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: 5
0
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 22 2005 @ 07:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by Stealth Spy

Third world....care to tell me what the other two world's are ??


i think it is superpowers and then developed and then third world.

GDP in PPP doesn't prove anything. the nomial GDP is the one you should read.

here is a list of the whole world
en.wikipedia.org...(nominal)_per_capita

india is $678
china is $1,411
United Kingdom is 38,098

see stealthspy china and india are on the same boat. we still are third world countries. it doesn't matter how nig our economy is. we have to spread the wealth amongst many more people than the developed world.



sure 19% of India lives inpoverty, but look on the bright side, 81%(~900 million people) dont and poverty is falling faster than ever before.


i throught it was 25%




posted on Jul, 22 2005 @ 08:07 AM
link   
indians always get their back up at the truth. India is growing but it still is a poor country, hundreds of millions of people live in squalor and poverty. I'm guessing india's poverty line is less than $1 a day.



posted on Jul, 22 2005 @ 10:57 AM
link   
WEll thats the case with all third world countries developing..
If china and India were to stop and ONLY cater to the needs of these people and not progress in other depts then well.. you tell me..



posted on Jul, 22 2005 @ 12:49 PM
link   
post edited; double post corrected; read actual post below

[edit on 22-7-2005 by Stealth Spy]



posted on Jul, 22 2005 @ 12:58 PM
link   

indians always get their back up at the truth.


Infact its quite the contrary.

per capita essentially divides all the wealth of the nation and splits it equally among its population...and obviously nations with larger populations loose out (the US is not even in the top 5)...it is not a measure of how rich a nation is but is a measure of how well off a nation's avarage citizen is...if you examine this list ... en.wikipedia.org...(nominal)_per_capita ... you'll find that luxemburg leads the way..luxemberg and is way ahead of the US ..it dose'nt mean is the most economically strongest country.....but Purchasing power is the real measure of a nation's wealth.

Sure per capita deals with a nations prosparity, but dfunk is talking about a nation's riches and purchasing power is an indication of that..not per capita.

And dfunk's claims that India does not have money to buy F-35's is absurd, incorrect and ignorant to say the least.


India is growing but it still is a poor country, hundreds of millions of people live in squalor and poverty. I'm guessing india's poverty line is less than $1 a day.


Yes the poverty line is 1$ a day in India....and 1 US $ in India = ~50 Indian Rupees...and a kg of rice can be bought for under 3 rupees !!

And although a large number of Indians live in poverty, that does not mean India is a poor country.......a far far larger number of people that is way greater than the population of UK+USA+many more countries live normal prosperous lives much ahead of the poverty line(which itself borders luxury in a place like India because 1$(= 50 times more worth in India) goes a long way in what you can buy with it).



And dfunk, i'm still waiting for an answer to why not so well off nations should keep away from US made weaponry


[edit on 22-7-2005 by Stealth Spy]



posted on Jul, 22 2005 @ 01:12 PM
link   
Since we have discussed stuff that is beyond the scope of the thread...here's getting back to the topic at hand :



Not Just A Sale, It's A Relationship
A rapidly expanding Indo-US story, one that begins with F-16s and moves on to F-35s, the joint strike fighter of the future.

Richard Kirkland, vice president of Lockheed Martin, would like his $34-billion defence empire to be an important chapter in the rapidly expanding Indo-US story, one that begins with F-16s and moves on to F-35s, the joint strike fighter of the future. Excerpts from an interview:


The key question for India is to buy a leading-edge capability today which will be refreshed for the next three decades. The F-16 leads to the F-35. My vision of the future is that one day India is going to be flying the F-35. I truly believe it. There is no comparison for the F-35—the French don't offer it, the Russians don't offer it. It only exists for US partners. One day the US and India will co-develop what's going to be next.

The future of weapons is said to lie beyond "visibility"...
In the battle of the future, when the F-35 is fielded, where do you want to be? The battle of the future becomes an unfair fight. The F-35 still has the aerodynamic performance of F-16 but I can basically walk up to you and tap you on the shoulder and you don't even know I am coming. It isn't invisible but it has a significant advantage that I can operate and you can't. It's like having night vision goggles. Would you rather set up the defence of India by going to a Swedish airplane that can't even envision in its wildest fantasy how they would go to this airplane (F-35)?


Will Lockheed give assurances for spare parts to address worries about reliability?
In the government-to-government agreements between the US and India, there will be language that will address acquisition and long-term support issues. Lockheed Martin will support those agreements. I would like to invite the minister of defence here at some point in time because a dialogue is extremely valuable. We want to be transparent and want to know what it is you are trying to achieve so we can help you achieve it.






full interview with lockheed vice prez


now hopefully the US cong will second this


and more good news on this thread :
US Aegis radar for Indian destroyers and much more ....


[edit on 22-7-2005 by Stealth Spy]



posted on Jul, 22 2005 @ 01:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Stealth Spy
Yes the poverty line is 1$ a day in India....and 1 US $ in India = ~50 Indian Rupees...and a kg of rice can be bought for under 3 rupees !!

And although a large number of Indians live in poverty, that does not mean India is a poor country.......a far far larger number of people that is way greater than the population of UK+USA+many more countries live normal prosperous lives much ahead of the poverty line(which itself borders luxury in a place like India because 1$(= 50 times more worth in India) goes a long way in what you can buy with it).


I'm not trying to bash on India, but you're exaggerating the truth. I have several friends that have travelled to India and tell me that it is very poor.

Your logic doesn't make much sense either. If $1 is worth 50x more in India, then I can buy a pair of shoes in India for a buck? Heck, I could buy the Ferrari 360 Spyder for ~$400 then?

Also, GDP takes into account exchange rates and whatnot. So that $1 they're making really IS worth $1 here in the USA.

[edit on 22-7-2005 by Blackout]



posted on Jul, 22 2005 @ 01:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Blackout
then I can buy a pair of shoes in India for a buck.I have several friends that have travelled to India and tell me that it is very poor.


Can a shabbily dressed person not have a fat bank account ???

I've seen documentries on TV on slums in New York (no offence intended), now does that mean that the USA is a poor country ??

A large number of people in India live in poverty...there's no secret in that but as i said there are a larger number(overwhelming majority) of people (>US+UK+many more nation's population) that live normal lives.

and, yes several low end pairs of shoes are available for 50 Rs. (1$)

And Ferrari's are not made in India but directly imported and there is heavy Government duty to add to it so it will end up costlier than in many other parts. And the 360 Modena is the only model on sale in India.

1$ will buy you 20kg of rice (the staple food here) and that may last one person for ~8 months (if it dose'nt go bad).


Can we get back to the topic....there are several threads on ATS on other forums to discuss economics, etc

[edit on 22-7-2005 by Stealth Spy]



posted on Jul, 22 2005 @ 05:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Stealth Spy


I've seen documentries on TV on slums in New York (no offence intended), now does that mean that the USA is a poor country ??


his saying as a whole its very poor. people over the poverty doesn't mean their not poor. someone that may earn $400 but its not included in the poverty line. whats the diference in 50dollars




and, yes several low end pairs of shoes are available for 50 Rs. (1$)


and the japanese yen is like 1 US dollar to 70yen. whats your point?

does that make japan a cheap place to buy things



1$ will buy you 20kg of rice (the staple food here) and that may last one person for ~8 months (if it dose'nt go bad).


one whole family or one person




posted on Jul, 22 2005 @ 05:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Stealth Spy

And dfunk's claims that India does not have money to buy F-35's is absurd, incorrect and ignorant to say the least.


just lok at indias military budget. no way are they going to spend 10% of their budget getting these planes.



posted on Jul, 22 2005 @ 05:18 PM
link   
external image


Lets see if we can get back to the topic:
Indian Navy want F-35, not the Super Hornets that were offered

Thank you.





seekerof



posted on Jul, 23 2005 @ 01:39 AM
link   
nooo nukes noo nukes .. noo F-35s..



posted on Jul, 23 2005 @ 03:00 AM
link   
Now since the Indian Navy rejected the Super Hornet, Boeing seems to be trying their luck with the airforce :



Boeing in talks with Indian Air Force to supply F-18s

Boeing Co. said on Friday it had begun preliminary talks with India on selling and co-producing F-18 Super Hornet fighter planes, a month after New Delhi and Washington signed a far-reaching defence pact.

"We have begun initial discussions with the IAF in terms of exploratory relationship building and to provide them with some initial information on the capabilities of the Super Hornet," Chris Chadwick, Boeing vice president for the F/A-18 programs, told Reuters. "Their response has been very positive."

He added the price per aircraft would depend on the configuration sought in the planned request for proposal by the IAF. The cost would also be determined by the kind of technology and weapons platform the U.S. government would allow Boeing to export to India, Chadwick said.

"We would be working at setting up a co-production facility for this aircraft in India," he added.


full article ........



posted on Jul, 23 2005 @ 03:03 AM
link   


Boeing will not offer the F-15 Eagle for India's forthcoming fighter needs but would like to offer the latest Block 2 version of the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, the company said.

The Block 2 includes advanced systems such as the APG-79 Active Electronically Scanned Array, Advanced Targeting FLIR and Multi-Functional Information Distribution System.

Co-production with India is likely.


full article at : www.flightinternational.com...



posted on Jul, 27 2005 @ 02:25 PM
link   


WASHINGTON - The prospect of selling fighter jets to the world's largest democracy is generating mounting interest at Boeing's military headquarters in St. Louis.

Executives are just back from a trip to India late last week, during which they spoke to political and military leaders about the possible sale of the St. Louis-built F/A-18 Super Hornet. In India, Chris Chadwick, Boeing's vice president for Hornet programs, told Indian reporters, "As the world watches closely while the story of India unfolds, we at Boeing see the next 60 years of aerospace in India as dynamic, entrepreneurial and globally dynamic."

India is in the market for 126 aircraft, said Boeing spokeswoman Pat Frost, who accompanied Chadwick and others on the trip. Advertisement "That's a lot of airplanes. It's a great opportunity," Frost said Tuesday. The Boeing group spoke to Air Force and government officials who're trying to put together a formal request for proposals. That request is expected to be ready between mid-fall and December, Frost said.

"We know they're interested in co-production and technology transfer," Frost said. "We're willing to entertain all these different options."

A sale to India would be Boeing's first international deal for the Super Hornet, though the F/A-18 Super Hornet has been sold overseas. Right now, the U.S. Navy is the Super Hornet's sole customer.

The Boeing talks took place just a few days after India and the United States agreed to strengthen cooperation on nuclear, defense and security issues. "With all the agreements going on between the U.S. government and India, India's obviously becoming a very important economic player," Frost said.

"They've got a reasonable chance in India," said Richard Aboulafia, aerospace analyst at the Teal Group Corp. in Fairfax, Va. "The big advantage they have is the U.S. Navy's stamp of approval, and this is going to be a consistently upgraded aircraft."


full article .......

[edit on 27-7-2005 by Stealth Spy]



posted on Jul, 27 2005 @ 10:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Stealth Spy
And dfunk, i'm still waiting for an answer to why not so well off nations should keep away from US made weaponry



because its irresponsible for a country that is poor to spend the incredible amount of money on a luxury such as a brand new US fighter. India's eyes are too big for its stomach. That money could be better used on helping people and if I was a poor indian taxpayer I wouldnt be happy that my money would be spent on such expensive things. There is a large middle class in India but still most of the country is dirt poor, so poor that the roll of toilet paper i wipe my a$$ with is worth a days wages to them.

India can do what they want with their money but you really have to question the need for such ridiculously expensive weapons a country like India.

The elite in that country would rather spend their money on guns than schools.



posted on Jul, 27 2005 @ 11:29 PM
link   
I don't know abt the money bit but I personally feel that India should work on building its own (or in concert with Russia etc.) F-35 type fighter.. Zero dependability on unreliable sources of tech/equipment



posted on Jul, 28 2005 @ 08:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by drfunk
India's eyes are too big for its stomach.

You sound like a broken record...did'nt you see the purchasing power list and did'nt a mod ask you not to hijack the topic with non-weaponry related topics ???

You said that poor countries (which India is not) should buy only Russian weapons and not US ones and when i asked you why you post this ignorant irrelavent stuff.


That money could be better used on helping people and if I was a poor indian taxpayer I wouldnt be happy that my money would be spent on such expensive things.



No body likes spending money on weapons...but what do you suggest ..surrender to Pakistan the next time the attack us ???..they've started 3 wars on India in 50 years time and although they got badly beaten in all 3, they still are waging a pseudo war by sponsoring thier jehadi terrorism on India....and keep threatening us with nukes every fortnight


And despite this India spends only 3.5% of its GDP on defence and the rest on poverty reduction...the rest is spent on health and eduaction...infact in the last five years, 250+ million people were lifted out of poverty


most of the country is dirt poor

It is undenyable that 19% of the population live in poverty...but that is not MOST of the population as you wrongly claim.

and ~900 million people (the remaining 81%) live normal lives out of poverty...why dont you look on the right side ???..that's almost the population of all the western developed nations.


so poor that the roll of toilet paper i wipe my a$$ with is worth a days wages to them.


That is bl00dy offensive, highly provocatory and extremely derogatory to say the least ;if i were to adequately reply to that i would be banned.



And go post you BS on some other forums dealing with economics, not on ones on aircraft projects.


and in case you did'nt know, India's defence spending of 19.5 billion $ is only 3.5 % of the GDP and is dwarfed by the amount that is spent on education, health care, etc.


Look at this 2005 chart of purchasing power if you are'nt cinvinced

Rank | Country| Purchasing power (in millions of International dollars)

1 United States 12,332,296 (12.3 trillion)
2 People's Republic of China 8,091,851 (8 trillion)
3 Japan 4,009,327 (4 trillion)
4 India 3,602,894 (3.6 trillion)
5 Germany 2,498,471
6 United Kingdom 1,825,837
7 France 1,811,561
8 Italy 1,694,706
9 Russia 1,585,478

link

Sure there are poor people but the massive number of non-poor people = ~900 million that constitute most of the population keeps things buoyant.

And if you want to post some thread hijacking details, do so in a dedicated thread in an appropriate forum and notify me and i will be glad to reply.


[edit on 28-7-2005 by Stealth Spy]



posted on Jul, 28 2005 @ 08:35 AM
link   

You sound like a broken record...did'nt you see the purchasing power list and did'nt a mod ask you not to hijack the topic with non-weaponry related topics ???

You said that poor countries (which India is not) should buy only Russian weapons and not US ones and when i asked you why you post this ignorant irrelavent stuff.


you asked for a reply so i gave it. The only reason India is so high on that list is because of its huge population. Even with purchasing power India has nothing on western countries.


No body likes spending money on weapons...but what do you suggest ..surrender to Pakistan the next time the attack us ???..they've started 3 wars on India in 50 years time and although they got badly beaten in all 3, they still are waging a pseudo war by sponsoring thier jehadi terrorism on India....and keep threatening us with nukes every fortnight


And despite this India spends only 3.5% of its GDP on defence and the rest on poverty reduction...the rest is spent on health and eduaction...infact in the last five years, 250+ million people were lifted out of poverty


India has held its own fine and it has a great defence force and is able to defeat its rival pakistan easily without the extravagance of a brand new US jet fighter. Just because an Indian can afford a kilo of rice a day for his family doesnt mean he's rich, he's still fairly poor compared to the west. Most chinese people are still poor too and they are supposedly becoming a superpower. You cant hide the truth about the living standards of the Indian people just because a billion people makes your country look rich on paper.


It is undenyable that 19% of the population live in poverty...but that is not MOST of the population as you wrongly claim.


they may be above the poverty line but they are still dirt poor. The Indian govt qualifies the poor as people living under a $1 a day right?? you still have about 200 million people living below the dollar, a burgeoning middle class (which by no means has the kind of life of the western middle class) and the cosmopolitan ultra-rich Indian's who's lives are incredibly different from the avg indian.


and ~900 million people (the remaining 81%) live normal lives out of poverty...why dont you look on the right side ???..that's almost the population of all the western developed nations.


they may live 'normal' lives, but they arent certainly like the lives people lead in the west. They are still poor no matter what you say, in your books a guy who earns $5 a day is normal. The standard of living is still way way below what the west has and that's my point. 900 million indians arent living as good as americans, south koreans or japanese are they?? they dont even live as good as the chinese who are considered poor too.



That is bl00dy offensive and provocatory and if i were to adequately reply to that i would be banned.


sorry i didnt mean no offense but i had to get my point across that something so worthless to me is a days wages in India. I understand about PPP but even with PPP India is a joke compared to the west. Can't you realise this?


And go post you BS on some other forums dealing with economics, not on ones on aircraft projects.
aircraft projects cost money and a strong economy delivers better planes. That's why the US and Europe are the top dogs in the aerospace sector.l



and in case you did'nt know, India's defence spending of 19.5 billion $ is only 3.5 % of the GDP and is dwarfed by the amount that is spent on education, health care, etc.


$19.5 billion isnt much money for a defence force of India's size. They cant afford the luxuries of western aircraft and they should buy Russian if they want cheap and cost effective solutions. The money can be better spent than on lavish airplanes a country like india could spend better money on things such as schools and healthcare for all those poor indians out there. as you said 200 million indians still live like they are in the dark ages and 900 million still live like they are exploited workers in the 19th century. The rest of the population are the ones who are living comfortably, no doubt mostly comprised of brahmins and kshatriya's.

thanks,
drfunk



posted on Jul, 28 2005 @ 12:58 PM
link   
edited heeding to mod instructions.. but mind yuo thoughts have been communicated via U2U

[edit on 28-7-2005 by Daedalus3]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join