VnomadYou make far more of the China-Russia axis than actually exists in reality, and that is being mild.
Same with Pakistan.
China of course is vastly more important to Russia due to economic ties being of much greater scale than with India.
I suppose ‘axis’ sounds a lot heavier than it really is. However, change is in the air. The breakdown in Russian relations with the EU & US only accelerated what was already in motion. While far from a formal alliance, the ongoing Sino-Russian political alignment can hardly be missed.
As for US defense supplies to India:
I don’t know what your source for that table is. Mine’s a written response by the Indian MoD delivered in the Parliament last year.
On Tuesday, in a written reply to Rajya Sabha, defence minister Arun Jaitley said India spent Rs 83,458 crore on importing weapons over the last three years. The US stood first in this list with Rs 32,615 crore, followed by Russia (Rs 25,364 crore), France (Rs 12,047 crore) and Israel (Rs 3,389 crore). – Link
VnomadThe Indo-Russian relationship is well understood by both parties. Russia has no interest in a subservient relationship with China, even as their interests align in opposition to American hegemony and western interventionism. Indeed, India is valuable to Russia as a long-term counter-weight to China. Improving relations with Pakistan have to do with taking advantage of the souring US-Pakistan relationship and also with Russia’s issues with Islamic-flavoured unrest in e.g. Dagestan, and present no issues for New Dehli. Unlike western nations with their Manichean view of the world, diplomats in China, Russia, and India all understand the multifaceted nature of international relationships.
I’d suggest you look back at the history of the bilateral relation. It really took off only with the signing of the Indo-Soviet friendship treaty in 1971. That in turn was a result of a very marked US tilt towards Pakistan, and total breakdown in Sino-Soviet relations culminating in a series of border clashes in 1969. Nixon went ahead to use Pakistan as a springboard for his historic outreach to the PRC. The common ground for India & the USSR was very very explicit.
Non-alignment, diplomacy, ideologies, and philosophies of international relations were all meaningless when it came to the bottom-line – national interest ruled.
Today, the geopolitical scenario has been reversed. There is a very clear China-Russia axis emerging, one that Pakistan is striving to join hands with, at both ends. On the other side, you have a loose grouping of Asia-Pacific states & the US, united by their apprehension of an ascendant China. Again, when you get down to it American ‘hegemony’, ‘interventionism’ and all that recedes into the background and national interest still rules.
While yes, India is useful to Russia as a long term counterweight to China, the Indian ties with the West (particularly the US) are hardly welcome news in Moscow. The view from New Delhi is even more simple – its issues with China are historical, extensive, evolving and nowhere near resolution. China is economically and militarily far stronger, and thus strengthening relations with (at least) the US, Japan & Vietnam is an ideal (if inadequate) way of offsetting them.
As for the days of Russian technical assistance being numbered, I would argue it is quite the opposite. India has been burned these past few years in its experiences with western companies: MMRCA, Scorpene, nuclear & trade negotiations, and attentions are shifting back to Russia. The items of military-industrial cooperation actually signed for during Modi’s recent visit to the US were almost laughably inconsequential: a hand-held drone and a cargo delivery/parachute package. Moscow is not exactly losing sleep at night.
The US has formally overtaken Russia as India’s largest defence supplier (by a fair margin too). Include Western Europe and that figure becomes quite lopsided. Something the Russian side is rather angry about. And the Indian military has been extremely satisfied with the equipment and, more importantly, with quality of support they’ve received. [Something that’s been an issue with the Russia side.] That trend isn’t going to change regardless of the PR ceremonies surrounding Modi’s overseas visits.
VnomadBTW I’m not just spit-balling here. Its an actual possibility, albeit a relatively remote one.
The Indian Navy has asked the government to allow a fleet of six nuclear-powered submarines and is also looking at nuclear power as an option for the next sea-borne aircraft carrier, which will be the follow-on to the INS Vikrant currently being built in Kochi.
“We have proposed to the government that in lieu of the conventional submarines we would like to have more nuclear-powered submarines,” Navy Chief Admiral Robin Dhowan told The Tribune today. The decision is pending at the level of the Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS), the Admiral said, adding that the number of nuclear-powered submarines sought was six.
The Admiral was referring to the existing submarine plan announced in 1999 which had spoken of having 24 conventional submarines by 2030. It is out of these 24 subs that the Navy wants six to be nuclear powered. At present, India operates 13 conventional vessels and a nuclear submarine, INS Chakra, leased from Russia, while the indigenous nuclear-powered INS Arihant is undergoing sea trials.
VnomadUK is not a suitable source for a strategic asset. France is better, but their cooperation on Brazil’s SSN project is limited to the non-nuclear bits of the boat.
Well.. strategic ties (military ties in particular) with Brazil for both countries aren’t quite as robust as their relationship with India.
Russia will (continue to) provide the requisite nuclear assistance. The only question is if Russia also gets a look-in on the diesel-electric side of things, or if that becomes an exclusively western (or Japanese) affair.
I’m somewhat skeptical about the trajectory of Indo-Russian relations in light of Russia’s blossoming ties with China and remarkably enthusiastic outreach to Pakistan. Even the PAK FA/FGFA has reportedly run into tech transfer hurdles. I think the days of Russian technical assistance may be numbered, though of course they’d be as willing to sell an SSN as the British and French.
VnomadNothing is impossible Vnomad, in respect of the Astute there would be some issues. Basically the program is winding down, any Nuclear submarine India could buy from the UK would be Astute derived but not the same. The major issue is the reactor, no more PWR2 are being produced once Astute production has finished. The UK is moving to PWR3 for the Successor SSBN and no doubt any future SSN program. Problem is PWR3 is derived from an American design and I doubt the Americans will be happy to allow onwards selling to the Indian navy.
That may in fact be something of an opportunity seeing as the contractors to the current Astute program face a 5 year production gap with the SSBN. Longer if the replacement is downsized to 3 units and delayed further. A 3-6 unit order from India should be more than large enough to justify continued (or even restarted) PWR2 production while capitalizing on the existing infrastructure, tooling etc for extended production.
The French are just getting started. While they may be able to divert production to service exports, they may not have as much flexibility when it comes to facilitating assembly in a foreign shipyard.
VnomadRussia would certainly seem to be the natural partner for India’s nuclear submarine ambitions.
That’s the conventional wisdom. But SSBNs aside, if India were to approach the UK & France as a prospective customer for the Astute/Barracuda would it really be refused? In the prevailing economy? Especially considered both states consider India a responsible and friendly military power. One that already operates nuclear submarines and will continue to do so regardless.
VnomadDo you have any idea what they’ll be using for COD?
Nothing. Merlin where range and payload aren’t an issue. Same for the French who operate E-2s but no C-2s.
VnomadJust to clarify, SDB2 and JSM were never part of any SDD/Block3F plan so they by definition can’t be “missing” from something they were never a part of 🙂
Figure of speech, you know what I mean. ‘Missing’ as in ‘should ideally have been a part of’. In the context of a ‘fully developed’ F-35.
VnomadExcuse my laziness not to split up your post, the device I’m writing from is somewhat uncomfortable to handle in this respect.
No problem. Always a pleasure talking to you.
Neither the sensor, nor the sensor fusion capabilities of the aircraft are fully developed yet. Even at this intermitent configuration there are a lot of issues that have yet to be rectified. Don’t get me wrong that’s neither unusual, nor unique to the F-35. Other modern aircraft types had quite similar issues, but these types are already further ahead in their development and as such more mature.
The problems will be fixed before the Block 3F software is released to the fleet. At worst, it’ll be a few months late.
I doubt that the Block 3F standard, even if it arrives in 2017, will be fully developed and mature. I’m inclined to believe that the Block 4 standard will be closer to the proposed capability standard that people are talking about since some years already. It was no different for other aircraft like the Typhoon for example.
Hence it’s my judgement that we won’t be looking at a fully developed and relative mature F-35 before the early 2020s.
Well lets not talk about people. Lets talk about what the air force is expecting to receive. To quote the DoD –
Mission
• A force equipped with F-35 units should permit the Combatant Commander to attack targets day or night, in all weather, and in highly-defended areas of joint operations.
• F-35 will be used to attack fixed and mobile land targets, enemy surface units at-sea, and air threats, including advanced cruise missiles.
The only thing missing from the Block 3F configuration is the SDB-II & JSM (neither of which is ready at this point). Aside from which its a perfectly capable multi-role aircraft.
Concerning upgradability there are aspects of an aircraft that are more or less upgradeable. Airframe related changes are obviously more limited, avionics and weapons on the other hand are quite upgradeable on any modern design. It are these areas in particular where the gap will most likely be smaller or even non existent.
Even here the F-35 retains a couple of advantages. First is economies of scale – allow for much larger development budgets unlike Europe where there is considerable duplication of effort. Second is the UAI – allow for far faster weapons integration (at least for the foreseeable future).
Concerning the “it’s just a matter of a software patch” I have to cast doubts about your understanding of what needs to be done before a software patch file is finally ready for use on an operational aircraft, from its inception. There is quite a lot, time & money consuming work to do to achieve this. That’s not to say it’s not practical or as easy as “fixing a bug by uploading new software”, but it’s not as trivial as developing a piece of software for your smart phone or home PC. There are a lot more dependencies, stringent requirements, tests and documentation needed!
I’m aware of what goes into developing the software. I was operating under the assumption that you understood that the flaws in the software will be ironed out by the 3F stage, at which point release to fleet is merely a matter of patching the software. Is it really your contention that the bugs in the sensor fusion will not be addressed till the mid-2020s?
VnomadWasn’t there one report recently complaining about F-35 not fusing much if anything at this point?
It fuses two ship formations just fine, but they’ve encountered distortions for larger groupings. Point to note is that a fix will be just a matter of implementing a software patch, which they can do at the squadron level itself.
Also, AFAIK this sort of automated multi ship sensor fusion isn’t featured on any existing fighter (including the F-22).
Right now the discussion is often about “what the aircraft should be capable of” once it is “fully developed”. Ofcourse fully developed is a relative term as modern aircraft evolve at a constant pace. The difference is thata Rafale and other aircraft deliver closer to their promises at this point in time. The F-35 may well do this too, but only somewhere in the early to mid 2020s!
I’ve heard this from others as well. Where are you folks coming up with this ‘mid 2020s’ figure? It’ll be ‘fully’ developed in 2017 when the Block 3F software is released to the fleet. That’s when the primary operators will have everything they expect from it. No sooner, no later. (Enhancements will of course carry on for the next 2-3 decades.)
By that time other aircraft will have evolved further and the capability gap will be much smaller than the imaginary one based on future promises vs current reality.
Unfortunately, fact is you cannot retrofit VLO capability onto a conventional fighter jet.
VnomadNot lying, just stating facts for something almost 3 years ago. Things so change….
Its been less than 2 years since the report was published. And you don’t overhaul an aircraft (Alouette in this case) that you’re retiring in a matter of months.
VnomadI’ve proved to everyone on thos forum thats not the case, you were double counting retired types, surprised you did not list F-86 Sabres and F-104 Starfightewrs as still being flown.
That’s 30 types without counting the retired F27 or Atlantic. As for the helicopters (Alouette/Bell 206/Lama/UH-1), perhaps Alan Warnes is lying…
VnomadSimple maths. The current rate of JF-17 production indicates this will be the case, there may be a chance these aircraft become LIFT trainers. In that case PAF will still be down to two max three fighter types. IAF still 8 types with about half the fleet 30-40 years old
Your hopes and aspirations for the future aside, the Pakistan military today operates 30 different types of aircraft, compared to 29 for the Indian military.
VnomadSo my point is right anyway, by the time F-7PGs are phased out of PAF (certainly before 2028) PAF will be retiring planes around 20 years younger then the Bison which will still be in IAF service.
Bison will serve till 2028. Your prediction. PGs will retire by 2020. Your prediction.
VnomadMaybe worth reading up on it before making comments that make you look uninformed in front of the entire forum mate
I’m uninformed… right. 🙂
Sign In
