US offers Patriot(PAC-3) missiles to India

The Mirage 2000 was developed in 1983... that makes it 22 years old....

You'll notice that I said the Mirage, not the 2000 version. It's still a modified plane, and it's very old.

The Jaguar was brought into service in 1974... that makes it 31 years old

It was developed in the 60's. It's a late third generation plane.

It was really outclassed by the 70's and introduction of the F-15.

If they were so obsolete than why did the US order a large batch of them after seeing their performance in the Falklands?
That was in 1982 roughly 15 years after the initial design was approved... It has been upgraded continiously throughout the years and only recently has production stopped.

I said they were considered obsolete at the time.

I don't know if America just bought some after the Falklands, either. America had always shown interest in the Harrier program. We were the ones who developed the concept after the British weren't interested in it.

Both rely on foreign technology... which one imports the most relatively is a moot point. The main thing is both countries can develop their own indigenious weaponry...
It's fair to say though that South Korea relies far more on US assistance than say India... which does not at all.

I don't know what India can produce, but I do know they don't produce much. Most of their ground weapons are Russian.

South Korea can make systems capable of competing with Russian weapons on their own. They have built their own navy.

Why don't you give examples of where South Korea relies on America besides the airforce.

Originally posted by Disturbed Deliverer

The Mirage 2000 was developed in 1983... that makes it 22 years old....

You'll notice that I said the Mirage, not the 2000 version. It's still a modified plane, and it's very old.

India flies the mirage 2000 though. The original mirage has little in common with the 2000. Even the basic chasis is different.

The Jaguar was brought into service in 1974... that makes it 31 years old

It was developed in the 60's. It's a late third generation plane.

It was really outclassed by the 70's and introduction of the F-15.

The Jaguar is not even in the same class as the F-15... and remember it was also developed in the 60's... the US seems to want to keep flying them.
The Jaguar has performed well above expectations and is only now being retired from RAF service now that the Typhoon is being introduced.

If they were so obsolete than why did the US order a large batch of them after seeing their performance in the Falklands?
That was in 1982 roughly 15 years after the initial design was approved... It has been upgraded continiously throughout the years and only recently has production stopped.

I said they were considered obsolete at the time.

That's like saying the F-22 and typhoon are obsolete because they were developed in the 1980's

I don't know if America just bought some after the Falklands, either. America had always shown interest in the Harrier program. We were the ones who developed the concept after the British weren't interested in it.

You seem to have your facts mixed up. We convinced the americans that thrust vectoring etc was the way forward. The US decided to purchase the license for the harrier after it devastated the argentinian air-force

Both rely on foreign technology... which one imports the most relatively is a moot point. The main thing is both countries can develop their own indigenious weaponry...
It's fair to say though that South Korea relies far more on US assistance than say India... which does not at all.

I don't know what India can produce, but I do know they don't produce much. Most of their ground weapons are Russian.

South Korea can make systems capable of competing with Russian weapons on their own. They have built their own navy.

Japan, China and India have the most powerfull Navies in Asia. And if you look... you will see that russian equipment only supplements indigenious designs. India's delhi class for example.
India also developed the Arjun MBT

Why don't you give examples of where South Korea relies on America besides the airforce.

Lets just forget about all of those american troops based there shall we?
Not forgetting all of the millitary aid the US pumps into the economy every year.


[edit on 25-1-2005 by Lucretius]

The Jaguar is not even in the same class as the F-15... and remember it was also developed in the 60's... the US seems to want to keep flying them.
The Jaguar has performed well above expectations and is only now being retired from RAF service now that the Typhoon is being introduced.

The F-15 was far more advanced then the Jaguar.

My point was that it wasn't advanced by the time the British sold it to India.

That's like saying the F-22 and typhoon are obsolete because they were developed in the 1980's

I didn't say the Harrier was obselete. I said that was what it was considered. The Harrier was actually produced in the 60's, and developed in the late 50's.

They probably couldn't have competed with the most current Russian or American technology.

You seem to have your facts mixed up. We convinced the americans that thrust vectoring etc was the way forward. The US decided to purchase the license for the harrier after it devastated the argentinian air-force

I'm going back to when the concept was first developed. The British weren't very interested in the idea, America was.

Japan, China and India have the most powerfull Navies in Asia. And if you look... you will see that russian equipment only supplements indigenious designs. India's delhi class for example.
India also developed the Arjun MBT

South Korea's navy is right up there with at least China and India. China basically has bought everything from Russia. Most of India's navy is Russian equipment.

As for the Arjun, there will be what, 100 by 2010? India will be relying on their T-72's, and then T-90's.

This is opposed to South Korea where pretty much everything on the ground was developed by them.

Lets just forget about all of those american troops based there shall we?
Not forgetting all of the millitary aid the US pumps into the economy every year.

Those troops are there for America's strategic reasons, not the South's need for them. And how much money does America actually give to the South? Can we see a real figure?

Th esouth korean navy is NO match for the Indian Navy in any aspect....the Pakistan Navy is superior to the South Korean Navy...The south Korean Navy is more defensive than the chinese Navy ..and the chinese Navy was pretty green water until now..

The Jaguars WERE sold to India when they were frontline fighters..they still were until the typhoon came on the scene...same with the Mirage 2000..what makes you say that the Jaguar/Mirage 2000 were not top-of-the-line fighters when sold to India?
Same with the Harrier, before you get embroiled in a USAF-RAF harrier debate..
The T-90 is an amazing tank...though tanks haven't ben used by the Indian army ever since 1971..the most useful piece of weaponry used by the army since then in all the wars has been the 150mm BOFORS guns bought from sweden..

Any war between the South and North will be decsive for either side, unless foreign allies step in..that whole peninsula will be a guerilla zone in a couple of days...

Originally posted by Disturbed Deliverer
As for the Arjun, there will be what, 100 by 2010? India will be relying on their T-72's, and then T-90's.

125 Arjuns are already in service. Final trials are nearing completion and up to 300 will be procured by the end of this decade. The Arjun is not nor was ever meant to replace the whole of the Indian armoured force, but is designed to fulfill a designated role in Indian armoured doctrine.

The T-72 upgrades make for quite a formidable tank itself, especially considering the tanks it would go up against, and the T-90 is already confirmed that 1000 will be inducted by 2011. However to infer that India will be relying on these units at the expense of the Arjun is misleading and unjustified.

-Raj

what makes you say that the Jaguar/Mirage 2000 were not top-of-the-line fighters when sold to India?

The Jaguar couldn't stand up to a F-15. Probably couldn't even match a Flanker.

^^
I never said that they could stand up to the F-15 or not; I merely stated that when they were sold to India they were frontline fighters in the respective AFs of the countries that sold them..
Boy you sure know how to twist an arguement


And what ever happened to the results/reviews of Cope Thunder in Alaska where IAF Jaguars flew against USAF jets..that'd be a good measuring stick..

Please get back to the topic guys

Some interseting stuff :

Over the past decade, Russia has deployed thousands of S-300V and Antey-2500 missiles around its key military and industrial complexes. In addition, it has exported these systems throughout Asia, Europe, and the Middle East as a means of financing its ailing economy in the wake of the Soviet Union’s 1991 collapse. According to Aviation Week & Space Technology, “in the worldwide competition to sell ballistic missile defense systems, the Russian Antey Corp.’s S-300V is a main contender.” The advantage for buyers of Russian surface-to-air missiles is that, unlike buying from the U.S., there are no political strings attached and, more often than not, the weapons are significantly cheaper than their U.S. counterparts.

In 1996, for instance, Russia marketed the S-300V system in the United Arab Emirates in direct competition with the U.S., which had been selling Patriot missiles to the UAE for several years. Russia offered heavy discounted S-300V missiles to the UAE, essentially selling them at half their normal cost, in return for UAE’s forgiveness of long-term Russian debt. The Russia-UAE deal, however, angered the U.S. and soured its relations with Russia.

Likewise, it was reported in December 2003 that Moscow intends to supply Iran, a potential nuclear power, with $1.6 billion worth of weapons, the bulk of which will be either S-300V or Antey-2500 surface-to-air missiles. Iran has been lobbying for Russia to sell it a defense shield since the late 1990s. It plans to use the missiles to protect its key industrial region Esfahan, its naval base at Bandar Abbas (on the Persian Gulf), oil terminals at Abadan and Khorramshahr, and its nuclear power station at Bushehr.The U.S., needless to say, voiced its strong objections to the Russia-Iran deal and, at one point, even threatened sanctions.

Despite these objections, it appears that Russia has no plans to stop marketing its S-300V missiles, as well as other weapons, throughout Asia, Europe, and the Middle East in the coming years.

source : missilethreat.com...

[edit on 31-1-2005 by Stealth Spy]

[edit on 31-1-2005 by Stealth Spy]

[edit on 31-1-2005 by Stealth Spy]

[edit on 31-1-2005 by Stealth Spy]

Originally posted by Disturbed Deliverer

what makes you say that the Jaguar/Mirage 2000 were not top-of-the-line fighters when sold to India?

The Jaguar couldn't stand up to a F-15. Probably couldn't even match a Flanker.

Correct. But then again, the Jaguar isn't really a fighter aircraft.

If i was india i would probably select the S-300 against the patriot ...why.. the patriot seems to have been beset with problems from the start,
1. It was unable to destroy missile warheads in 1stGulf, although this appears to have been solved.
2. More recently (units deployed in the 2ndGulf) there appears to be problems with the targetting/IFF programming as several unfortunate allied pilots will be complaining about in the afterlife, if india wants an integrated defence this could be an issue.

The benifits of the latest S-300 are that its just as capable/V launched but cheaper and more versatile than arrow2 as it can engage targets below 10km usefull vs cruise thingys.

Originally posted by Stealth Spy
By Iftikhar Gilani

NEW DELHI: The United States has offered to sell its Patriot Missile Air Defence System to India. Patriot is a long-range, all-altitude, all-weather air defence system to counter tactical ballistic missiles, cruise missiles and advanced aircraft.

The US gave the missile defence system to Israel in 2003. US forces used Patriot missiles in the first Gulf war to destroy incoming Iraqi Scud missiles.

India has been offered upgraded PAC-3 missiles. Sources said India had yet to make a decision.

The missiles cost $90 million a piece. Sources said India was also considering buying Arrow Missiles System from Israel and talks were in progress with Israeli defence officials. Sources said the offer came on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly session last month.


it is very strange that usa one hand try to stop the sell of arrow missile on the other hand offring pac 3
some thing must be going on in dirty mind usa
[might be want to make india tools after selling missile to infulence the third world [read iran]

Originally posted by Cjwinnit

Originally posted by Disturbed Deliverer

what makes you say that the Jaguar/Mirage 2000 were not top-of-the-line fighters when sold to India?

The Jaguar couldn't stand up to a F-15. Probably couldn't even match a Flanker.

Correct. But then again, the Jaguar isn't really a fighter aircraft.

It is a deep penetration fightre bomber and our brit members will be glad to enlighten us on how good the jaguar may have fared against its USAF counterparts on numerous occasions, as the RAF and USAF must have had more combat exercises than any other two AFs in the world..
Got any stuff...Waynos, Lucretius, Smikeypinkey...

On another note..the US has offered India the PAC-2 not PAC-3 ad i read in an indian newspaper today..That definitely makes the S-300 a better buy..Im still hung the Arrow2 though..

Neither PAC system is effective and why would India want the Patriot missile defense system when they can get Chinese or Russian sams which are certainly more effective. The Pine Green is the only thing that reportedly comes close. The PACs are the worst systems ever developed.

On another note..the US has offered India the PAC-2 not PAC-3 ad i read in an indian newspaper today..That definitely makes the S-300 a better buy..Im still hung the Arrow2 though..

It depends on what India whats, if it wants a pure ABM system, then it will pick arrow but I dont believe it will, it has strong links with Russia in defence procurment.
Also if it buys arrow it might be seen by the pakistani govt as an attempt to construct a missile shield and to disrupt the balance of power in the region and considering that their both trying hard to co-operate and be neighbourly India might not wish to disrupt this.

Originally posted by Asia Minor
Neither PAC system is effective and why would India want the Patriot missile defense system when they can get Chinese or Russian sams which are certainly more effective. The Pine Green is the only thing that reportedly comes close. The PACs are the worst systems ever developed.

Excuse me, but what plannet are you from? What do you know? To say that the Patriot, latest version, is inferior to any system is to claim something "way above your pay grade", as they say...
You don't even know the latest Patriot numbers, as the Ruskies also keep the latest version of the S-300/400 are not exactly published in "Time" magizine...
If you have evidence then prove it. Otherwise I would say that generally the ABM and ATBM systems are very comparable, and you are a biased patriot claiming a comfortable party line.
The truth hurts sometimes, and I am able to take it if there is evidence. If you have it, then bring it on, otherwise keep your patriotic BS to yourself... The truth is all I am interested in here, and flamboyant claims are nothing but illusion from those want to dis-inform.

^^ chill yank!! ain't you ever dealt with over-patriotic foreigners before? Especially on ATS..
IMO the PAC is not as pathetic as claimed in the critical posts above..but it is more expensive..

Citing an announcement by defense officials at a press conference, India’s The Statesman reports that India could establish an air and missile defense shield for a 200 square kilometer area within five or six years, quoting defense scientists said. Such a system could reportedly be duplicated to protect “big cities and strategic facilities like nuclear reactors and space launching sites against incoming missiles.” The interceptor is said to be a surface-to-air missile with a range of 80-85 km, and another interceptor with a range of about 20 km. The Akash SAM is mentioned as a possible interceptor for such a system; “Meanwhile, the Akash will have some anti-missile system capabilities.”

As for the radars for such a system, Mr M. Natarajan, DRDO chief and scientific advisor to the defense minister, said they might include a phased-array radar placed on an executive jet, such as the Brazilian Embrear. India has already purchased from Israel the Phalcon aircraft-mounted radar system. source

Isn't it funny how the western media always goes on about the modernisation of the Chinese Military but not the Indian one.

Would it be a safe bet to assume that the indian military budget is also increasing substantially every year?

India’s budget is increasing, but ‘we’ like India and not China - because China’s the big bad.

story.news.yahoo.com.../ap/20050214/ap_on_go_ot/missile_defense
The USA’s Patriot system actually failed its last test and so far has failed nearly every test, if not all of them.

How is that a good system? Why would India bother buying something that can’t work in a test setting?

As for the S-300, I remember reading they did something like 10tests on that and it passed them. On that alone which would you rather have? Especially when the S-300 is cheaper.

Originally posted by rapier28
Would it be a safe bet to assume that the indian military budget is also increasing substantially every year?

india's defence budget increased by 27% last year, and 8% this year.

at 20billion usd, india ins now the world's 3rd largest defence spender.

china -- 25 billion usd

usa-470 billion usd !!!!