Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Save The New Stuff For The Chinese
The Strategy page ^ | 2/20/2010 | The Strategy page

Posted on 02/20/2010 6:48:55 PM PST by ErnstStavroBlofeld

India, alarmed at Chinese claims on its northeastern state of Arunachal Pradesh, will deploy six of the first eight squadrons of its new Akash air defense system there. Akash is Indian designed, developed and manufactured, and is modeled on the older, but successful, Russian SA-6 system. Akash is meant to replace some very old Russian air defense systems India is still using. Each 1,543 pound Akash missile has a 132 pound warhead, a range of 27 kilometers and can kit targets as high as 49,000 feet, or as low as 66 feet. Each squadron has eight launchers (each carrying three missiles). China has increased its diplomatic and military moves on Arunachal Pradesh in the last year. Arunachal Pradesh has long been claimed as part of Tibet. But when Tibet was an independent nation a century ago, it agreed that Arunachal Pradesh was part of India. This is what angers China, as Britain was running India at the time, and was believed to have pressured Tibet to surrender Arunachal Pradesh. Currently, Arunachal Pradesh has a population of about a million people, spread among 84,000 square kilometers of mountains and valleys. The Himalayan mountains, the tallest in the world, are the northern border of Arunachal Pradesh, and serve as the border, even if currently disputed, with China. This is a really remote part of the world, and neither China nor India want to go to war over the place. But the two countries did fight a short war, up in these mountains, in 1962. The Indians lost, and are determined not to lose if there is a rematch.

(Excerpt) Read more at strategypage.com ...


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: airdefense; akash; china; india; sa6; sam

1 posted on 02/20/2010 6:48:56 PM PST by ErnstStavroBlofeld
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]


2 posted on 02/20/2010 6:54:12 PM PST by ErnstStavroBlofeld ("I have learned to use the word "impossible" with the greatest caution."-Dr.Wernher Von Braun)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sonofstrangelove

India would be best NOT to rely on Russia for its stuff! The Indians should deal exclusively with Israel and the West for its defense needs while developing an indigenous Defense-industrial program.


3 posted on 02/20/2010 8:40:32 PM PST by Thunder90 (Fighting for truth and the American way... http://citizensfortruthandtheamericanway.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Thunder90

I have been saying this for a very long time. The United States should deal with India since we are supposed to be “allies”. All India is getting from Russia is pure technological garbage.


4 posted on 02/20/2010 8:46:27 PM PST by ErnstStavroBlofeld ("I have learned to use the word "impossible" with the greatest caution."-Dr.Wernher Von Braun)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: sonofstrangelove

“All India is getting from Russia is pure technological garbage.”

Maybe, but all they get from the U.S. are lectures. Indian officials are petrified of the U.S. twisting India’s arm during a crisis by threatening sanctions on spares and supply of equipment. What use would technologically brilliant equipment be if you were not allowed to use it?


5 posted on 02/20/2010 9:11:53 PM PST by cold start
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: cold start

First,I would end the arm twisting,threats and the lectures and have every single American aerospace companies desend in India and sell them products that last.


6 posted on 02/20/2010 9:16:39 PM PST by ErnstStavroBlofeld ("I have learned to use the word "impossible" with the greatest caution."-Dr.Wernher Von Braun)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: sonofstrangelove
I have been saying this for a very long time. The United States should deal with India since we are supposed to be “allies”. All India is getting from Russia is pure technological garbage. I enjoy your threads on military matters SonofSLove, so please do not intepret my post in a bad way (and apologies for any spelling errors ...I'mtyping on an iphone on a restbreak in East Africa). The problem I have with your post is on the 'technological junk' part.

a) Please elaborate what junk this is.

b) Please elaborate what alternatives the US would give, AND if the US WOULD give it (eg if the Su30mki is 'junk,' WOULD the US ACTUALLY provide something better? If the Akula nuke sub is 'junk,' would the US ACTUALLY give them a Virginia nuke sub ...or even an older LA class? If the Ruskie carrier is bloated junk, would the US give the KittyHawk or the JFK? Answer to all of that is no, thus making the decision for India quite clear cut.

The final aspect is strategic independence. The US has historically shown a propensity for including 'strings' in regards to use, and has 'punished' nations by witholding spares and even equipment. The Russians and the French do not do that.

It basically boils down to this: When the US offers India 1) top of the line equipment, 2) transfer of technology for items such as Aesa radar and advanced avionics, and 3) does not use weapon sales and availability of parts support for political leverag. ....when that happens then India will buy from the US most if not all of its equipment.

Until that day, India will base MOST of its purchases from Russia, Israel and Europe, who have proven themselves over decades.

As for that 'Russian junk' ...well, it can defeat almost any regional threat, including the American equipment Pakistan has. Easily.

7 posted on 02/20/2010 9:27:14 PM PST by spetznaz (Nuclear-tipped Ballistic Missiles: The Ultimate Phallic Symbol)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: cold start; Thunder90

ColdStart & Thunder90 - I intended to include you in my post (no 7). Have a blessed Sunday


8 posted on 02/20/2010 9:29:00 PM PST by spetznaz (Nuclear-tipped Ballistic Missiles: The Ultimate Phallic Symbol)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: spetznaz

I really think that Russian made goods are not well engineered and crafted. They seemed to be thrown together and hope that will work as designed.There are some exceptions such as the AK-47 and some of the other rifles made over the years. I have heard stories from aerospace engineers who have looked at Russian planes and commented on their poor engineering qualities.


9 posted on 02/20/2010 9:32:52 PM PST by ErnstStavroBlofeld ("I have learned to use the word "impossible" with the greatest caution."-Dr.Wernher Von Braun)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: spetznaz

When I was in the Civil Air Patrol(many moons ago), my commanding officer was a engineer for Lockheed. One day, he told us a story that he had received a MiG-25 from a country he did not name. He could not believe that plane was able to fly. He mentioned the poor quality in design and that the plane was practically falling apart.


10 posted on 02/20/2010 9:41:03 PM PST by ErnstStavroBlofeld ("I have learned to use the word "impossible" with the greatest caution."-Dr.Wernher Von Braun)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: sonofstrangelove

From what I’ve seen of Soviet bloc plumbing fixtures, they combine the most amazing engineering with the most appalling quality.


11 posted on 02/20/2010 10:24:52 PM PST by HiTech RedNeck (I am in America but not of America (per bible: am in the world but not of it))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: sonofstrangelove
The FoxBat was quite the issue when it came out ...the West thought it was this super-killer, and to that effect it spawned the genesis of what would become the F-15 Eagle. However, when hands on experience was acquired it was discovered that the plane was not the monster that it had first appeared to be. It was a dud!

Or was it?

Well, I believe in logically looking at things. Some say that the MiG-25 was a dud because the workmanship was not to the exacting specifications of Western design (my response: even with rivets that were not flush, the plane could still do over Mach 3, since the rough finishing was in areas that really did not affect the flight of the airframe). Some say that even though it had a high top speed, the only way it could achieve that speed was by TOTALLY destroying its engines (that is true, but then a logical person would look at WHY the plane was developed! The FoxBat was meant to be a high altitude very high speed interceptor geared towards shooting down intruding high mach nuclear bombers ....specifically the supersonic B-70 bomber that had been earmarked by the USAF. In that role, the FoxBat only needed to ensure that it achieved that objective ...whether or not it needed an engine overhaul after that was not important if it stopped a supersonic bomber carrying thermonuclear weapons from incinerating Soviet targets. The FoxBat was never meant to dogfight ....it was meant to be a high speed interceptor against high speed bombers, with a secondary role as a reconaissance platform. It could fulfill both roles well ...it is just that the B-70 was never made, but in the recon role it did quite well: most recently it is a platform that the Indians have used quite successfully to buzz Pakistani cities, with the Pakistanis not being able to do much about it. The Israelis also had a problem shooting down Egyptian FoxBats, as did the USAF F-15s during once incident in the first Gulf War. In another incident, an Iraqi FoxBat shot down a USN F/A-18 ...the only air to air kill in the conflict)

Anyways, it does change perspective in looking at the role that something was created. However, overall the workmanship of Soviet engineers was not as refined as that of the West. No argument there. However, lack of refinement does not necessarily indicate junk (neither does the performance of said equipment in the hands of a turd world nation like Iraq against the largest modern military force every assembled ...during the First Gulf War. You could have given the iraqis F-15s and 16s, and given the allies Su-27s and MiG-29s, and the allies would still have won! The training of the allies, the support, the battlespace awareness, the tactics ...the Iraqis would have lost either way. A good example I love to use is a conflagration between India and Pakistan tonight, where Indian SU-30MKIs backed by the Israeli sourced Phalcon AESA AWACS would face off against Pakistani F-16s ....currently the Pakistanis have no AWACS, although they plan on getting some Swedish platform, and they also do not have the same level of BVR capability that the Indians have, although they plan on buying ...I mean receiving as military aid ...some AMRAAMs from the US so they can use them to shoot down al Quedas flying carpet airforce. If a fight broke out today, the Indian Russian-denominated airforce would be shooting down the Pakistani F-16s without even having to enter Pakistani airspace! Does that mean the Viper is junk? No ...simply that in the particular situation stipulated it is at a disadvantage. Give the same Vipers true BVR capability, give the Pakistani AWACS, take away from the Indians BVR, strip them of their AWACS, negate their training by half, take away jammers, and suddenly the situation flips on its head. Logic).

Finally, on the purchase of weapons. As Rumsfeld says, sometimes you have to go with what you have! The Indians have received great support from the Russians (apart from a few issues recently), great support from the Europeans, but spotty (and at times straight acerbic) support from the US. For that matter, for decades India was the 'enemy' during the Cold War due to its support from the USSR. Now, the US and India are chummy, however simply looking across the border into how the US has frustrated the Pakistanis (let's say by the time they get the F-16s they were supposed to have gotten YEARS back India may very well have finalized its MRCA program ...ok, maybe not, but the Pakistanis have been waiting for a mightly long time). Furthermore, the political climate in the US shifts every 8 or so years, thus what happens when a pro-India president like Bush gets replaced with a person like Obama, or even worse say an anti-India type of fella? Then there are other aspects like the level of transfer of technology that would accrue ...the Russians have allowed the Indians to participate in the PakFa SU-50 stealth project (would the US allow India to even be a partner in the F-35? I know the team trying to sell the Block-60/70 'Super Viper' are trying to hint to the Indians that if they select the Super Viper they get on the fast track to the F-35, but even Indian media has been laughing at the sheer insolence of thinking people could fall for that!). Even the Europeans would be more than willing to share a huge chunk of current-to-cutting-edge technology ...the Eurofighter Consortium has gone as far as saying that they would give all technology, which has been matched by the French (e.g. the Spectra active-stealth jammer in the Rafale would really give a boost to the Indian technology base). I wonder if the US would be willing to let the Indians have all-access to the AESA of the F/A-18E/F even?

Thus, you will see more and more US weapons in Indian use ...however, do not expect to see the US take over from Russia/Israel/Europe due to the issues I've raised. The day the US can let India get a F-35 as easily as Russia let them have the SU-50 ...then that will be the day things can be different.

12 posted on 02/21/2010 8:07:13 AM PST by spetznaz (Nuclear-tipped Ballistic Missiles: The Ultimate Phallic Symbol)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: spetznaz; sonofstrangelove

Only air to air kill in the conflict = only air to air kill by the enemy against the allies in the conflict


13 posted on 02/21/2010 8:14:06 AM PST by spetznaz (Nuclear-tipped Ballistic Missiles: The Ultimate Phallic Symbol)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: spetznaz

The U.S rarely transfers the technology to build advanced weapons to anyone other than the closest military allies.

The Russians, being much poorer, need to sell their technology. But even they have been wising up in recent years after China stole so much of their military technology.

It is definitely in Indian interests to continue partnering up with Russia. They might not get as much tech know-how as they hope, but something is always better than nothing, which is what they’ll get with the U.S.


14 posted on 02/21/2010 1:23:07 PM PST by artaxerces
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: spetznaz

Take for example the SU-30MKI program for example:

While Sukhoi and Rafael is withholding all core manufacturing technologies from the Indians (Airframe, Avionics, engines, radar systems). At the very least the Indians are learning the techniques/technologies of aircraft final assembly and QA.

That knowledge alone would radically speed up their own LCA program for example. The U.S isn’t even promising local assembly for the F-16.


15 posted on 02/21/2010 1:33:47 PM PST by artaxerces
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: spetznaz

I agree


16 posted on 02/21/2010 4:31:33 PM PST by ErnstStavroBlofeld ("I have learned to use the word "impossible" with the greatest caution."-Dr.Wernher Von Braun)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson