Barak Missile
Posted on 12/09/2009 11:59:39 PM PST by ErnstStavroBlofeld
Israel has become a major exporter of military equipment to India. And that includes advice, as well as hardware. Recently, for example, Indian Air Force commanders have been asking Israeli advice on the Indian effort to select a supplier for over a hundred high end jet fighters. Israeli Air Force officials have recommended the U.S. F-16. In this case, the Israelis practice what they preach, currently having over 300 F-16s in service. Israeli firms also manufactures a lot of add-on gear for F-16s (and similar fighters). India has been leaning towards the Swedish Gripen, but the Israelis point out that the F-16 is cheaper, and battle proven. Over the last seven years, Israel has sold more than five billion dollars worth of arms to India. The two nations have cooperated on counter-terrorism matters, as both countries are primary targets for Islamic radicals. Israel is a high tech development powerhouse, something India is trying to become. So the two countries are now jointly developing some new weapons systems.
The biggest single sale, worth nearly half a billion dollars, was the Barak anti-missile systems for ships. The Barak system uses small missiles to shoot down incoming anti-ship missiles. Israel weapons have a solid reputation for reliability and effectiveness. Israeli success in several wars adds to the appeal of their armaments. U.S. and Israeli arms manufacturers often work together, which also gives Israel an edge when selling their equipment.
(Excerpt) Read more at strategypage.com ...
As a side note 0 will block the sale as this means jobs in the US and support for our allies. Two no nos for 0.
> Why in God’s name would they name a missle Barak. By definition it will be and EPIC FAIL.
Barak is a common name in Israel. It means “lightning” in Hebrew, and I think also in Arabic (although pronounced slightly differently). “Lightning” is a pretty reasonable name for a missile, I think.
Odds are, the missile had been given this name long before last year’s election.
If you’d like to be on or off, please FR mail me.
..................
“Barack” without the vowels can also spell “Baruch” which means “Blessing”.
Oh, I would love to send some very special “Blessings” over to Israel’s enemies in Iran and even closer. LOL!
India is unofficially in a state of war every day, that could turn into all out war at any time with its western and northern neighbors.
I would hope that they will select fighter aircraft that has been tried and proven in actual battle conditions.
Barak means lightning in Hebrew. It’s also one of Bibi’s fellow lackey-for-US-imperialists’ name, to wit: Ehud Barak.
This is great. The closer Israel gets to India, the happier I am. Best way out of a bad relationship with an abusive, domineering control-freak boob is to find a supportive friend who has been through something similar, as Israel and India did with Britain, and as Israel is now enduring with the United States of Obamica.
I was just being snarky about it being named after The 0. Nice to know it’s real meaning. May it do as it is named.
It is not all about 'tried and proven in actual battle conditions.' There are other considerations, such as the level of technology present (e.g. the Gripen's NORA AESA is quite the piece of work, or for instance the Rafale's technological abilities and weapons loads and systems are better than the Vipers), the level of technology transfer (India is very particular about TOT ...and while the US would probably have no qualms transferring F-16 innards, India would probably be more interested in, say, the Eurofighter Typhoon or the Rafale due to their newer vintage), and other factors such as political considerations (e.g. the US is known to have strings attached to their war-ware usage, or even stopping the flow of spare parts ...something the French or the Brit/Germ/Span consortium would not do). To that add extraneous issues, for instance the fact that Pakistan already uses Vipers (of an earlier vintage though), or that China may require a solution that is advanced than Vipers (e.g. Typhoon or Rafale).
Also, proven is a trick term. The F-22 Raptor has not been proven in combat ...yet we all know it is the cat's miaow! The rafale has not been proven in combat (hmmm ...actually it has over Afghanistan), yet we know in the fly-offs against F-15s and F-16s it beat them (the Rafale's been losing due to political considerations). The Typhoon has also not faced 'real' combat, but it trounced F-15s easily during exercises with the USAF. Thus, 'tested' is a subjective term (and it can even be stretched further ...for instance most Legacy fighters of the 4th generation would not survive the Chinese IADS anyways).
I'm sure the Indians will select the best option for India based on all possible metrics, and of the planes under review all of them are quite nice. Some are better than others, but all are good.
Although, to be very strict in the intepretation of the MRCA requirements, the only ones that should qualify are the Viper and the Gripen. Light single engined planes. The others are far more capable, twin engined, heavier and more expensive (the MiG 35, Eurofighter Typhoon, Rafale, F/A-18 SuperHornet). Thus, there has definitely been mission creep in terms of requirement, since most of the planes fighting for the post are bigger, better and more expensive than the requirements ...thus rather than having a Hi-Lo (say, SU-30MKI as high option and Gripen as low option) it may very well be a Hi-Hi scenario (e.g., say the SU-30MKI and the Typhoon, or the SU-30MKI and the F/A-18E/F, etc). Thus it will be quite interesting. If they look at pure costs and the original requirements, then they should pick the cheapest option that meets the requirements (even if there are more capable options available) ...which means the winner SHOULD be either the F-16 or the Gripen. However, if they go for pure capability then the winner will either be the SuperHornet, the Rafale or the Typhoon.
I'm sure the Indians will make the best choice for them. Hopefully.
This could be a huge concern from the indian side, especially in a short war with Pakistan, the U.S. probably would be the quickest to turn this screw to bring about an immediate ceasefire even before any goals are achieved. What's the point in buying these aircraft if this significant segment of the airforce arsenal is nullified during war. I can see the Euros also being unreliable. The Ruskies are the only ones without any qualms about weapons supplies during war. They might actually offer additional customer support.
Barak is Ehud Barak Israel’s current Defefnse Minister and the most decorated soldier in Israeli history.
Although he is a leftist, He is an outstanding Defense Minister imo.
I agree. Israel and India have a lot in common - a Jihadist enemy within
I would have no problem with him or Bibi, except that they just agreed to a settlement freeze, thus the swipe at the running dogs of yankee imperialism.
Also, object lessons in the cost of territorial concessions to said Jihadists, who simply ramp up their demands, as well as a history of being victimized by British colonialism.
Needs a picture of The One on it.
Israel has become a major exporter of military equipment to India. And that includes advice, as well as hardware. Recently, for example, Indian Air Force commanders have been asking Israeli advice on the Indian effort to select a supplier for over a hundred high end jet fighters. Israeli Air Force officials have recommended the U.S. F-16. In this case, the Israelis practice what they preach, currently having over 300 F-16s in service. Israeli firms also manufactures a lot of add-on gear for F-16s (and similar fighters). India has been leaning towards the Swedish Gripen, but the Israelis point out that the F-16 is cheaper, and battle proven. Over the last seven years, Israel has sold more than five billion dollars worth of arms to India.Payback is a beeotch.
This is going to sound sarcastic but Pakistan and China should consider selling India the JF-17 from a purely economic point of view. It’s an entry level 4th gen fighter whose production technology India can probably master indigenously within 3-5 years and the price is cheap enough to produce these fighters in the necessary numbers.
Both the Gripen and the F-16 are still sophisticated for India to domestically build and really too expensive for the benefits gained.
The Indians already have the LCA/Tejas that’s supposed to be entering widespread productions relatively shortly. One of the big problems is with the indigenous Kaveri engine. In fact, that problem could have an impact on the MRCA selection since the Super Hornet’s F414 and the Eurofighter’s EJ200 are both being considered as interim (at least) solutions to the LCA’s engine woes. Commonality with the proposed 3rd tier fighter segment and a sizeable section of 2nd tier (although the Eurofighter and Rafale don’t really seem like second tier fighters when matched against the Su-30 MKIs) seems pretty attractive from an economy of scales standpoint—especially given the logistical nightmares the Indian military must already have with their great variety of suppliers.
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.