When did I ever was warned by the way?

You responded to the flames? You were trolling like what you were doing in this thread.

Gee, I was trolling in the IAF thread responding to those who have been banned…tell you what Crobato, please dont make me laugh! All you can do is say troll, troll when somebody doesnt buy your hype about the PLAAF. Get a grip, and leave it to the admins to decide who is doing what. If I am “trolling”, I am sure SOC or whoever sees this thread can make up their mind for themselves, hmmm. If all I wanted to was to troll, I wouldnt even bother writing rejoinders or debating this, one-two liners would suffice.

You interacted with Russian developers? Who do you actually interacted with? If you really do, you won’t be taking the time to be trolling here. As for visiting an airforce base, by the way, I happen to live near one and visiting it is just an arm’s throwaway.

“Who I do I actually interacted with”? Errmm, Phaza reps, NIIP reps, Rusarm reps..quite a few actually..nice blokes all of them. Much more informative than the Israelis for instance.

The issue is of not living near some AF base in the west, its of even going to Zhuhai or the PLAAF bases and then talking to people in the know, or having first hand access from relatives, friends, the like..see, when you make such claims of being in “the know” regarding the PLAAF, its equally likely that you will be queried. Your seeing the Blue angels perform does not fall into that category.

So please do tell me, and be honest – have you ever met or interacted extensively with actual serving PLAAF personnel, PRC developers or been to trade shows like Zhuhai? Dont regale us with your business experience, kindly tell us about the above. If you havent, then try to understand the fact that despite all your analysis and personal interest, what you have is opinion.

And Rossoboronexport isn’t a Russian government organization?

This is where I really doubt about your claims of meeting Russian developers. Rossoboronexport is the FACE representative of the Russian arms trade to China. Everything goes through them, including proposals. It is this organization—a Russian government organization—that presents these proposals to China.

You merely demonstrate how much you have to learn about the byzantine mess that is Russian arms selling. Rusarm or Rosoboronexport does not make policy. The Russian Govt does. At times, Rusarm has been cut out from several deals, depending upon whether the Russian MOD feels like it- in fact a year or so back, there were even proposals to whittle down the power concentrated even in Rusarm because of price gouging. But thats not the point- everything Rusarm comes up with, Almaz Antei come up with, NIIP thinks of selling- ultimately goes through the Russian Govt. There have been several deals which have bypassed them- but there have been recriminations thereafter and heads have rolled. Simply put, I dont think you will get anything that the Russian Govt does not want you to have. That holds true for any country out there.

Let us add to the fact that the Chinese defense minister happens to lead the negotiations himself, and you don’t deal with someone that high in the Chinese government unless you are someone in the Russian government itself.

Oh big deal. The Indian Defence Minister and his flunkies, as well as the three service chiefs in the Defence Acquisition Council have negotiated deals- so what.

On the N001VEP issue, I have a right to disagree as such comments do not mesh with the factory information released by KnAAPO. Simply said, I don’t think anyone now would contradict that V stands for the SUV-V, P stands for the SUV-P subsystem, and not because of the modifications on the radar. As a matter of fact, the Kh-31A functionality, according to the KnAAPO document, is attached not to the SUV-P subsystem which handles TV guided weapons, but to the SUV-V which handles radar guidance functions.

You have a big issue with reading comprehension- I say this as this is the third time I have had to mention this. Nobody questioned your right to disagree. Disagree all you must, but please learn to debate in a civilized manner instead of using invective from the word go, and personalizing the debate- “you are this, you are that”.

Up to now, I have never seen you present a credible argument otherwise. You keep laying this issue on Pibu, and I have repeatedly ask you, or Pibu or Overscan to verify the basis of the designation.

See above. The issue is how you debate with others is germaine. Because otherwise, there can be no debate with you. Calling people “assh****” or whatever is not going to get us anywhere.

Furthermore, I believe it was some of your BR posters that suddenly concluded that because of this, the MKK does not have an air to ground functionality, when in fact, Pibu, Overscan and even Garry said that the air to ground functionality is not connected to the radar, which is correct—the SUV-P ground attack subsystem runs on a TV channel and is EO based.

Couldnt give a damn what BR says.

I disagree with him and I will repeat that, that the P designation in the N001VEP meant air to surface functions in the radar system itself,when in fact, it refers to the SUV-P subsystem, that hosted TV air to ground weapons and adds no functionality to the radar at all. The basis for the modification was on the SUV-V subsystem in the first place.

Keep disagreeing all you want, its your prerogative, but kindly realise that it doesnt make you correct- and still doesnt change the fact that he has primary access to Russian developers, and you dont.

Now since you claim you have access to all the Russian developers, why don’t you ask them yourself?

I very well might if I find the time, a year or so from now. Its simply not been of much interest to me and still isnt, to be frank. The N001V series, is obsolete, even with the Pero and its limited advantages over the Zhuks, irrespective of how much window dressing and upgrades are applied to it.

And please don’t give my your expert opinion about the Irbis. It does not mean that I disgree with him on a technical detail of labeling, that I disagree with him on his news report about the Su-33s and the Irbis offering.

No, what it means is that you cherrypick opinions as you see fit. Which is your right, but since you lack any access to primary sources- ie the PLAAF and Russian developers or Chinese developers, all they remain is your belief.

Frankly I think you have a lot more to explain since I believe at least Pibu is at lot better connected with Russian arms developers than you will ever be.

I dont have anything to explain Crobato. I have said what I have said in as plain English as possible. I am aware of many attempts by Russian developers to market leading edge equipment to the PRC, many of those have not been cleared by the Russian Govt. It cant get more straightforward then that. Simply put, the PRC and Russia share borders, and old concerns die hard.

Yup. Why should China buy everything the Russians offered?

Seems to me you are not arguing any business sense at all, and yet you want to challenge me about business?

There you go again- see Crobato, this is the problem with you- your inability to observe how loaded your own arguments are, and when somebody rebuts them, you get personal very fast. Your simple deductive logic is: If its not purchased by the PRC, its because PRC has an alternative which can replace it”. I would say there is a third option- that the PRC does not have access to it yet. I will change my opinion on this, the day the PLAAF gets Irbis..till then, sorry.

To have business is to have something you would actually want to buy. There is no indication that China is actually interested on Irbis. The Russians were the ones that were making the initiative here.

Oh please..the PLAAF fyi, were very interested in the Bars as well.

Bull. You are trying to set the terms for proof which is in fact wrong. China has no reason to buy Irbis, just as they cancelled or did not go through the Zhuk, Sokol and Pero proposals.

Amusing. When you set terms its ok, because it must be true. Of course, if anyone points out an alternative, its that the PLAAF never wanted it anyway. Sour grapes?

One important aspect that you really don’t know much about the real world is that people will tell you what you need to hear. If you really really ever in business, and your statements and behavior tell me you’re not even past the college age, you can never take people’s word in face value. People will say what you needed to hear, and not necessarily the truth. Second, you really have no idea what the sheer power of money can do. From your behavior, and your willingness to take people’s word on face value, you really never have been on a negotiation table or deal with corporate blue shirts.

I cleared college a long time back- in fact, I daresay it is you whose behaviour is so typically collegial. Combative, hostile, abusive and vast amounts of that time wasted on the internet . And you wonder why I am skeptical? (Grin, if you can return those years to me or have a time machine, I’d gladly take it!!)

The problem with you is that you have not even interacted with the people whom you claim to mindread. Which is what makes it so amusing. In thread after thread people tell you something different from what you want to hear, but you respond with: “Aha, they were lying and you dont know !@#$% because you are a !@#$%%”. Amusing and droll- but hardly reality.

Christ, in five years for Irbis? And that’s probably the minimum. If you think China will take that long to wait for Irbis, and then expect them to pay for the overpricing, you are mistaken.

Whatever- five years is the minimum that you can even take a raincheck on. Something tells me that you are not too keen on the PLAAF getting the Irbis now . 😉

Why would they buy it? In five years, China could come up with something better for lower the cost and one that is compatible with their own arms.

Sure, sure.

The Chinese can plough superior resources into radar development. Money wise, talent wise, and not the least, they have the manufacturing infrastructure to actually make the ICs right in their homeland. These also include MMICs which are fundamental to the TTL elements used in AESA. They also have the ability to refine quantities of Gallenium Arsenide, that is essential in making such elements. All this because of a booming domestic telecommuncations industry.

Sorry, you are very badly mistaken. The PRC is still far away from the Russian aerospace industry in airborne FCRs. And please dont bring up the repetitive KJ-2000 and KLJ-XXX binge. Been there, heard that.

The fundamental flaw in any Russian radar system being offered to China is that China now has a boisterous missile industry of its own. None of the Russian radars are directly compatible or integrated with the likes of the PL-12, the latest PL-8 blocks, the YJ-83 ASMs, the KD-88 standoff missiles, and now even the LT-2 LGB, the LS-6 and FT-1 JDAM style bombs. And I don’t think the Chinese are willing to share the software interfaces and command protocols of these weapons to the Russians which is fundamental to integrating them. Because of this, China’s will now and always put a domestic radar system of its own in most of its planes, the proposed Su-33s excepted. But then the Chinese intention on the Su-33s was merely to study it so they can make their own navalized J-11s.

Still doesnt change the fact that a full specced Irbis would be a massive boost to the PLAAF.

To be fair. AW article does not quote any official source for acknowledgement except for monetary loss.

Any AWST reporter (or for that matter anyone else) who publically quotes his sources within China on a report which is a fair critique, would land his sources in trouble with the authorities. Leaked pictures and the occasional tidbit are ok, but when the sources start releasing technical information which can be potentially embarassing to the PRC, they could get into trouble.

I would critique the article not vis a vis its sources (for either ways we would have to take the authors word on that), but versus the information with reference to the technical details it provides. If someone could do that, it would be a start.

Weird that a thread started asking for an update on a Romanian navy helicopter purchase has descended into a mud slinging match over the Indian and Chinese navies.

Which is EXACTLY why Harry & I didnt want the PLAN brought in to begin with.

Time for people to go to their happy places and let the issue drop me thinks…

And heres a cheers to you, mate. Have a good one. 😉

So do you or dont you disagree with the opinion that I posted?:rolleyes:

I honestly think your opinion on this topic aint worth shaking a leg over, as it is opinion devoid of actual facts to back it up. My previous replies should have made my POV on your opinion clear, if it wasnt clear enough already. :rolleyes:

I have no problem with discussing the PRC

Sure, sure. :rolleyes:

I just dont see why you insist on using it to defend India?

Hardly using the PRCs record to defend India. Neptune and Turbinia brought the PRCs record up as some sort of thing for India to emulate, and I was merely pointing out the other sort of the coin. :rolleyes:

Why do you not respond to points? Instead you modify language and come up with what YOU want people to say, then have a fit about it.

Examples,
1) I try to find out more information about Neptunes comments, so you remove the IF’s (the crucial part) and start ranting about me making accusations which I have in fact not made. I would not contact the mods unless I actually know what happened.

Please spare me the martyr act (yet again). You have either a problem with the English language or reading comprehension. I have neither modified language nor have I missed your “Ifs”.

This is the first reply:

So now its a campaign against Harry- how predictable. What next, Harry is- gawsh, horror of horrors, an Indian!

Very nice way to besmirch an individual- make comments about his judgement, load it with a suitable number of “IFS” and there you have it!

Meanwhile, no comments from you about the language etc. How very predictable.

Let me point it out even more simply- making accusations or doing a bit of muck raking, even whilst loading it with “Ifs” is fairly easy to discern. I do note however that you edited it to make it a tad less accusatory then it originally was- wherein you sat in judgement on Harry (with your few “Ifs, heh!). An improvement!

2) When did I ever say that there needed to be an order for 400 LCA? I did not, I was simply using Typhoon as an example. Maybe a better one would be the Su-30MKI, according to the latest reports that IAF may order upto 230, they are already on 190

Let me resort to that horrible thing I keep using- facts! For those unaware of the IAF’s procurement decisions, they may take note that India first ordered only 40 MKIs, before agreeing to license manufacture 150 more, and the latter was cleared only after the MKI Mk3 met full user specs. The point is simple- the IAF, is following the same path with the LCA, the issue of orders has little to do with the media coverage of projects, which is what I referred to.

Why would looking in the Mirror help me with the PRC, I have nothing to do with it?:rolleyes:

Really- why is it then that anything to do with the PRC gets you so so hot and bothered, then?

Let me repeat myself- if the message is not clear enough – you are welcome to take sides, engage in partisan debate and present your POV (this *is* a discussion board, after all)- but please dont pass yourself off as neutral or having that adjective lend your POV any extra credibility. Your record when it comes to defending the PRC speaks for itself.

pointing out other countrys procurement mistakes and faliures does not justfie Indias. :rolleyes:

Nice emoticon – but no, the simple fact is that if the PRC (or for that matter any other nation), is held to be a standard of comparison (others have insisted on doing)- then it bears pointing out that its record is not all strawberries and cream either.

Selective memory is a great thing, but if one does insist on facile comparisons as in this thread, (without even the actual data on how much the PRC has invested in weapons development vis a vis India), then please be prepared to see the other side of the coin as well. Not – as usual- cherrypick your figures.

In reply to the quick “edit work”:

You admit yourself that Trishul is a faliure.

No issues, but then again- its still on offer to the IAF, and its technology will be reused in other programs. Furthermore, I have the fortitude to debate this and admit it. I dont need to cozen myself with outrage when one stern article from AWST is presented about one Indian sat failing and then react with outrage! Look in the mirror please, and think- do we really need to go down the path of how many of PRCs’s projects, throughout its history, have been failures? I daresay you wont like that- I can well imagine your indignation. OTOH, I look upon them as vital stepping stones. “Lord”, kindly spare us the histrionics about one SHORAD missile- with some 70 Millon$ spent on it till date, it hardly broke India’s bank. Thats literally peanuts by international standards.

I did not cherry pick items I simply selected those that are well known. Yes major programmes draw criticism, and in Indias case alot of Criticism but one cannot simply say they have been delivered therefore they are succesful, one has to look at the context in which they are delivered, whilst over 400 Typhoons have been oredered, only 40 Tejas have, and only 124 Arjuns.

And we are to take these comments seriously! A multinational program, launched with much more institutional and financial support, and with the backing of Europes best aerospace firms, and the orders are likewise split between four nations – but hey, the LCA now has to have 400 orders! Why not 10,000 “Lord”? Would that be enough?

But that was not the point either- the simple fact is and was, that the EF drew equally bad press till it became ready (reached IOC, rather)- after which it was the bees knees. Hmm!

hat campaig against Harry? Did you not notice the IF’s in my post? I was asking for the full facts so I could make my own judgement not accusing anybody!

Right, a very outraged tone, a few IFs (for covering yerself) – I mean, seriously- do you really think everyone else is dense and that they cant see through the charade?

If you were really outraged or cared two hoots, you would have PM’ed the other mods or Harry himself- not engaged in a public spectacle.

Nick, considering your efforts in the Chinese military speculation thread, you are in no position to lecture people about flame wars.

Sealord, Its perfectly fine if you are sympathetic to the PRC, are of Chinese origin living in the UK or the like, and you wish to support them, but please dont try to pass it off as a neutral opinion. Considering the way you reacted in the Chinese thread after ONE report from AWST was posted,
and your prior attempts in this thread-where you made a generalized attack on all Indians, please dont attempt to stir the pot. I also note that you didnt respond to the latter part for quite some time, and only reappeared now, since you felt had a good chance of getting your own back.

In fact, I hadnt even remembered about the PRC thread and only checked up now and replied- I thought some would be debating the information in the article and pointing out discrepancies, but lo’ it was more of the usual from you & several other gentlemen.

Neptune could you please explain about the warning you got, becouse IF it was in the manner in which you have presented it and IF it was from Harry, then it is a disgusting abuse of power on his part.:confused:

So now its a campaign against Harry- how predictable. What next, Harry is- gawsh, horror of horrors, an Indian!

Very nice way to besmirch an individual- make comments about his judgement, load it with a suitable number of “IFS” and there you have it!

Meanwhile, no comments from you about the language etc. How very predictable.

The reality is that Indian Indigenous programmes have had a very troubled and expensive history with in many cases little tangible results. How many Trishuls, Arjuns, Tejas, Kaveris, indigenous submarines etc are in service?

The reality is that the PRC’s record, in many cases has been far worse- but considering that you cannot even take one AWST report and resort to commentary on the individual who points it out, I daresay you have some selective memory indeed. If I were to sit and type out how many programs worldwide have had issues, then it would be a long day indeed. But never mind that, shall we?

The Tejas is a program under development, ditto for the INs ATV. The Trishul project was completed, but delays and India’s increasing economic strength have allowed India to purchase superior alternatives. The status of the Arjun has already been posted above.

But never mind, such would never be the case anywhere else in the world. Nope, all milk and roses, and weapons development programs have been run on strict time and budget. Meanwhile, JSF anyone?

Very few if any and certainly not enough to justifie the expense.

A comment which is absolutely wrong and displays little understanding of the amounts India has spent on them, as well as their current progress, but then I daresay I didnt expect any better.

What makes your comment even more amusing is the fact that you have little to no data on what the PRC has spent on its internal weapons development, bar what others report on it.

If you have any authoritative internal accounts to the contrary, we would be glad to see it. Since, obviously, any external accounts which are less than glowing, would elicit your outrage. :rolleyes:

But there have also been succeses’ notably in the sonar department (Indian Sonars now being installed on Kilos), the recent test of an ABM, The Tejas is now starting to show promise but could still do with more commitment from the IAF. The joint projects in paticular are having results as well things like Brahmos are great achievements. Add to this the ballistic missiles, and things like Pinaka and you see that there is a very mixed picture. Ultimately though, however you dress it up the IN is still reliant on foreign systems (weapons in paticular) and on foreign support for naval ship design.:)

Very nice attempt to “bring a balance” in order to redress the very poorly thought out and researched comments earlier, but I daresay you still have a mile to go before you can pull that off with more finesse.

I would be glad to discuss most of these programs (bar the fact the current forum template does not permit it, otherwise my replies would indeed quote line and verse), but its a simple fact that most of India’s high profile projects that it has undertaken have indeed delivered, whether it be ballistic missiles as well as EW projects or radars.

The handful of cherrypicked programs you pulled out, were ALREADY quoted by I and Harry earlier on in this thread, but then again- since you posted it now, it probably becomes authoritative.

Please yourself. :rolleyes:

Coming to the foreign assistance, bit- which is your most amusing assertion, I would be glad to see one country bar of course, the US, which is cent per cent vertically integrated or can achieve it. The PRC is also dependent on foreign assistance, but then again- we have a plethora of information from the Indian side, I dont expect you would be able to provide similar data on the PRCs side would you SeaLord? Such mundane stuff as Govt accounts for tech transfer, external assistance and the like?

I think not. What you can do, however, is stir the pot some.

In the meantime, the continuing Indian weapons programs which are high profile do attract bad press, and so would they. After all, thats the job of the media- to keep the decision makers on their toes, even if some of the data is woefully ignorant.

I (and many others) remember how badly the UK press slagged the Eurofighter and other high profile programs (Bowsman anyone?), till they were delivered. But lets not facts get in the way, shall we.

What’s the point of this? Why is it that everytime a Pakistani person posts something on India, it’s negative? And everytime a Indian person posts something on China, it’s negative? Quite amusing that Chinese posters don’t harbour the same negativity toward Indians.

If you do a simple yahoo news search, you can find this article. It’s been out for a while now.

Oh get off your high horse. I came across two AWST articles. One was on China’s RMA and the other this- I think the earlier one has been posted and it has the same old stuff on the SD-10 and the GPS guided bomb from other reports, just rehashed together and put together in one article.

So I posted this one, because it does mention China’s military sat program.

First read what the article says in context and as a Chinese you should be happy-

– Quality control standards will now be improved. What would you have, more sats crashing or the standards improved?

– This has happened before when Chinas space program came under question, and the PRC Govt cracked down.

-The intent of posting such articles is to have some informed member, rebut it. AWST, Janes, Defense News all make bloopers, and can write incorrect data, which should be corrected. Unfortunately, not one poster has so far addressed the salient points in the article- namely about the specific information.

This leads me to this point..

– Lastly, it continues to reinforce how rigidly information is controlled over setbacks when it comes to the PRC. I dont intend to change your (or other chinese ethnicity posters) POV on this topic, but it goes to show exactly why I (and many other folks) do not see eye to eye with the Chinese side on certain topics. Given how many times this has come up, it is germaine to point out that access to information in the PRC is controlled and there is a strict focus on avoiding negative publicity.

-The article has MANY interesting details about how military development in the PRC is leading to corresponding improvements elsewhere-

“As a fallback, Sinosat plans to launch Sinosat 3, a much smaller and different type satcom next spring. But that satellite, to be based on a mid-1990s Chinese military satcom design, is not intended to be a complete backup to the capabilities of the more advanced spacecraft. Development of a full replacement will take three years. “

Lastly, step back (and the other Chinese posters who are hyperventilating as well, with personal attacks)- and think.

Is the PRCs space program so weak that one satellite or space launch debacle/ setback would scupper it? Hardly.

Its still going places, and is backed strongly by the PRC Govt, that itself will guarantee its progress.