It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Indian Navy want F-35, not the Super Hornets that were offered

page: 2
0
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 12 2005 @ 01:05 PM
link   
darn; double post; edited

anyway enjoy pic of an F-35 carrier landing




[edit on 12-7-2005 by Stealth Spy]




posted on Jul, 12 2005 @ 02:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Stealth Spy
Sure the F-35 may be a little too much, but if India really want it and are serious on it, and lobby hard and a get data protection act together and make a very very serious request for it through the highest level and do some US soothing by ceding to the long standing request to send peace-keeping troops to Iraq and Afghanistan, etc and play the world's largest democracy card,etc in most probability they will get it.


Just keep your hopes up
!


So if Iraq got its democracy together, stabilized, and promised Bush it'll kick terrorist butt then it'll get F-35's as well!

Seriously, that's a lot of criteria you need to fulfill. Chances are they won't all be fulfilled though. A very serious request from the highest level? Sending peace-keeping troops? You think keeping your hopes up will make this happen? The news article with the "data protection" contained one sentence relating to India and the F-35.

Earth to Stealth Spy. Do you copy?



posted on Jul, 12 2005 @ 04:08 PM
link   
Again, I fail to see any rationale why India should not get the F-35 if they want it.

They are not a hostile country in any sense.
They're increasingly a major trading partner.
They have common strategic interests with the US.

Are they going to get the FBW code we refured to share even with the UK?
No.

But the aircraft...
Why not?
I doubt they'll be first in line when series production starts, but I doubt we'll turn down the cash either.

I think you guys are just projecting your own problems with specific Indian posters onto geopolitics


[edit on 7/12/05 by xmotex]



posted on Jul, 12 2005 @ 04:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Daedalus3
Anything for the US comes with "strings attached"


It looks to me the only "strings" that would be attached is the credible assurance that India won't share the technology with other countries, which I don't think is too much to ask.



posted on Jul, 12 2005 @ 08:58 PM
link   
Don't tell me India needs F-35’s to defeat or be better than Pakistan they already have that, so why the build up a challenge to the USN in the future? Who knows, Iran in 79 with Tomcats comes to mind.
Your reasoning of “if they want it they will get it” is nothing more than wishful thinking, a lot of county's want a lot of what the Us has it doesn't men that they will get it.



posted on Jul, 12 2005 @ 11:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Blackout
Earth to Stealth Spy. Do you copy?


Stealth Spy (in the upper atmosphere) to distant star : I always thought India was different from Iraq


I can understand you if it was the F-22 or the B-2 but this is the F-35 .



Who knows, Iran in 79 with Tomcats comes to mind.

and what makes you think any other country like say UK or Cannada or Israel(who have alredy leaked loads of tech to china >> link) or S Korea or Japan will never act against the US 's wishes 30 years in the future ???

and i always thought the the super hornets that were voluntarily offered will be the mainstay of the US navy till about ~2025 or ~2030.

and a question : Does the Rafale-M need steam catapults ? can it take off from ramp carriers ?

[edit on 13-7-2005 by Stealth Spy]



posted on Jul, 13 2005 @ 01:59 AM
link   
Rafael M does need steam catapults because well, De'Gall (the french carrier, correct me on the spelling) has steam catapults. There is a land based version though but India has no need for them and the Himalayan pricetag.

The offering of the F-16s, the F-18s and basically everything that America offered are things for good gesture, not things that India will want to acquire. India has no need for F-18s (Indian carriers can't support it on its flight deck, no catapult, too expensive), F-16s (India has no more need of a single engine fighter bomber after India acquired a dozen or so mirages and the upcoming LCA, logistical nighmare on the already spare part needing IAF and its too expensive BTW)............



posted on Jul, 13 2005 @ 06:38 PM
link   
Always the news report misconstrues the real significance of the story.

In the last weeks, India and America signed a far-reaching defense agreement, the latest development in the Next Step for Strategic Partnership (NSSP) accord between the two countries, which aims to bring together India and America as strategic allies.

A major requirement of NSSP is both inter-operability and commonality of equipment, and nuclear energy cooperation. The nuke thing is marching ahed on its own pace, but the latest round of joint exercises with friendly Western nations, with the goal of continuous joint-training and deployments, is aiming to fulfill the first part of that req. The second one deals with sales and co-production of strategic weapons platforms.


Foremost among these in the coming years, is the tender for the Multi Role Combat Aircraft for the IAF. To this regard, as I explained before, in another thread, the potential sale of F-35 to the IAF, and how I mooted their sale. However, I only focused on the IAF and not the naval wing of the IN.

Before I go further, humbly allow me to cross-post my previous post on the F-35 and the IAF, so then I can try to put this idea of F-35 sale to the Indian Navy into perspective, without having to repeat myself and confuse the issue



------==--=--==-------

There's the potential for the sale [of F-35s], but for all effect, the deal hasn't been made. Under the aegis the Next Steps in Strategic Partnership (NSSP) accord between India and America ("glide path" plan developed by the two countries to cement eventual strategic alliance), India was offered full stake in the F-35 development as a partner country (along the likes of UK, Japan, Singapore, etc.) with software and other systems development in India, but for various reasons, India politely turned down the offer. (Though even without official Indian participation, no doubt non-classified work on the JSF will be done in L-M's massive research centers in India, anyway)

img194.exs.cx...
^ F-35 in Indian Air Force colors at AeroIndia 2005

One reason, is that America required that India sign into an accord in that it will not use F-35-related technologies in other aircraft India uses. As literally every aircraft in the IAF service is 'tricked out' with technologies from a variety of sources, especialyl cross-platform, this was deemed out of the option. Futhermore, India required local production, and I doubt the F-35 will have a parallel assembly line in India.

However, The major reason is that the F-35 doesn't fit into IAF requirements. It is designed as a stealthy attack-oriented aircraft. Currently, the IAF is an attack-heavy airforce, but its attack fleet (Jaguars, Mirages, Su-30MKI, Harrier, MiG-27/23), apart from the MiGs, are the most advanced aircraft of the fleet. With the -23s already being retired and -27s in less than a decade, the current fleet (especially when the MiG-29 upgrades to SMT or M2 std give this a/c attack capability) will continue service to at least the 2030s, with the first of the Jags and SHAR retiring in the late 2010s-2020s.

Thus, the need for a 5th generation dedicated attack aircraft will only happen in 20-30 years. Till then, IAF's current unit types will more than suffice for the role. Especially as more multirole a/c are inducted in the Multi Role Combat Aircraft (MRCA) tender (either Mirage-2000-5/9 or MiG-29M2) soon, and the Tejas Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) by 2010.

The slated replacement for the 5th generation attack-oriented multirole aircraft c. 2020s is the future Medium Combat Aircraft (MCA), only in the preliminary developmental stages.

[...]

It should be noted that India is currently in joint development (committed to) a 5th generation a/c; a joint Indo-Russian fighter designated PAK-FA/T-50. It is claimed by the developers that this aircraft will rival the F-22 (though I doubt it would be quite as advanced), and it does have the same role as the F-22 (stealth air superiortiy with 2ndary attack capability.)

Supposedly a prototype will fly by 2008, and will enter service 2009/10. An aircraft of this type (obviously) fits into IAF requirements, as a dedicated frontline stealth aircraft will free up the very capable Su-30MKI to a long-range strategic strike role.

[...]

So in conclusion, IAF circa 2030 will comprise the following types:
? Pak-FA
? MCA
140++ Su-30MKI
140++ MRCA
40-80 Tejas LCA
40 MiG-29*
40 Mirage-2000*
40 Jaguars

(*one of these types will be upgraded to MRCA std)

------==--=--==-------


Phew... now that I got that out of the way I can continue.

I do not think the reference to F-35 is something for the near future, but very well may be in store to the middle term.

The main aircraft for current carrier, INS Viraat consists of upgraded BAe. Sea Harriers ('SHAR's), which when the upgrade will be complete, will serve until the mid to late 2010s. The INS Vikramaditya (ex-RUS Gorshkov) will be incducted in 2007 with a complement of MiG-29Ks (comparable to American Superhornets). And the indigenous ADS class carrier will be inducted in 2010, with a complement of -29Ks and eventually complemented by Navalized Tejas ('N-LCA's). Now when the Viraat retires, the SHARs will operate both off the ADS until the N-LCA variant gets fully inducted (c. 2015).

It is worth mentioning that, as I mentioned previously, the IAF is offering a tender for the MRCA whether or not this goes to the MiG-29M2 or not, there is a comprehensive upgrade program in the pipeline for IAF's MiG-29 fleet, which would have a wide variety of complementary systems with the IN -29Ks. Furthermore, the N-LCA will have over 90% direct commonality with the LCA and LCA Trainer. This will make the MiG-29K and the N-LCA the standard naval 4+ generation combat planes in the mid-run, offering a hi-lo mix of platforms.

However a third (and possibly fourth) indigenous carrier is slated for construction in the early 2010s, and is confirmed to be substantially larger. This carrier will likely be inducted in the mid- to late-2010 timeframe. By the time this carrier gets inducted, the F-35 production line will be up and running, and F-35s and Rafeles would be proliferate. This would require a 5th-generation aircraft in ideal. I have heard no news or even speculation that the PAK-FA will be developed in a navalized varient. And even then, its confirmed to be an air-superiority fighter in design.

Despite the petty forumal cat-fighting here that would suggest otherwise, India and America has made incredible material and diplomatic leaps in their relationship. Just last week, Ameica and India signed a landmark defense agreement. I have literally full confidence that even if the rate of this lovefest continues, and by all accounts its only expected to grow, then this deal very well me viable.

The diplomatic reasons for this are obvious, but in terms of military economy, America wants in on the Indian defense market in a big way. The minor differences that have prevented the development on the US offer of F-35 to India would be worked out before then. Technically, they're currently working on that now.

I for one am hoping for the best!
-Raj


Mod edit of oversized image/photo; changed to direct link

[edit on 13-7-2005 by Seekerof]



posted on Jul, 13 2005 @ 06:57 PM
link   
Originally posted by Realist05
The US/India relationship has taken some interesting turns lately; the old "Enemy of my enemy is my friend" in relation to the Islamic states would certainly be part of that, as well as India jumping into capitalist economic policies instead of the socialist model the congress party used to push. As a Yank I'm at least happy the weekly put-down of the US from Bhramin know-it-alls has disappeared.
As to the Indian Navy, my question to you Stealth Spy is where is this weapon aimed?
Deigo Garcia perhaps?


Wow! A cold war dinosaur!

May I be the first to welcome you to the last 20 years!



Lord. I don't know where to begin. I'll ignore the snide 'Brahmin' insult (though if I were a b!tch I could reciprocate in tone and say that "I am at least happy that the 10,000 kilos of explosive birthed by Cracker-Islamofascist love-in has finally stopped killing Kashmiri babies.")

Actually, you know what, I think I know who best can explain the bourgening American-Indian friendship. I could go all and wax poetic with quotes from the tons of policy making literature pouring out of both sides on the ideological similarity and concurrance of interests (democracy, capitalism, secularism, non-proliferation, etc.) But I like realpolitking more

So how about some excerpts from the statement of Ashley J. Tellis Senior Associate, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Committee on House International Relations Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific on June 14, 2005. Sorry I don't have a link, though its available through the Congress online archives.

Mr Tellis is the foremost S. Asia policy advisor to the Bush Administration and one of them under Clinton. His thinking, unlike your relatively neanderthal-like worldview, reflects the majority thinking in both the Indian and American establishments and the opinion of everyone with a neutral assessment capability of modern events and future potentials. Anyway, here we go:


"Vis-a-vis India, the United States should aim to rapidly complete the transformation in U.S.-Indian relations that has been underway since the final years of the Clinton Administration, and which received dramatic substantive impetus in the first term of President George W. Bush, in order to permanently entrench India in the ranks of America`s friends and allies. With the changes that have occurred both globally and in India since the end of the Cold War, a close bilateral relationship that is based on the strong congruence of interests, values, and inter-societal ties, is in fact possible for the first time in the history of the two countries."

[...]


"India has embarked on a new cycle of military modernization, but unlike the past when autarkic and exclusionary attitudes defined its conception of military power, New Delhi is now comfortable with using its military forces for combined operations with both regional countries and especially with the United States.

All told, then, India`s emergence as a great power that dominates the South Asian and Indian Ocean regions, is now only a matter of time. A strong U.S.-Indian relationship, characterized by robust bilateral cooperation in regards to preserving regional and global order, is emphatically in the interest of both India and the United States

Given India`s large size, proud history, and great ambitions, however, it would be unrealistic to expect that New Delhi would become a formal alliance partner of Washington, even if the current improvement in U.S.-Indian relations were successfully consummated. Rather, India will likely march to the beat of its own drummer, at least most of the time.

I believe that a strong and independent India nevertheless represents a strategic asset to the United States, even when it remains only a partner and not a formal ally.

I think that the administration has reached a similar conclusion correctly in my judgment in its March 25, 2005 statement about assisting the rise of Indian power. This appraisal is rooted in the assessment that there are no intrinsic conflicts of interest between India and the United States and, consequently, transformed ties that enhance the prospect for consistent even if only tacit ``strategic coordination`` between Washington and New Delhi serve American interests just as well as any recognized alliance."

[edit on 13-7-2005 by rajkhalsa2004]



posted on Jul, 13 2005 @ 07:14 PM
link   
Hi

I realized I hadn't addressed your question regarding the intention of the Indian navy. Though I must wonder, if you feel their target is DG, then why ever is America going to train Indian pilots in CATOBAR carrier ops?


But I had posted an explanation before in another forum on that exact same question. If I may humbly quote from there because I'm too lazy to retype
:


Hellfish6 posted:

Out of curiosity, what is considered to be India's primary maritime threat? They seem to have almost total dominance in the Indian Ocean already (save for the US battle groups in transit to the Persian Gulf). Is the US seen as a threat? China? Pakistan?
Hi Hellfish,
Forgive the very long post. But penning this also is serving to weave the divergent bits of accumulated trivia I have in my head into my own greater understanding of Indias stategic situation.



Pecently, the IN had unveiled its new doctrine. It reflects and reacts to the new world situation and the growing importance of Asia in oil politics.

With exception of the USN, India is the dominant force in the Indian ocean region. Along with its navy, the magnitude of the shore-based IAF and missile forces can virtually deny the region to any surface force from the Malaccas to the Persian gulf. Even a hypothetical USN carrier force would not lightly tangle with this in conventional terms.

From what reseach I have done, I see the IN's role as basically three-fold -- wherein the IN must be capable of fulfilling each of these roles at the same time without compromizing on any of the other of them, viz.:
1. A guaranteer of Indian strategic interests
2. An independantly operateable (from the mainland, that is) instrument of localized force projection anywhere in the IOR
3. And a policeman of free-lanes shipping in the busiest sea lanes in the world.


With regards to the first, India is heavily dependant on foreign oil for its needs. As the Indian economy continues to boom, oil requirements grow exponentially. India's relationship with Iran, UAE, Oman and even speculations in the N. African desert require adaquate security of tankers transiting from the Gulf to India's west coast. It is necessary that IN must be overwhelmingly capable of providing this security, as the Indian economy is dependant on this influx.

Even with pipeline politics and talks of pipelines from through Pakistan from Iran and the CAR, India's strategic supply of petrolium reserves is two weeks --about the time it would take to conduct any war against Pakistan or China. Those two weeks, would see whatever land-based oil lines in Pakistan obviously destroyed. India would then be forced to import its entire petrolium resources through sea-lanes, and the Indian Navy must be in a position, post-war, to protect India's shipping from any threat.

India's strategic requirements don't have to deal with India alone. China, Japan, Korea and even ASEAN members get their oil from the same place, and are even more heavily dependant on the Mid East. The vast majority (we're talking 95+%) of their oil is shipped through the IO and up the S. China sea. The very jugular vein of these countries flows right under India, and unlike India, they are in no position to do anything about it. This is a tremendous --and completely overlooked-- strategic advantage India holds over these nations.

Obviously, the only potential enemy India has with these nations is China, whose energy need requirements are in an even more critical position than India. Its pipeline projects basically all are based out of Pakistan. Even with these, the vast majority of its oil will continue to be shipped from the ME. And even the Pakistan-pipelines require shipping oil/lng from there to Pakistan in any case. The pipelines can easily be neutralized by IAF/IA. IN's role is to deny the Chinese navy access to the region, and interdict its shipping by IN's overwhelming regionalized superiority.

Any PLAN (or other navy's for that matter) increase in procurment/deployment to the IOR will be matched by IN force increase/deployments, so this superiority remains. The likely aquisition of Tu-22M3s from Russia in the next year or so will act as a strategic, long-range standoff platform with which, for example, massive E. Asian fleet entering the IOR will be hard-pressed to counter (especially given the geography of the Indonesian, etc. archipelagoes)


With regard to the second point, force-projection, what the Tsunami disaster basically displayed to the surprised world the speed, size and effectiveness of IN's deployability to troublespots in the region. India, being that its a regional superpower strategically unconstrained in its natural sphere of influence --(unlike, for example, China which is contained by strong and hostile littoral nations like Japan, Korea, Taiwan, which as well have US backing)-- has a vested interest in the surrounding states and has the ability to intervene, humanitarianly or otherwise, as was displayed with the Indian Peacekeeping Force in SL and the put-down of the invasion of the Maldives in the 80s, and by the Tsunami deployments now.

Pakistan presents no naval threat to the IN, and land-based resources are itself able to neutralize them. IN will have a supporting role (as 1971 war showed) but these will be limited to speedy missile boats and patroling vessels. The meat of IN deployment -- and where IN's capital deployments will be against Pakistan -- is that of blockade of its shoreline. India's mobilization following the Pakistani-backed terrorist attack on India's Parliament showed that this can easily be done.

Another goal of this is the ability to land troops in nearby trouble spots. The intital landings of IPKF in SL was done mostly by air, and then only after ports were secured. While IAF is going hellstrong on strategic transport capability (that itself another topic), IN is concentrating on having the ability to conduct forced landings in hostile territory. Potenial targets: Pakistan (unlike in the previous wars, Indian conventional superiority now allows India to not only fight on the border, but literally to establish a beach head in Balochistan directly to create another front bypassing traditional defended borders, and supply this front quite at want); Sri Lanka (intervening in the civil war); or Burma (any full-scale India-China war will have the PLA streaming through the Burmese jungles around the Himalay.

The fact that India has started the increase of the Marine Commando Force to regimental-plus size is telling.


The third, policing the seas is the most benign, and where there is considerable convergence with US and allies (UK, Japan, ASEAN) interest. It is in India's greatest interest that freedom of the seas is maintained around her. Piracy remains a very bad problem in SE Asia, where the hundreds of thousands of islands make for policing difficult. There is also a growing problem around Bengal and Lanka of piracy.

There is also a military reason. The rapidly growing India-US friendship has been most materially evidently shown --despite it being perhaps the most low-key-- by IN ships routinely escorting USN ships in the IOR. This was especially during the afghanistan invasion, where USN capital ships were otherwise committed.

Also India's benign foreign policy all these years have caused the ASEAN nations to rapidly turning to India as a counterbalance against China, which is seen as hostile, and even to balance America/Australia. IN escorts Singaporean, Thai, Indonesian, Cambodian and Vietnamese commercial and naval ships, as well as Japan, Australian and Korean ships transiting the sealanes there. There is joint patrolling with USN in the area already, and I've heard that Japan is invited, but I think recent developments wrt China would make them shy to stray far from home. Also, because India is a neutral country, Thailand and Indonesia requested India patrol the seaways around their country so America won't have to.

Another (main?) reason behind India's willingness to have a continuous presence in the area is to deter the PLAN from even entering the IOR through sustained forward IN deployments in and monitoring of the region.




iron posted:

iam i right if i say that india has a quiet strong army now , or will have in the near future ????
Hi

I don't think many people really grasp how far the IN has come in recent years. From being a gorified brown-water navy through the 80s, to the 15-year plan from 2002 that will see in little over a decade -- that is, 2017 -- India having 3 carrier battle-group fleets and a fourth around a cruiser comprising upwards of 150 ships and 40 submarines, 30 MR aircraft and helicopters, 60 ASW helicopters and 4 augmented squadrons of ASW planes, an coast guard tripled in size, induction if indigenous nuclear submarines -- all this plus the double increase in IAF size and potency, with many more modern planes capable of long-distance ASh roles (including by that time at least sqn strength Backfires, and 4 sqn MKIs which also have standoff long-range nuclear/missile capabilites.)

What's also significant is that as IN's strength increases, it will see greater cooperation and inter-operability with USN and allied navies, especially in the Gulf and SE Asia.

[edit on 13-7-2005 by rajkhalsa2004]



posted on Jul, 13 2005 @ 07:49 PM
link   

I can understand you if it was the F-22 or the B-2 but this is the F-35


Really? So the F-35 is like any other pane then? I don't think so, although it won't be as stealthy as the Raptor or B-2 it will still have major computer and stealth capabilities ahead of most jets.

[edit on 13-7-2005 by WestPoint23]



posted on Jul, 13 2005 @ 07:49 PM
link   
Hi there rajkhalsa2004.
Always nice to see you when you do pop in.

You might want to read your u2u from me, asap.
Thank you.




seekerof

[edit on 13-7-2005 by Seekerof]



posted on Jul, 13 2005 @ 09:00 PM
link   
Hi Seekerof

Done and noted



posted on Jul, 13 2005 @ 09:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Stealth Spy
Sure the F-35 may be a little too much, but if India really want it and are serious on it, and lobby hard and a get data protection act together and make a very very serious request for it through the highest level and do some US soothing by ceding to the long standing request to send peace-keeping troops to Iraq and Afghanistan, etc and play the world's largest democracy card,etc in most probability they will get it.

But I serioulsy doubt if India are that serious about the F-35B and they would not go to such deep extents to get it when they have other easily available offers at hand, especially the VSTOL PAK-FA, naval LCA & MCA.


M8 think realistically
Its well known that the F 18 has almost become "outdated" with the arrival of the F 22, Hence the Usa offered the F18 to India as a last ditch effort to milk as much money from the F 18 "cash cow".
They know that even if india were to become hostile, they would have far superior tech to counter it.
So as the other posters said the F 35 might never be offered to India.
Secondly India can' t oblige to all of the Usa's demands like sending troops to iraq etc as seriously we have got better things to do.
And even if it were available to us after all of this it would cost us a fortune, given that we are still a developing nation, i bet our govt is never going to spend that much on just a couple of high end aircraft!


Mod edit to correct the big quote violation.


[edit on 13-7-2005 by Seekerof]



posted on Jul, 13 2005 @ 10:10 PM
link   
Hi all, thought I'd drag my Neanderthal knuckles back to the keyboard to spout some more cold-war nonsense.

First of all, do not discount the close relationship that India has with Russia; there still seems to be a great deal of animosity in that country toward the west and at America in particular. Cooperation with India will continue as India fields Migs and Sukhoi products throughout it's airfields. There is a natural carryover from this to diplomacy.

Second, as I believe someone like Seeker has pointed out, nations do not have perminant friends, just perminant interests. Although both countries have a shared British inheretence of democratic institutions and burgeoning trade ties, I don't think the US is ready to cede even parity with India over control of the sea, even if it is called the Indian ocean.

As to my Bhramin remark, I apologise if that causes you offence. I come from a background of listening to Indian diplomats in New York (UN) in the 80's along with staff, who made careers out of criticising my country with almost every breath, while holding out the great virtues of the Congress Party and their magnificent achievements on the sub-continent while all sorts of bad stuff was going down there. Back in my dinosaur days.



posted on Jul, 13 2005 @ 10:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by teh_sithlord
M8 think realistically
Its well known that the F 18 has almost become "outdated" with the arrival of the F 22, Hence the Usa offered the F18 to India as a last ditch effort to milk as much money from the F 18 "cash cow".
They know that even if india were to become hostile, they would have far superior tech to counter it.
So as the other posters said the F 35 might never be offered to India.
Secondly India can' t oblige to all of the Usa's demands like sending troops to iraq etc as seriously we have got better things to do.
And even if it were available to us after all of this it would cost us a fortune, given that we are still a developing nation, i bet our govt is never going to spend that much on just a couple of high end aircraft!


Well the idea of having an exclusive F-22 would mean that they would have a plane that would be capable of countering it.


But what a lot of people aren't acknowlaging was that participation in the F-35 program was already offered to India. This would mean India ponying up cash and technical resources to actually help develop the aircraft, and then buying them as their turn came up off hte assembly line.

India would be required to adhere to the incredibly strict intellectual property licenses. They couldn't oblige because it would basically kill the PAK-FA program -- the only competator to F-35 -- in it's infancy. Something, of course, America would love to do.

What the IN is referring to is sales of these after the inital assembly lines have been established -- when the sales of F-35 already meet initial developer country requirements, and can be sold to friendly non-3rd-party countries with lots of cash (i.e. India.)


Let's be brutally honest, there is no pressing need for these planes in the IN right now.

1. They are locked into MiG-29K/NLCA procurement, and both of these are very formidable planes that will operate well into the next 25-30 years and hold their own nicely.


2. In 15-20 years, IN will still be the dominant (except for USN) force in the IOR. Really, significantly more so than it is even today. During that time, potential enemies the IN would face would simply not have similar capabilities within that sphere of force projection. While allied navies will eventually induct more capable naval aircraft with Rafele, F-35, really, in terms of India, so what? They are allied navies. India still has considerable superiority vis a vis hostile or potentially hostile nations.

And even if China were to build a fleet of carriers or surface ships, they'll still be bottled up in the S China sea, with concurent USN+allies ramping up of capabilities. Even if the Taiwan issue is resolved and say PRC controls Taiwan, there would be an even bigger onus for USN + E/SE Asian allies to expand their own ASu/ASW capabilities. India will still be screened by a whole lot of countries terrified of an increase in Chinese force projection capabilities, and a host of similarly allied nations.


3. India is not going to induct a whole lot of them. We're talking 1 carrier airwing -- 2 at max, after manufacturing lines are spewing them out. India will be able to afford them by then, comfortably, even at current 3% GDP defense expendiature + additional 1.5% CAPEX allocation.

And even if India were to sign up for this tomororw, it would still be about a decade before they will be inducted. This is long-term.


4. Perhaps the biggest factor is that in 20 years, the idea/surprise of US selling these aircraft to India will simply be a non issue. By then a 2 whole generations of non-cold-war touched people will lead both nations, people raised in an era of incredbile sense of friendliness between the two countries.

Even if the world were a vaccum, and there were no intl. developments in that time, India and US will well reach that level of trust and economic/political intamacy and interdependance. ...But the world isn't, and you'll see a rise of China, India following a close second, and a resurgent Russia and an integrated EU. Even if they had a US-Pakistan relationship now, they'd still be forced into each others embrace and military cooperation.





The IN chief didn't just up out of the blue say "hey, we want F-35s." He was asked that specific question, and obviously saw the writing on the walll, shrugged, and said, yes we'd like it, knowing that they'd probably get it anyway.

-Raj



posted on Jul, 13 2005 @ 10:39 PM
link   
rajkhalsa2004:


But what a lot of people aren't acknowlaging was that participation in the F-35 program was already offered to India. This would mean India ponying up cash and technical resources to actually help develop the aircraft, and then buying them as their turn came up off hte assembly line.

Lockheed certainly did make such an offer to India to participate in the JSF program...........back in 2003, where India later turned down the offer. And because they turned it down, that is why they were just offered F-16/F-18s and the bargaining position for an F-16 assembly plant to build them.
India's Defence Purchase Equations

Now, if India wants the F-35 JSF, they will certainly pay for it if such a deal is reached and approved.





seekerof

[edit on 13-7-2005 by Seekerof]



posted on Jul, 13 2005 @ 10:44 PM
link   
Yeh but, if it don't fit a the Purchasers Carrier why but it?

Dallas



posted on Jul, 13 2005 @ 10:52 PM
link   
Originally posted by Realist05
Hi all, thought I'd drag my Neanderthal knuckles back to the keyboard to spout some more cold-war nonsense.

Glad to took my comments as I'd ment them to be taken, cheeky but non-insulting nonetheless

First of all, do not discount the close relationship that India has with Russia; there still seems to be a great deal of animosity in that country toward the west and at America in particular. Cooperation with India will continue as India fields Migs and Sukhoi products throughout it's airfields. There is a natural carryover from this to diplomacy.

Well, I agree with you. If anything India-Russian cooperation will increase with joint projects. First the MKI, then Brahmos, then PAK-FA, GLONASS, etc., with each project, more and more Indian cooperation and expertise goes into it then just simple funding, and more and more the relationship grows to weapons of more strategic importance.

Russia realizes it can't keep arming CHina forever. Like India, China will eventualyl become self-sufficiant in arms, and unlike India, which Russia enjoys probably the closest non-CIS relationship, China is at best muted hostile. China will eventually exert more and more economic and strategic clout -- and demographic, with a huge population compared to Russia.

Russia can either go economically subserviant to China, and the more they sell them brings them that much closer, or they can throw in with the hyperpower, basically finally surrendering after 60 years of rivalry, and again, be economically subserviant, and then economically impotent as Western jobs and economies strips Russia of her true economic asset -- her scientists.

Then the third optino is throwing in with India, the only rival to China in Asia, and really the only other country with the capability to match China's potential man for man, dollar for dollar, culture for culture, PhD for PhD in the future. I mean, really, the economic difference between Indai and China is a mere 15 years. 15 years! That's diddly squat when you are talking about civlizations millenia old!

India and Russia have no stratetgic or tactical cross swords, and both like and respect each other. It is in Russia's interest to wean India away from American friendship, and build her up against China. Unlike with CHina, Russia has no qualm about getting involved with/cooperating on things of the utmost strategic importance to India. The whole world aside, Russia will always make sure to complement Indian weaknesses with her own strengths to see that India maintains that technical edge over Chinese numerical superiority that stalemates the two countries, and prevents CHina from exerting influence over SE, Central, South Asia/IOR and Middle East.

Russia also knows that India's going to cozy up to someone, and it would rather have that with her, rather htan the USA. This would mean, for every ideological/politica/cultural plus point America has with India, Russia will counter with an economic/strategic.

Interesting times ahead... Great Game pt. 2


Second, as I believe someone like Seeker has pointed out, nations do not have perminant friends, just perminant interests. Although both countries have a shared British inheretence of democratic institutions and burgeoning trade ties, I don't think the US is ready to cede even parity with India over control of the sea, even if it is called the Indian ocean.

In the predictable future, barring act of God, US will never cede that power. The US is called a hyperpower for a reason. A single USN carrier battle group can take out the rest of the world's navies combined.

However, with a rise of China, threatening, like Japand did in the 30s, 'America's ocean', the Pacific, and the US herself, USN will be very busy bottling up China. I honestly think this 'war on terror' will keep going until non-petroleum energy resoruces are developed, and the Mid East gets no funding, until that time America will be scattered around the world, putting out little fires, here and there, while keeping that pistol pointed at China's face.

America knows it cannot project power everywhere at once. It must have allies it can depend on. Hence we do not see them ceding any ocean to anyone, especialyl one as important as the IO, but they will need to accomodate the growing power of nations. This is done by makign sure that their interests, and the othercountries interests, match up and are in harmony.

There is a reason US and India are exercising and developing inter-operability like there's no friggin tomorrow. Because both see the writing on the wall wrt CHina, and India knows that it must rely on US to bottle up China so they don't operate in the IOR, and US knows that it must rely on India to protect American shipping and the shipping lanes in general in the IOR, and act as a strategic reserve to any Chinese breakout of hte S China sea.

Hence, there is a harmony of interests. Sure, there are no such things as perminant freinds, but dude! There is nothing but pure, sweet convergance of interests between India and America in the IOR ... and what a convergance that is!

We see it today, as I said before, when India escorted all US/Allied non-combat warships, and merchies while all USN war assets in the ME/IOR made a beeline to bomb the hell out of Afghanistan post 9/11

Imagine that, but on a much bigger scale in 20 years, when America must pull ships from other places to a flare up in the wildfire (China) while also containing brushfires (WOT)


As to my Bhramin remark, I apologise if that causes you offence. I come from a background of listening to Indian diplomats in New York (UN) in the 80's along with staff, who made careers out of criticising my country with almost every breath, while holding out the great virtues of the Congress Party and their magnificent achievements on the sub-continent while all sorts of bad stuff was going down there. Back in my dinosaur days.


Well, the cold war was a wierd time for everyone (is that an understatement or what!) America wasn't exactly a saint wrt India either. Arming the hell out of Pakistan and turning a blind eye while Pakistan unleashed 4 wars and unholy hell on India with terrorism that killed over 80,000 Indian civilians in the last decade... until those same groups started targetting America...


But the point is not to dwell on the past. There is incredible bitterness on both sides on things happened. But there is incredible potential in the years hence, and the biggest thing that happened in the last 10 years in India-US relations, by FAR, is that both sides are willing to let sleeping dogs lie, repress those bitter memories, and start afresh in a new world.

That is what is happening.



But regarding your statement about hostility, there is way too much of that in this forum. I find there are a whole grip of cold warriors on bothsides, from the hyperactively anti-American Indian Russopihle, to the condiscendingly, arrogantly ignorant American Indophobe.

That is why I get so irritated at thsi forum sometmes. It's like a perverse farce, because these strereotypes simply are insignifiacnt in real life.

Here is the reality:
Still not loved. Now not envied

Jun 23rd 2005 | WASHINGTON, DC
From The Economist print edition


Anti-Americanism is becoming entrenched, and getting more personal



[...]

Positive impressions of America have risen a few points in France, Germany and Russia since 2004, and have surged in India (since 2002) and Indonesia (2003). Against that, opinions of America are still well below their levels in 2000—and in most places they are still basically negative (see chart).

[...]

Pew asked its respondents to give favourability ratings to five nations: America, France, Germany, Japan and China. America came bottom of everyone's list everywhere except in India, where it was top, Poland, where it was in the middle and China, where it came above Japan.The British view France and Germany more favourably than they do America. China is more popular than the United States throughout Europe. (Germany won this particular beauty contest, by the way, scoring highly almost everywhere except Germany itself.)


[...]

The Pew poll even raises questions about how far others still see America as the land of opportunity, as Americans do. One question asked: “Suppose a young person who wanted to leave asked you to recommend where to go to lead a good life—what country would you recommend?” Nobody except the Indians picked the United States first (see table).





Cheers,
Raj

[edit on 14-7-2005 by rajkhalsa2004]



posted on Jul, 13 2005 @ 10:54 PM
link   
The way India has been overhyping those beautiful Su-30MKI's and their other varients, I am somewhat surprised and question why the Indians would want to buy the JSF for their carriers myself, Dallas.





seekerof




top topics



 
0
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join