Why India can't buy new fighters




 
--
 
November 20th, 2007  
rock45
 

Topic: Why India can't buy new fighters


This is why India can't buy new fighters after more then five years everything has to be so difficult. I understand why the French closed the Mirage 2000 production line down on them. Maybe they want somebody to come over and fly the aircraft for them too. I hope the mighty HAL Industry can keep what they have flying for a long time.

Talk about shooting one self in the foot you could make a comedy out of this.

Quote
NEW DELHI — Technology transfer will not count toward the offset requirement in bids for India’s $10 billion Medium Multirole Combat Aircraft (MMRCA), Indian Defence Ministry officials have decided.
Potential bidders learned of this new twist in an Oct. 30 meeting with ministry officials. The deadline for offset proposals has been extended until June, although technical bids are still due in March, a senior ministry official said.
The change will force bidders to recalculate their offers and increase the cost to the Indian Air Force, said one senior executive of a foreign aircraft firm. “The transfer of technology alone could add up to 60 percent of the total cost of the aircraft,” the executive said.


Link to story
http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?F=3181327&C=airwar
November 21st, 2007  
major liability
 
 
I'm sure they can come up with something themselves.
November 21st, 2007  
LeEnfield
 
 
The problem is the balance of power. India upgrades then so does Pakistan and so it goes on and on. Also if you sell your latest fighters to India and some other countries like that the next thing you know they have copied your technology and are producing their own planes based on what you what you sold them.
--
November 21st, 2007  
rock45
 

Topic: Balance


The big picture for the region is a balance thing I agree but the internal section is a Indian failure. They raked Russia over the coals with the Su-30s when they were being designed and built, changing there minds over and over adding three plus years to the project. They make it so difficult that aircraft makers shy away from them just like the French did. Currently they waited so long just to make the section harder at the end. For example EF2000s went from around $65 million or so to $120 million per aircraft in the five plus years of no decision, good move India. Maybe if they wait another three years 4th generation aircraft might break a $140 million per. Three major failure modern aviation in sales, decisions, and marketing are: France Rafale, India/HAL, and MIG, all should have upper management changed.
December 2nd, 2007  
rock45
 

Topic: Since not operational yet after 17 years


Questions over Tejas’ induction
Quote
Having been unable to come up with an engine even after 17 years, the GTRE since 2005 been in talks with the Russians and the French, attempting to decide who among the two engine houses will help them bring out an engine.

http://www.hindu.com/2007/12/01/stor...0156141600.htm

I was looking around and so this and thought I would share a little 17 year old history. How much money and time was spent on the Tejas, just another example of HAL Industries find top management.
December 5th, 2007  
mmarsh
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeEnfield
The problem is the balance of power. India upgrades then so does Pakistan and so it goes on and on. Also if you sell your latest fighters to India and some other countries like that the next thing you know they have copied your technology and are producing their own planes based on what you what you sold them.
Except that India is a very Rich Country and Pakistan is a very poor one. If they get into a arms race Pakistan will eventually lose.
December 5th, 2007  
rock45
 

Topic: Race


I agree Pakistan can not even come close to what India has and would lose any real arms race. If the US pulled out or cut there military support Pakistan's armed forces would suffer a great deal. I may come down a little on India (mainly HAL management) but they have better trained and equipped armed forces overall.
December 5th, 2007  
LeEnfield
 
 
India is larger and richer than Pakistan, but they are both Nuclear Powers with with there own home built medium range rockets. Now as it has been said on here that India would win any conflict between the two countries, then may be that person can explain why India has not been able to take Kashmir after a large number of battles there
December 5th, 2007  
rock45
 

Topic: Kashmir


A agree Kashmir should have beem taken and reinforced some time ago. I guess it comes down to having the will to do it. I remember reading about one battle on an Indian web site where Mirage 2000s with newly equipped with laser guided bombs made the differance. Artillery has be be almost shot almost striaght up was used and either the Hip-6 or Hip-17 has a little problerms operating because of the height of the mountains. If I find the site when I get home later I'll post it. It was a good read but it was one sided it seem the LGB and artillery worked or was the key. Pakistan used artillery too and could fire down on certain Indian positions as well. Some special unit of Inida's army had to slowly and painfully work there way up tough fighting. From what I remember was Pakistan didn't use any aircraft and India used Mig-29s for fighter cover for the Mirage 2000, and no Flankers were used.
 


Similar Topics
RUSSIAN FIGHTERS SUPERIOR, SAYS PENTAGON
Bush Signs India Nuclear Law
Indonesia to Buy 8 Russian Sukhoi Jet Fighters
Indians are so treacherous -- Richard Nixon
India to buy 126 new warplanes ( F-16 being Considered)