since then. Tech/project assessment-level Joint Working Groups were formed and everything has been positive so far. The only issue is, India is not gonna be building IAC-2 anytime before 2030 it seems.

    From the US? Unlikely. But that's why we've got Russia in that department.

    The only US tactical missile platform India operates is the P-8I Neptune...and the Harpoons we got on that (also on Jaguar strike aircraft and ordered for U209 SSKs as well) have the same range as the Harpoons on US P-8A. Even the SLAM-ER has the same range.

    Regardless, you're forgetting that India is NOT forgoing better Russian/French alternatives and buying worse US equipment in their place. The only US equipment we bought (or will buy in future) has it's own category and would have been bought after careful assessment of it's capabilities, costs, any attached deals/benefits and ofcourse, the competition's offers as well.

    We are not forgoing BrahMos and buying Harpoons in it's place.
    We are not forgoing Meteor and buying AIM-120 in it's place.

    When the Russian/French offer is better in all respects, we won't ditch them and buy US wares. Rest assured.

    That is hilarious.

    You can't reject something that hasn't even been requested.

    And what do you mean 'still'? As if India was begging for F35 since last decade. :tongue1:

    Of course US is a more difficult partner ToT-wise when compared with Russia/France.

    As of LCA program, I reckon that was around the period of nuclear tests?

    It is a question of which will be bought first and which latter. Even if F16 comes under SE MII, it still can't stop Rafale from getting minimum 72 orders from IAF.

    MoD/PMO have no specific desire to kill Rafale - if they did, why would they ever have signed on the 36 in the first place and sent $9 bn down the drain? They could have just as easily junked the whole thing right when MMRCA was called off and went straight to US for F-16/F-18. Why did they spend years negotiating the G-to-G agreement with France?

    The requirement for more MRCAs was always there. What PMO/NSA saw was an opportunity to turn this requirement into a way for deeper strategic relationship with US. That's the reason why they appear to be pushing F-16 (against Gripen, mind you. Not against Rafale). @randomradio might explain this better.

    F-16 cannot stop additional Rafales. And that's not something only me or others on the forum are saying - even PKSG (completely unconnected with the forum's sources) agrees to that.

    India does not want Kaveri huh :disagree: That is some length to go to discredit the French, bro.

    What does it matter who initiated it? If it fits our requirements, we will pursue it. Thanks to this, at least now Tejas (and other aircraft) will even have a chance of flying on at least a partly Indian engine! Not only that - it gives us a serious alternative to relying on US F404/F414s for Tejas (and AMCA). I have no idea how you can downplay such an important thing.

    As of being a true "Joint Development" - I don't see your point. As long as it manages to retain the parts of Kaveri which work and fill the gaps with their own tech, we have a winner on our hand which was made possible only with the fusion of Indian & French tech.

    You're chasing things of no value dude. "At least partially own"...hmm, what exactly is that getting them? A few brownie points to use in forum wars?

    Our "outsourced production" is worth billions, provides that much more employment for our people and is growing every year.

    All of these are at a level that is well, well beyond the aerospace capabilities of our western neighbour. These are Indian-initiated and Indian-designed projects. There is really no comparison.

    When you have an aviation industry that is big enough, inevitably you'll have some projects which lead nowhere.
     
  13. Sancho

    Sancho Lt. Colonel Technical Analyst

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    Messages:
    5,558
    Likes Received:
    3,383
    Come on man, don't find excuses. IAF had ground attack as a crucial part of the tender and all contenders that were displayed at Aero India for example, also showed the offered weapon packs. Gripen, EF and Rafale came with Taurus and Scalp for years.

    You when you said that they give us more than Pakistan, which is not the case as shown and neither is it the case for Russia and France. Russia denied Flanker and Migs to Pakistan, even Chinese fighters with Russian engines. Scorpene was not on offer for PN either.

    Under an MoD that didn't supported political deal's and even prevented the higher ups from doing so. Now we have an MoD that has no say, defence deals and policy are guided by the PMO as the Rafale deal and the SPM shows. That's why we can't equate that with the past and rule out F16 anymore.

    Not really, you forget that there is a difference in a company allowing the sale of a product and the government doing it!
    LM has made several presentations of F35 to our forces and Boeing even came up with a Growler lite idea, but it is US government that restricts what is possible and what is not!

    India asked for catapults even in the concept stage for IAC 1, but that tech was denied, which is why we had only the VSTOL or STOBAR option.
    Now that seems to have changed, but as I keep saying will come with it's price (combined deal with fighters).

    SLAM-ER has land attack capability and a range of 250Km (below MCTR limitations), that's why they sold it to Gulf countries. Harpoon is only the base anti ship version and has far less range. So while Gulf countries are allowed to attack Iran at long range, but we are suppose to attack a Chinese carrier at low to medium range?

    If we buy F16s or F18s we do, because Brahmos NG won't be allowed on them or P8I.

    Why do you think IN sent a Request for Information to LM? And why do you think, they didn't responded?


    Nope, after that too. ADA (for whatever reasons) wanted Boeing as a consultant for the flight testing and LM for NLCA designed, both didn't happend and Airbus was hired at the end. Not to mention that US vendors surely were invited to supply AESA radar too, don't you think?

    No, it's a question of what is left of the medium class requirement to fill and how can you justify billions for 2 squads of Rafales build in France, instead of 2 more squads SEs build in India. The only reason why IAF wants 2 more Rafales squads, is to make the bad deal financially useful. We paid for infrastructure at 2 bases, to each house 2 squads. So if we don't buy 2 more, we have wasted a hell lot of money!

    PMO took the decision for the photo opp deal, because killing it completely, would have opened them to widespread criticism. They now sold it as a gap filler (supposedly a fast procurement) and the media jumped on it, while several IAF officers noted right away, that 36 is far too less for IAF needs!
    The negotiations however, must be done by MoD, which is why Parrikar had to deal with it, although he had no clue about the deal and was still negotiating with Dassault for the MMRCA.

    Exactly and by leaving the Rafale and EF out (shortlisted choices of IAF), they created the possibility for the F16. With Rafale or EF in the tender, US fighters never had a chance.

    Lol, how is that against the French? It's merily a fact that we scrapped the Kaveri development, because it had too much problems and that we don't asked the French to team up for the revival of Kaveri, we only asked for offsets.

    And that's the point! We don't know when the engine will be ready, we don't know the thrust it will have, we don't know if it's sufficient enough for LCA MK2, let alone AMCA.
    Again, Safran wanted to fix Kaveri, we didn't asked them to, nor did we required it to power LCA or AMCA. In fact ADA and HAL are planing with GE engines.

    Go through the kaveri thread, I posted a report of IAF once, that rejected the Kaveri / Snecma engine in the past, specifically because it doesn't get India anything wrt know how, to just use a French core.

    No, I point out the sad and painful truth. That Pakistan is showing us, how beneficial co-developments can be for a country, that has no viable aviation industry.

    Which would be the case if they would be successful, but by not being able to develop them, we only showed that we aren not at the level either!
     
  14. vstol jockey

    vstol jockey Colonel MILITARY STRATEGIST

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2011
    Messages:
    13,803
    Likes Received:
    15,564
    Country Flag:
    India
    Tillerson came to India offering finest tech in the form of 40yr old F-16s & F-18s. And we call it WOW.
     
  15. Gessler

    Gessler Lt. Colonel Technical Analyst

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2012
    Messages:
    9,738
    Likes Received:
    9,633
    Country Flag:
    India
    Is it not true that US has sold/is offering tech which is much more advanced to India as compared to Pak? That's the point I was making.

    We provided far, far less help to the US than Pak did...and yet we managed to procure a lot more!

    Plus, you need to keep in mind that US-Pak relations as something that were continuing since the beginning of the Cold War....so a much longer time period.

    Yes and I already told you why: Russia, while hungry for money, is not stupid. If they sell Flankers & Migs to Pak that will be it. They'd have closed off the big valve and opened a very small one in it's place.

    Not something Russia wants to do at the moment (or France, for that matter. Don't forget that France had also entertained the idea of selling Rafale to PAF in past. They couldn't go ahead purely because the Pakistanis couldn't afford it).

    The Rafale G2G was done after IAF/then Govt. already declared Rafale the winner of MMRCA. IAF was perfectly okay with it - even today it is the Rafale that IAF wants more of.

    As of SE MII/SPM, on that front there is only talk. Nothing has happened yet so I'd restrain myself before calling it political deals. Yes, there is a political angle and PMO/NSA have their reasons for pushing it (some of which that we civilians have no idea about). But we haven't seen any of that actually materialize, in short we have no idea how it will turn out in the end. Recent updates from Parikrama suggest NSA is now more open to additional Rafale deals before going ahead with SE MII (this is after Dhanoa's statements, btw).

    IAC-1 in concept stage? You mean in the last millennium? India & US were pretty much on opposite sides in those times. A catapult at that stage would mean us having to go for Western jets as well. At that time, it wasn't gonna happen.

    But TODAY is what matters - and as of today US is open for EMALS on Indian carriers (but doesn't translate into much because India itself appears to have sent the IAC-2 to the freezer. SSNs taking priority - a deal which appears to have a LOT to do with Russia, btw).

    First of all, I've never come across any report saying India wanted SLAM-ER but was rejected.

    And so far, there is no platform in the Indian inventory that even needs SLAM-ER for land targets (we're already working on BrahMos-A/NG for multitude of platforms and air-launched Nirbhay as well. Besides, we're getting SCALP-EG with Rafale so even future platforms are equipped adequately.), so there's no question of us wanting it either.

    P-8I isn't a land-attack platform (neither were Tu-142 or Il-38 before it). It does anti-ship and for that it gets the AGM-84L Harpoon-II/Block-II. US is even selling them for Jaguars and SLCM version as well for U209.

    The only possible platform I foresee that could actually have a need for SLAM-ER is the F-16. And what weapons we get with that plane are yet to be seen so no point speculating now.

    You do realize that SLAM-ER is actually older than Harpoon-II right? In fact the Harpoon-II incorporates many techs from the SLAM-ER.

    Also, the version of Harpoon India operates has the same/better range as SLAM-ER ( 270+ km).

    What you're saying makes no sense.

    Rafale wasn't a photo-op deal and neither is SE MII.

    You don't spend $10 billion on photo op deals. PMO simply isn't that stupid - if we think it is, then we are stupid.

    Of course 36 is too less and makes no sense either tactically or economics-wise, hence a minimum of 72 are going to happen no matter what. SE MII cannot do anything to stop that - at most it may push back the schedules a bit backward (or forward, seems unsure now).

    The twin-engine Eurocanards were not a part because one of them (Rafale) was already bought - and from there it was merely a matter of increasing it's numbers in batches (either completely off-the-shelf or via DRAL).

    And as far as SE MII goes - rest assured NOTHING is cemented as yet. As I said, yes PMO has it's plans. But they are subject to change and PMO's opinion is NOT the only opinion. They have to work with everyone (including IAF) and that's what they'll do.

    Exactly - we scrapped it because we did not have the tech to realize it. Not because we didn't need/want it.

    As I said - how does it matter? In the end it is India which is benefiting!

    What are you worried about? If it works, we'll use it. If it doesn't, we won't.

    There you go again.

    At one hand you argue that we're being too dependent on US. But when an opportunity comes allowing us to have an alternative to US engines, you want to throw it away saying we don't want it - we want to stick with US engines instead.

    What does IAF want with know-how? IAF doesn't manufacture or produce anything.

    As long as we have local MRO facilities and timely repair infrastructure, IAF is good. And anyday, we'll get more know-how and autonomy with Safranized Kaveri than any GE engine.

    The JF-17 is the most pitiful excuse for a co-development there can be.

    If you compare that with India's multi-billion aviation industry and feel that situation is sad & pitiful compared to Pakistan's JF-17 "exports"....we'll I'm not even gonna attempt to stop you anymore.

    We got way ahead of today's Pakistan when we built Ajeet & Marut itself. Everything else is a plus.
     
    Last edited: Oct 26, 2017
    zebra7 likes this.

Share This Page