Posted on 03/02/2006 6:28:28 PM PST by spetznaz
"But a lot of it's systems incl. it's Volvo engines(GE-404) & EW systems have American origins.Those cannot be exported WITHOUT American consent.Now my point,is why should the US release the AMRAAM when the F-16 is around or for MBDA members like France & Britain(hawking their wares) to allow the Meteor??"
The Gripen doesnt necessarily have to come with a US engine. India could opt for Gripens powered by French or British, etc engine, which would encourage the French or or whoever to allow their missiles to equip it.
And anyway, if one country does not get the plane contract, but does get the missile contract they will not refuse the missile contract because at least their industries will be getting something. Ditto with the engine. If India bought Gripens, the US would definitely give consent for the 404s.
"The Israeli option does exist but the Swedes are not putting in the kind of efforts that any of the other folks are putting in."
That's probably because India hasnt shown much interest in their plane.
"Anyway,even it's biggest supporters will admit that the LCA will not be produced on the scale that was envisaged."
Wouldn't it have made more sense to have scrapped the LCA long ago, and bought a very modern fighter with the millions of crore saved, such as the Typhoon, etc. With the money saved from the LCA India could have bought 100 Typhoons, perhaps with a technology transfer, which would have been much more beneficial to India's defense than a fighter which will be pretty much obsolete the minute it rolls off the assembly line, IMHO.
"As I stated much earlier,a 2 aircraft is pretty much on the cards.With the N-deal through,an American aircraft is more or less likely.Question is how many of each type."
As far as I've heard, the Indian requirement is still only for 126 planes offically, but some say it will go up to 200.
I agree with you that India greatly wishes to buy American for diplomatic reasons, and for the technology, but there are several things that may prevent this.
1. Pakistan already has the F-16, so that makes it very unlikely that India will be inclined to buy Falcons, even if they are much more advanced than the Paki ones. It has been somewhat ingrained in the minds of many Indians that the Su-30 is superior to the Falcon, and they would question why India is buying an inferior aircraft. Also, using the same plane as Pak, even a more modern version, would be a humiliation for India. So, this pretty much rules out the Falcon.
2. Lockheed invited India on the spur of the moment to participate in the F-35 project, but India's participation is unlikely for several reasons.
A. India is not inclined to pour the hundreds of millions of dollars it would take to even become a Level 3 partner (which is the best they could hope for) in the JSF project, when the plane has not been completed yet, and will not go into production for a number of years. India just doesnt have the kind of money to throw millions of crore into consortium type projects.
B. having funded most of the research, the member countries would be unhappy at letting India join this late in the game.
C. Despite India's Defense budget increases, the cost of the JSF would be prohibitive.
D. Indian firms would have no role in the project, which would turn India off.
E. India would not receive a technology transfer for the F-35. The technology tranfer has, of late, been a deal maker or breaker for India.
F. The US Congress and military establishment would likely be unwilling to agree to a sale. The Pentagon has indicated it is willing to sell the F-16 and FA-18, but not the JSF.
G. Shaky resolve by member nations regarding the project would probably give india second thoughts about considering to join the project.
H. India could buy a lot more much less sophisticated, but still very modern and capable planes (like the M-2000-5 or the Su-30MKI) for the same price as a much smaller number of JSF, which would be more appealing to India since they need to match the numbers of China's modern fighters.
So, assuming that the F-16 and JSF are off the table, we are left with the F/A-18.
India would obviously hope to buy the F/A-18E/F, but the deal-maker or breaker will be if India gets the most advanced avionics, radar, etc if India gets the E/F at all (which I think they would, but there may be some opposition in Congress and the DoD (despite the official DoD position).
Additionally, the cost of the F/A-18 is again prohibitive, though india really wants the F/A-18 technology so they might just buy a few examples.
Personally I cannot see India buying more than 20 or 30 FA-18s, and certainly not more than 40.
Before the nuke deal, I would have said that the M-2000-5 and the Su-30 were the almost certain winners, though now I think India will try to purchase at least some US planes to boost relations w/ the US.
Perhaps a small number of F/A-18s (like 20-30) and then some F-16s, with might be back on the table after all since they are not that expensive.
"The Gripen is out of the race given that the Swedes have sold the Erieye to the Pakistanis. "
Well they want to buy from us, and we've sold lots of weapons to the Pakis. France has, too. Russia has sold T-80 tanks to the pakis.
I think the Indian govt is mature enough to realize how the global arms trade works, and they won't bear a grudge (which would be very infantile) against the Swedes.
True. But Sweden aint the US or Russia or France. I think it was the Ukranians who sold the T-80s to the Pakistanis. Anyways I think this debate is moot. Sweden doesnt offer enough "incentives" for the Indians to buy the Gripen. The Erieye might be the last straw.
Boeing, the Russians and to a lesser extent the French do offer a long term partnership. Many Indians I spoke to agree with that statement. I am hoping that Boeing gets this. As I said there is also the Indian Civilian Aircraft market and if we play our cards right we can make Boeing a one stop shop for all of Indias requirements.
"Sweden doesnt offer enough "incentives" for the Indians to buy the Gripen."
I heard they did offer a neat offset program though.
"But Sweden aint the US or Russia or France."
True. Their neutrality and refusal to join NATO has left them in a much weaker position of influence in the world. If they were a NATO country, as prosperous and advanced as they are, they would be quite influential, IMO.
"As I said there is also the Indian Civilian Aircraft market and if we play our cards right we can make Boeing a one stop shop for all of Indias requirements."
I dont think the Indians would ever go along with that. They like to hedge their bets by diversifying their suppliers. It's good military strategy for them, because if they buy only American, and relations sour, they will be left out in the cold with their airforce rusting on the runways for lack of spares, etc.
The way it is now, they have planes from a number of different countries: Britain, France, Russia. That way, they have a number of suppliers to fall back on. Plus, they know if relations with Russia ever went south (extremely unlikely), they could still get spare parts, missiles, and even attrition replacements from the numerous countries that operate Russian planes around the world.
Isnt it true that they get most of their hardware from Russia today. I guess if we sign one big deal with the indians we can break the russian dominance over that market. I am sure Bush and his team did some serious selling when talking to the Indians. Getting a 5th gen fighter like the SH will make the indians the kings of the asian skies. A Mig-35 wont give them that and neither would the Griper or the Rafale or the EF2000.
Buying small numbers of 2(rather expensive) American jets & that too supposedly with AESA for a first time customer is very unlikely.The F-16 Blk 60 cost almost 60million a piece for the UAE & The SuperHornet is about as much.Since this is a major purchase,it makes economic & logistical sense to go with upto 80 American/French systems of one kind & probably a 100 Russian jets which would cost within the vicinity of 35-45 million USD.& Besides the Mig-35s would be easier to integrate into the IAF & a delay in the induction of say the SuperHornet,won't be causing operational problems.Such a solution would jack up the total worth of the deal to around 10billion dollars,but it would meet both logistical & political needs.
Reengining the Gripen or any system is going to be complicated & will lead to delays.& Unlike the Mig or Mirage,the Gripen is a virgin for the IAF.The Swedes are pretty much likely to win a big artillery deal from the Indian army,so guess they will have to be content with that!!
About who will get the contract or rather who will get how many,we should wait & watch!!
PS-I remember that the IAF declined a bid from a Russian company which offered a single seat variant of the SU-30 fo this competition,to avoid overrepresentation.Having too much of a single type,esp if you are an export customer is unhealthy as India & Germany have learned the hardway with their Mig-21s & F-104s.
"Having too much of a single type,esp if you are an export customer is unhealthy as India & Germany have learned the hardway with their Mig-21s & F-104s."
Wait, so you mean the Su-30 is not on the table for the 126-200 jet requirement??
"Since this is a major purchase,it makes economic & logistical sense to go with upto 80 American/French systems of one kind & probably a 100 Russian jets which would cost within the vicinity of 35-45 million USD"
Do you think India could afford 80 Super Hornets in addition to the 100 or 120 Russian jets (MiG-35 I guess?)
You may be right, but personally I think they will, as you said, buy some American, to cement defense relations with the US. But I dont think it would be 80, unless it was F-16-MLU or something. I think it's more likely they'd buy 30-40 F/A-18, possibly 50 at the very most, and cut the remaining requirement to 100 or so M-2000-5 (since Chirac is making moves) or MiG-35 (to satisfy Russia.)
Do you think a 3 way split is possible?
"Such a solution would jack up the total worth of the deal to around 10billion dollars,but it would meet both logistical & political needs. "
meet the needs it certainly would, but can India afford to spend 1/2 of it's military budget for one year on new fighters alone?
a 3 way split is way too crazy & will end up wrecking the IAF.you also have to remember that the IAF is still inducting the SU-30,a handful of LCAs & possibly a 5th gen aircraft with Russia after 2015.Buying 3 separate aircraft to add to these is crazy to say the least.Even a 2-way split,was only considered when Indo-US ties started to improve after the July-18th accord of 2005.Till then,it was almost certain the M-2005 would make it.
If & when 2 aircraft are purchased,the whole amount wouldn't be paid immediately,with a big downpayment first up.Assuming that the SuperHornet & Mig-35 would be purchased,the SH contract would be signed first & both deals & payment would be spread over a considerable period,so there is no question of exhausting a single budget.
The SU-30 was never in real contention for this contract.
"you also have to remember that the IAF is still inducting the SU-30,a handful of LCAs & possibly a 5th gen aircraft with Russia after 2015."
The LCA isn't in any combat units yet, is it?
Also, why did India sell 18 Su-30MK1s to Belarus. I know they arent quite as advanced as the MKI, but they are still Su-30s, and the 18 represented almost 40% of the entire IAF inventory. Now they are left w/ only 34, which is not good, considering that China has 100-150 Su-30s and about 200 Su-27s, in addition to about 100 J-10s.
"If & when 2 aircraft are purchased,the whole amount wouldn't be paid immediately,with a big downpayment first up.Assuming that the SuperHornet & Mig-35 would be purchased,the SH contract would be signed first & both deals & payment would be spread over a considerable period,so there is no question of exhausting a single budget. "
Oh, OK, now I understand.
Nope,the LCA hasn't been inducted & won't probably be till after 2008.
India sold SU-30MKs to Belarus,so that it would get an equal number of new SU-30MKIs from Russia.The earlier plan was to upgrade the MKs in Indian service(since 97) to MKI standard,which didn't make longterm economic sense.
Has China started inducting the J-10 in squadron strength??If websites are to believed,the J-10 has just achieved or will achieve IOC by this year,so the 80-100 number is rather blown up.Besides India has Pakistan to worry about & China has Japan,the US,Vietnam & Taiwan to take care of.
"India sold SU-30MKs to Belarus,so that it would get an equal number of new SU-30MKIs from Russia.The earlier plan was to upgrade the MKs in Indian service(since 97) to MKI standard,which didn't make longterm economic sense. "
Well that sounds like a good deal.
I believe it was closer to 100 million a piece for the Block 60s (if you include the AMRAAMS and other supporting purchases). These toys dont come cheap. I see your argument though. I guess the Indians need aircraft in numbers. Is the figure for the Mig 35, $35 million with AESA??
(PS: Why is your name Sukhoi-MKI..are you russian, indian??)
Yep,I was only referring to the aircraft alone.Im not sure about the Mig,but if you include a foreign radar & other systems,it could touch 40+ million plus.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.