TeerYou are underestimating the Indian public. Indian voters made a decision based on many factors; some of it is due to the better performance of the incumbent government and some due to bad policies/ideology of the opposition. The main oppostion party was very virulent in projecting UPA as soft on terror; it backfired. Indian voters understood the compulsions of the government and made a decision. Being anti-minority affected the chances of BJP, being opposed to progress caused demise of Left parties.
Blaming the inability of the opposition and mindset of Indian public is not correct for the return of UPA. The voters are concerned about terror but their real priorities are something else. If terror was the real priority, UPA would have won very few seats in Mumbai.
Sorry – the Indian publics muddled voting patterns would confuse the most seasoned psephologist and your convoluted explanations merely repeat the same pattern. Its all the usual “after the fact” analysis.
The voting patterns broken down by state, by individual levels, merely show an ineffective opposition strategy, not to mention their limited national reach versus a fragmented issue base & the usual mix of local versus national issues.
TeerWhat you seem to be actually asking for Teer is no less than an Autocrat/Theocrat (in Plato’s lingo and not the degenerate form we refer to today). In essence, a pinnacle of civilization led from the very top – call it what you will – “kingdom of Christ”, “Ram Rajya” or the rule of the Mahdi. We can only hope, and for those of us still willing, pray.
The closest sampling the world saw of this in the last 200-500 years was probably that of Ch. Shivaji or probably that of Washington and Mohd. Fatih. Subhas Bose also comes to mind but it seems that by this late stage such effort was doomed to tragedy. But still, would have been amazing to have some one of that calibre around.
JMT
USS.
You know USS- you are one of the few Indians on this board who at least made an attempt to understand what was written (though you missed my point entirely), or perhaps its just age where you try to see what a person means versus making idiotic comments (see the post by abrahavt for a perfect example of brainwashed auto response – the only non sequiturs missing were “fascism” or the hoary Indian favorite “communal”).
At any rate – you deserve a reply.
No – I am not asking for an autocrat.
I am asking for a decisive leader who can motivate people with the right tools as necessary and who truly wishes the wellbeing of the country and is willing to look beyond his own prejudices and biases as need be.
Unfortunately, we have lacked that caliber of leader for quite some while now. The parade of Deve Gowda’s (unabashed corruption & incompetence), the VP Singhs (combination of greed for power allowing him to try sectarian rabble rousing, resulting in problems faced by India even today..) and now even MMS (for all the good clean image, he has been an absolute failure at security in the first term, allowed his personal religious differences to overshadow attempts to work constructively with the opposition) – none of these are worthy of the chair of leadership.
India as a nation deserves better, even if its people are not anywhere near serving the nation what it deserves, and by this I mean, all of us, nowhere do justice to what the nation can & should become.
India has been lucky that it has had visionary leaders who served quietly and did yeoman work, and in many cases were even denigrated during and after their time, but who had that requisite blend of qualities that a leader should have.
Take Sardar Patel for instance – had severe differences of opinion, but worked with MKG & Nehru, allowed his personal claim to the PM post be vetoed by MKG for his favorite Nehru & went on to serve a pivotal role in making todays India, played a decisive role for both Goa & J&K. Did he walk out in a huff or allow his personal tragedies overcome his sense of duty? No – duty came first.
PVN Rao – often castigated for the HMehta case (with some merit) & other issues, but in his time, showed remarkable spine in continuing our strategic missile program, effectively reversed 4 decades of economic policy (against his own party’s opposition), faced down a severe insurgency in the Punjab (and saw it ended- lets not even go into the decisions he took) and did not even succumb to the blackmail of the NPT etc. Remarkable leadership. How many know or care about this? Almost none.
Ok – what about Lal Bahadur Shastri? Read about him – truly inspirational. And what grit. In 1965, this quiet spoken mild mannered man, written off by our subcontinental rivals as a stereotype, showed absolute steel in taking the war to its logical conclusion & having it taken across the IB.
These are the kind of leaders India needs. The kind of people who for better or worse, take a stand when the chips are down & see things through, not the kind we’ve had for many years now bar some brief interludes, who basically decide “hey I am in power, no decision is the best decision”.
Seeing the apathetic performance of the GOI after 26/11, the apathetic manner in which functionary after functionary attempted to rationalize the chain of terror attacks which preceded this event, and their media sycophants attempting to spin it away, would make anyone serious realise about how sadly India has been let down by these clowns.
The bureaucracy and the system are equally to blame. For decades, India’s bureaucracy has been firmly subordinated to making things happen for the political masters, as opposed to doing whats right. There are good people in the system, but they are weighed down under a huge pile of rot. And that rot will not go unless we again get some kind of leader or rather series of competent leaders who effectively dismantle these chains.
Look into these issues, research them – see for how long our pre-eminent internal security “Eye” the IB, has been squandering its abilities doing its political masters bidding. See how long failed economic policies were trotted out and kept going & the public shackled in poverty because the word “socialist” had been officially added to our parliamentary lexicon & constitution.
A country the size of India, with the talent it has, and the ferocity of its indigenous population & martial heritage, can field a variety of solutions to match the terror threat that it faces. Israel, a nation far lesser in resources and many other countries have done far more. In India, we have not even set up an effective law and order mechanism to protect within, let alone intervene externally. The political & bureaucratic class are so used to cutting deals for the most odious of reasons, that problems escalate till the Armed services & expendable paramils are called out.
Then violence becomes endemic to the particular area, and all sorts of interventions from other organizations become possible.
All this is brushed away under the carpet of democracy, rights, this and that. Buzz words to hush away criticism.
These are the sad details of where our country has been let down repeatedly. False patriotism (and labeling others jingoistic or arrogant as some twits have done – not you) will not make the issue disappear.
The fact is India deserves better leadership, it has for a long while & thats where it requires leaders who for better or worse, are decisive, and able to formulate a long term plan. Not give in to emotional blackmail (“I cant act against x people from y country, I was born there”) or be hopelessly naive (sending a dove card after 26/11) or pursue a quixotic agenda (the n-deal) when internal security is bleeding & the chosen appointee is not even barely upto the task. We have had far too many “could be would be’s” who simply havent delivered. If India has to truly unlock its potential, it has to confront its security challenges and overcome them.
Otherwise, learn from history – the strongest walls can be breached, the bravest can be killed, defeated or even converted & turned against a populace apathetic to their fight, the wealth can be scattered and the cycle repeats. Merely beating the drum about being an economic power or how noble we are, etc does diddly squat. Civilization, for better or worse, requires a strong shield backed by effective leadership. India – doesnt have that.
And it deserves better.
TeerReal politician/diplomats are not meant to have gonads. Those (who many might describe as having gonads) are usually termed idiots, e.g. president Chavez.:)
Real politicians who actually make decisions that are essential for their nation’s well being often need “gonads”. Gonads of course being an euphemism to describe guts, the will to do whats right, or at times what’s necessary versus just being in the chair to make money & run off when the going gets tough.
Indira Gandhi – for all her warts- was often described as being the “only man in her cabinet”. S&exist statement apart, the lady did have a certain amount of necessary steel in her spine. Unfortunately, many of India’s leaders havent.
As far as Chavez is concerned – I could’nt care less about him. He is not my nation’s leader & his decisions but remotely affect me. Thats the reality.
TeerYes all of which essentially means Nuclear Exchange at the end. Different options towards a Nuclear War. Now I am not saying India and Pakistan will not fight Wars again. I am saying it will be very limited along the borders any push into Pakistan may lead to a Nuclear Strike.
Says who?
Please read what I wrote again – India has a range of options at its disposal. These options exist. They dont mean war.
Unfortunately, its politicians & bureaucrats are unable to do anything because of the reasons I mentioned above. They simply dont care, unless it affects their reelection chances. And even there, as the performance of several state Govts indicates, make enough money during your time in power, and even elections dont matter.
The politicians are responsible to the people who elect them. The UPA came to power despite not taking stren action against Pakistan. Majority of the populace want peace stability and rural employment and not war.
Wrong. The UPA came to power because the opposition could not mount a coherent campaign or convince the public it was going to be substantially different, and the public, did the good old, doing nothing is doing something, philosophy.
You are creating another false sock puppet here when you insinuate that war is the only option. It isnt. There are a range of covert & overt options that can hit the perpetrators of terror both within & outside India.
The Military is to protect the country and not the other way around. You don’t go to war because the military is bleeding in the border. The economic and political prize is way too much for the Indian Government to risk war against Pakistan even if another 26/11 happens.
The military is made up of Indian citizens who are not infinite in number nor are their human and economic costs lesser.
Furthermore, a nonstop quasi war situation just moves up the deterrence -escalation matrix and makes future action that much riskier.
In effect, by not stopping the constant escalation of the terror war, the GOI is setting itself up for something it cannot start.
And that is exactly what has occurred. All the GOI can do is wave its finger and threaten overt war, because it has locked itself out of other options, thanks to its own mendacity, institutional inertia & craven concerns (votebanks and re-election versus national exigencies).
Middle class and upper middle class people were targeted in the 26/11 attacks. Do you think they represent the majority of India ? The Majority lies still below the middle class, so as long as you have Employment Guarantee Programs and Welfare measures like the current UPA government has you are unlikely to be voted out of power because of terrorist attacks. You saw the UPA winning comfortably despite the oppositions claims of it being soft.
Incorrect at every level. The people who died at the railway station were not middle class. Go find out about their names. The taxi drivers killed were nowhere near middle class.
In fact, in the vast majority of cases, everyday Indians who have died, come from the lower economic strata and the lower middle income strata. They are the ones who commonly use public transportation & are more vulnerable to mass terror attacks.
The people who die in droves in naxalite violence, whether civil or state servants are almost always, below middle class standards.
Second, the fact is that just because the so called majority or minority elects a certain Govt, does not make that or previous Govt’s decisions sacrosanct.
The imbecilic decisions taken by successive GOI’s after independence are a matter of public record. Do you know how ULFA became an issue? Or how the NE was successively declared open grounds for illegal immigration?
India’s so called elected leaders have done such a horrible job at times, that its embarassing. Second, bringing in other nations worse leaders is pointless – the issue is our folks should have done much more. They didnt.
I suggest you actually research the topic more, starting from India’s economic policies to how corruption was institutionalized in the Indian state.
Teer in a democracy it do not matter what the armed forces or the minority war mongers think. 🙂
Please dont make a mockery of yourself by making such statements.
If this is the level of your debate, then I’d rather not even waste my time responding to your comments.
TeerIn my opinion FGFA will be different more than half from the Russian PAK-FA.So the 10b$ development costs shows it.Two seat means the difference at the whole design of the aircarft, new aerodynamics (a huge design work between India-Russia).And there will use lighter Indian carbon-composite materials at FGFA.(Russians says India is better than them at this technology).And it means this aircraft will be lighter than Russian version.And the most important another thing is avionics.Most of the FGFA avionics will be Indian made or foreign orign.So design, avionics, weapons all specs of this aircarft will be suitable for the IAF requirement. Also Mr. Pogosyan expressed that they will develop completely new weapons for the FGFA together will India.
In my opinion without engines and Radar whole work will share %50-50 between Sukhoi and Hal.
Bingo.
There are many systems where India is either making items on its own or license producing, which it feels are better suited for its needs. These will need to be part of the FGFA.
The decision to incorporate these systems & IAF requirements is balanced against cost and time. While the IAF can usually afford a certain amount of delay (by 2020, it will have 229 MKIs, around a hundred MRCA, around 80 plus LCAs – plus the upgraded Mirages, MiG-29s) – cost zooming up would not be preferred.
So its all about “must have” versus “good to have” – a balance must be struck in any program.
TeerThe above is exactly what is incongruent to developing the PAK-FA with much “touted” 50% Indian R&D. Regardless of whether the Indian version will have Fly-By-Light (as you claim) or twin-seat, the point is that it is Sukhoi, and not HAL which will be doing all the development. India will only fund it.
LOL, and as if you know all the details about who is developing what & what the workshare agreements are!
Basically, you say the Earth is a cube in shape & are going on and on about it. If I say, but what about empirical data and what this research shows? You’ll say – yes, but the Earth is a cube..
This is getting to be a big joke, as I had expected.
Not that “they didn’t say more”, but as mentioned earlier, they didn’t say that Russia, and not India would be developing the aforementioned.
Whatever.
As if the entire IAF, HAL & Indian defence establishment have to come out and parrot what you want, in the words that you want, and then you will say – liars.
So irrespective of what they say or dont say – you have your ready made conclusion ready.
So remind me – why are we having this conversation again?
If you just wish to say the same thing again and again, why dont you get a sock puppet?
It wont reply to you, tell you the reality and listen to whatever you say and never correct you.
Arey uncle, we know that IAF needs a fifth gen. fighter. What I’m telling is that there is a general misconception that : a) India will do 50% R&D in the entire PAK-FA when it has been stated that India won’t do anything even on the modified FGFA, and b) India will get ToT from this project for it’s MCA.
Kid, there is no misconception there. The workshare agreement between India & Russia can end up giving India a lot of design, development work AND transfer licensed production of the 5G platform itself.
This wont come cheap & its as much HAL’s responsibility to drive this as it is Sukhoi’s desire to gain maximum windfall from Indian investment.
That is the reality. Whether you choose to even accept this is entirely different.
And second, which is why I say you dont have any understanding of the topic under question- the question of leveraging tech for the MCA comes in when India works with Russia on select systems & development of the aircraft. Who do you think mentioned the FBL?
Are you aware of what IGMDP tech is used in the Brahmos? Or what Akash tech contributes to the PAD/AAD etc?
Details, details..
The efficacy or lethality of PAK-FA or FGFA is not in doubt. It will be a very good fighter. However, as India will have close to nil R&D share in it’s development, it is equivalent to licence manufacture only without any ToT.
Repeating the same thing again and again, does not make it true.
It only makes you come across as intellectually incapable of understanding the basics of the infrastructure in India & what it is and what it is not capable of.
And again, you are now mixing up TOT and R&D. When it is TOT where does the term R&D even come into the picture?
Hence, it would be better that IAF commits ONLY to MCA instead, to save billions of dollars and also accelerate the “learning curve”. The only impediment here is Tejas’ unfortunate record in 1990s of bureaucratic delays and hence a “sceptre” of history repeating with MCA.
It would be better, in your subjective opinion. Fact is that the MCA is intended for an entirely different role from the PAKFA. India can do with both classes of fighters.
As already discussed earlier, we can assume temporarily that India will involve in 50% R&D of FGFA and will get all ToT asked. Even then, the very efficacy of this PAK-FA is in doubt, because there is NO other country which is pursuing not one, but two 5th gen. programmes. Including China and Russia. Whay does IAF have to be “different” ?
The US is pursuing multiple classes of fighters. The Europeans have an active UCAV & fighter upgrade/ development program that will continue for many years. India’s plans in contrast are quite limited and restricted to developing a follow on for an existing program, the LCA.
India has to be different, because India “is” different. A nation of a billion plus people, with huge borders, surrounded by a couple of heavily armed hostile states, and declared nuclear powers, means that its security environment dictates certain choices. This means an advanced, expensive AF with certain capabilities to match the choices forced by a heavily armed peer comparator with an increasingly developed technology base.
Its better for India to develop an advanced FGFA with Russia, comlemented by a MCA than rely on limited imports.
The economics aspect also bears out the issue of technology development in house.
Although not to be discussed further, it must be noted that DRDO is on record mentioning that had India tried to develop Brahmos on it’s own, it would’ve taken 15 years to master it’s ramjet propulsion. They have mastered it’s specifics by being in close quarters with testing, and assembly of live examples of the same.
You continue to put words in DRDO’s mouth.
It is not the ramjet propulsion per se which the Yakhont design provided but the overall complete design, with integrated seeker & high stress airframe, all in a relatively compact assembly.
It would have taken far too much money & time, for DRDO to develop each aspect of this design and its manufacturing value chain on its own. So it chose NPO M for the Brahmos.
You talk of “x’ and “y”, and are simply unable to see the big picture in any topic.
Its a shame. You are wasting your energy and intelligence beating a dead horse when you cant convince anyone using logic.
TeerThe Indian military has not been neutered – nor will it be. The politicians never had gonads, so the question of them being neutered doesn’t really arise.
TeerWell, first its way off-topic and doesn’t belong here………..
Then why did you bring it up?
Second, its just the same old “double talk”………nothing is final. Just more of the same promises. That we’ve heard over and over again……..
Quote: (your source)
The new deal “could” be tied up later this week after Indian Defence Secretary Vijay Singh’s negotiations with his Russian counterpart. Singh has been sent to Moscow by the Defence Minister A K Antony, reflecting the new government’s resolve to speed up all defence purchases.
So if it is finalized and posted here, will you eat humble pie?
Typical……..:rolleyes:
Indeed.
TeerTeer, the statements I have made are not “conspiracy theories”, but based upon what Mr. Mikhail Pogosyan has stated publicly and also what HAL and it’s employees have publicly stated. All the relevant news reports have already been posted earlier.
Based on your interpretation of what Pogosyan says and what you choose to believe.
Please spare me the bit about “publicly” and what HAL & its employees have stated as well. You have twisted their words out of whack.
If you’ve read the report carefully and completely, without a “meandering eye” or an “impatient smirk”, Mr. Pogosyan has explicitly and clearly stated that Sukhoi corp. will not devote time and resources to develop India’s version of the PAK-FA, because it will concentrate on developing Russian PAK-FA first. Besides, HAL’s marketing head, Mr. Fakruddin is on record stating that there are “differences” between India & Russia on the issue.
Gawsh, this is what makes me laugh. You clearly have no understanding of the topic and are fulminating away.
Obviously they will validate the basic PAKFA characteristics first, and then prove the Indian system, which will be more complicated. Anything else would be nuts! Did you seriously even think otherwise?
And what did you think – India & Russia didn’t have differences on prior projects like the MKI? And how do you think they were resolved?
Thats the entire point of negotiations – to come to a mutual agreement about the overall charter.
The crux here is that Fakruddin, Baweja et. al hinted that India will develop the twin-seater for the IAF from the basic template of the Russian PAK-FA. So why the “differences” ? It is because Pogosyan said that Russia will develop the twin-seater. It turns out that Baweja and Fakruddin were not lying after all; in a very subtle fine play, they have never said that, “India will design and develop the twin-seater”. They’ve merely stated what the Indian version will have, like a second seat, probably composite expertise etc. The differences are probably in the level of ToT that can be licenced, obviously.
The level of word play you are doing to support your prejudices is unbelievable.
Since you clearly have no idea of how A/C development takes place, let me share it with you.
The IAF has drawn up a list of requirements which it expects from its FGFA. These list of requirements are compared to what Sukhoi is aiming to field for its PAK-FA. That determines the overall design.
That is what Fakruddin et al said when they said twin seat et al – they didnt say more, because the IAF is not going to appreciate HAL yacking about the parameters of its future combat aircraft.
This decides the broad specifics.
Then Sukhoi comes back and says- FINE. You want to take all this and convert the basic design we had in mind, to “this” – it will take so much money, so much effort, so much time.
Then HAL consults with the IAF & after a bit of back and forth, the broad specifics are decided and the negotiations begin on the quantum of work that will be involved.
That is the stage we are at now. There are still certain issues which involve some more contractual wordplay and firm guarantees from either side, before the heavy money starts flowing, but the formal Govt agreements to share specific data and begin the process has been approved.
The IAF has decided it needs a FGFA & the IAF, HAL & the Russians are now deciding on the program specifics. The Russian Govt & India have signed a formal agreement to do this. This means restricted information from the Russian & Indian sides has changed hands and both sides are working out the key details of the FGFA. This is a formal commitment.
The quantum of work flowing from the above, to convert a prototype PAK-FA flight demonstrator into an operational India specific FGFA, decides the workshare agreements as well between India and Russia.
You keep yammering away about the design being fixed – which is why I asked you to brush up your knowledge about these things. There is a HUGE amount of work remaining to even convert the PAK FA prototype into the PAKFA operational, let alone the FGFA.
Part of that work will come to India, with HAL as the PM, for the Indian contribution to the FGFA, and the work packages will be distributed between HAL, between DRDO, and WIPRO and other players in the Indian aerospace sector.
That is stage 1. Stage 2 is when production begins, and you will see more players there.
Depending on timelines, you will see a Sukhoi style assembly approach, where production moves from SKD, CKD, to Phases 1 to 4 of production. Again, private and public players will be involved.
Now do you understand the complexity of the task?
This is far more than what was done for the MKI.
In the MKI, India skipped the pre-construction part entirely, bar limited involvement from the Indian Air Force in writing the specs, and the involvement of DRDO (DARE) and HAL in the avionics architecture and subsystem development.
This program will take that to the next – LOGICAL – level, IF India plays the cards right.
No news report has them stating that, “India will design / develop the twin-seat FGFA”.
You are fixated on the twin seat because you are limited to news sources.
You have not even begun to exercise the gray cells in your own head about what the program means versus what the media feeds you in terms of scraps of information.
This is what I mean by “unfortunately, you dont know the strengths or weaknesses” of the Indian defence industry.
So busy talking that you dont even listen.
I repeat for the last time – the FGFA will not just be a “two seat” versus “one seat” or whatever stuff you pick up from the internet and start yammering away non stop – it will be an aircraft designed to meet the IAF’s personal requirements of its air superiority and strike doctrine in the twenty first century.
Now ask yourself – WHAT are those requirements.
And work your way from there.
Look around you, which nations share your borders, what capabilities do they have or will have and then open your eyes.
Stop parroting the media, or some phrase you have picked on. You are wasting your own time. You will end up knowing or understanding nothing!
Note that in 2006, the PAK-FA was reportedly on the verge of being scrapped, as India was not involved in it since the design stage.
In 1996, an Air Chief dismissed any notion of India buying the Flanker – “totally unsuited for our needs”.
In other words – “verge of being scrapped” etc- doesnt necessarily mean anything.
What it means is that India & Russia found a middle way to accommodate India’s requirements into the program.
IAF has never publicly committed or even commented on the MCA until very recently, despite the fact that it was mooted as far back as 2003-04. Unfortunately, it readily accepted the FGFA proposal despite knowing that that fighter has had nil Indian design inputs till date and has been moulded from scratch as per the requirements of the Russian Air Force only. (IAF did state explicitly that it’s involvement in the MCA from scratch will help it make into a product that it needs exactly).
Thus, IAF too was obviously misled by HAL into believing that India will have 50% R&D share in it’s development. It is only slowly trying to “fathom” that the first flight of PAK-FA will take place in a few months from now, without an Indian “screw” on board.
Again, this childishness is what makes me wonder about why you waste your time writing the same nonsense again and again. Seriously, you need to grow up and stop this “x” versus “y” business.
First understand, different stakeholders often have different priorities. The key is to prioritize, decide which take precedence and then work it out.
First you say IAF is the culprit. Now the poor IAF was misled by HAL.
You think HAL has secret meetings with Sukhoi and then come and trick the innocent IAF?
Kindly go back and read what I wrote about the development plan.
These things are not done according to secret squirrel but a formal plan with representatives from all groups attending.
Now, understand – the IAFs priorities are to defend India. For that they need to field the FGFA to match a certain neighbours formidable AD network.
The MOD’s responsibility is to make sure the maximum amount of that investment stays in India and grows Indian aerospace – this is the charter for HAL involvement.
DRDO’s charter is to leverage the FGFA to work on the MCA & to support this project to the extent possible – that is their charter.
These decide the Indian “aims” from this project.
As regards Brahmos, it was a stated goal of DRDO to gain knowledge about Ramjet propulsion, which was denied by Russia (not in contract or later on is irrelevant). DRDO gained the same by close inspection and observation only, which Russia could not prevent. It is this knowledge that has enabled it to embark upon the hypersonic vehicles segment.
Dont make me laugh – where is this stated goal!
DRDO already knows about the basics of ramjet propulsion via the Akash program and they also know what they lack and where they needed to collaborate with Russia.
And the contract being irrelevant is another joke, if this was indeed the secret masterplan, gee wow, guess what, they didnt even INCLUDE it in the contract.
So now you say, because they didnt need to.
If just by close inspection and observation, technologies could be mastered, India would have almost all the technologies it wanted.
All it needed to do was “closely inspect and observe” – I mean, seriously, please dont make such ridiculous comments.
The hypersonics program predates the Brahmos program itself, you should realise that this charter was laid out by Kalam & the DRDL team many years back.
Every nation has x amount of resources. DRDO has had to make the call whether to invest that amount in todays tech (and for no good reason) and miss out on tomorrow, or go for tomorrows tech & master that.
In an ideal world, DRDO would have enough money to throw at everything. We dont live in that ideal world.
Again, your claimed meets with ADA and HAL personnel is a privilege that others do not have for lack of time, location and even accessing / meeting / knowing the right personnel. It is easily and readily discernible that this is clearly not due to any professional merit on your behalf.
No, meeting ADA, HAL or any aerospace personnel is not even required – all that is required is some common sense & some dedication to attempt to understand the massive volume of information which is available!
The problem which you have is you want the information to meet your agenda but wont look at the information for what it is.
In short, you are wasting your time (and mine).
As regards merit of any kind – thats clearly beyond your ken, unless you change these habits
TeerAnd in recent news
http://www.ptinews.com/pti%5Cptisite.nsf/0/B0F15F3B8771EAE1652575C800559E46?OpenDocument
“New Delhi has agreed to allocate extra funds for the carrier which would be delivered to the Indian Navy in 2012, four years behind schedule,” Russian officials said following what they said “successful” negotiations to break the prolonged deadlock between the two sides over multi-billion dollar cost escalation…..
“The negotiations were successful,” Sevmash CEO Nikolai Kalistratov was quoted as saying by ITAR-TASS, without giving details of the exact figures involved.
…..
TeerTwo independent confirmations of the actual number of Su-30s in service- around 80 to 100 airframes.
Note both of these are after a press meet with the IAF – so the details are from the IAF itself.
http://ibnlive.in.com/news/iaf-to-post-sukhoi-war-planes-near-china-border/93970-3.html
IAF to post Sukhoi war planes near China border
New Delhi: After stationing the Sukhoi Su-30MIK war jets in Tezpur in Assam, the Indian Air Force will post another squadron of its frontline jets at the Chabua air base under its military policy to boost security along the border with China in the northeast.
On June 15, four Su-30MKIs will land in Tezpur for a symbolic induction, making the airbase the third in the country to house the combat jets.
“It will be a symbolic induction as of now. Currently it’s not clear which of the Sukhoi bases – Pune or Bareilly – the aircraft belong to,” a senior IAF official said.
“The four aircraft will formalise the Sukhoi flying routes. After that plans are afoot to station the Sukhois at Chabua air station in the northeast (Assam) and at Halwara (Punjab) and Jodhpur (Rajasthan) in the west,” the official added, speaking on condition of anonymity.
The basing of the squadron in Assam is in line with the IAF’s policy of capacity-building near the India-China border.
Former IAF chief Air Chief Marshal Fali Homi Major, before handing over his charge last weekend, had said: “There is no escalation in threat perception (vis-a-vis China). We know very little about the capabilities of that country.”
Currently India is operating five squadrons of the Russian-built fighter aircraft. out of them three are stationed at Lohegaon in Pune (Maharashtra) and two in Bareilly (Uttar Pradesh). Each squadron operates 18-20 aircraft.
In the next five years, the IAF plans increase the strength of Sukhois in its fleet to nearly 200.
After taking over as defence minister, A.K. Antony had underscored infrastructure development in the northeast as the priority of the defence ministry. Under the same programme, the upgradation of various airfields is in the offing.
“Five bases, including Tezpur, Chabua, Jorhat (Assam), Panagarh (West Bengal) and Purnea (Bihar), will be upgraded. The upgradation will comprise of expanding the length of the runway from 9,000 feet to 11,000 feet,” the official added.
And:
http://www.telegraphindia.com/1090602/jsp/frontpage/story_11051342.jsp
Tezpur to host four Sukhoi 30Mki
– Squadron base means air force moving powerful assets near ChinaNew Delhi, June 1: Four Sukhoi 30Mki will land in Tezpur on June 15 to turn the tea-town base in Assam the third in the country to host a squadron of the frontline combat aircraft.
The basing of a squadron of the Sukhoi in Tezpur means that the Indian Air Force is moving some of its most powerful assets closer to the border with China in the Northeast.
The basing of Sukhoi aircraft in Tezpur — a second Sukhoi squadron is to be based in Chabua, also in Assam — is in keeping with a policy in which India’s military has been beefing up assets near its borders with China. It began in Ladakh, where the western air command revived two airfields, Daulat Beg Oldi and Chushul, and has continued in the Northeast.
“Our assessment is not threat-centric but capability-based,” said Air Chief Marshal Fali Homi Major, who retired on Sunday, in his last meeting with the press. (Air Chief Marshal P.V. Naik has taken over). Referring to China, he said: “There is no escalation in threat perception. We know very little about the capabilities of that country.”
An IAF source said modernisation projects had been taken up in five airfields in the eastern and northeastern regions: Tezpur, Chabua and Jorhat in Assam, Purnea in Bihar and Panagarh in West Bengal. Runways were being extended from 9,000 to 11,000 feet.
The Sukhoi base in Tezpur will be raised over two months. The chief of the eastern air command, Air Marshal S.K. Bhan, will preside over a simple ceremony to welcome the four Sukhois that will fly out from their original home in Lohegaon, Pune. Pune currently has three squadrons of the Sukhoi one of which is moving to Tezpur. Two squadrons are based in Bareilly in Uttar Pradesh.
A squadron of fighter aircraft in the Indian Air Force usually has between 18 and 20 aircraft. An air force source said there were currently five squadrons of Sukhoi 30Mki aircraft, one of which was yet to be fully raised.
In five years, the Indian Air Force is expected to have more than 200 Sukhoi 320Mki in its fleet of fighter aircraft. Two more IAF bases in Halwara near Ludhiana in Punjab and Jodhpur in Rajasthan are to be converted for the Sukhoi in two years.
Tezpur was the home of the MiG Operational Flying Training Unit (MOFTU) that shut down and the training units were moved out to Bagdogra in north Bengal and Chabua in Assam.
With the MiG 21s — currently the mainstay of the Indian Air Force’s fighting fleet — due to be phased out in another two to three years (by 2011-2012), the training units will be closed down.
TeerSee, as per the statement of Mr. Mikhail Pogosyan of Sukhoi corp. Sukhoi will develop the Indian version of PAK-FA, whereas HAL will manufacture 50% of the components of the same.
Even if Fly-By-Light etc. are being developed, they will be developed by Russia only, with India being given licence-rights to manufacture components only. If at all, some non-critical work like routine testing etc. may be “tossed over” to India.
Even in the Brahmos project, DRDO officials are on record stating that Russia did NOT transfer key technologies including Ramjet technology to India. DRDO had to gain the same knowledge by espionage via close observation and inspection of the same — which the Russians could not prevent (unlike a Russian nuke-sub which India leased in 1980s, that had a Russian officer manning the door to the reactor so as to prevent Indians from visually inspecting it and “getting ideas”).
In a “sleight of hand”, HAL under Mr. Baweja touted this 50% share in licence manufacture as a “50% Joint Venture”. Newspapers like Times of India and Indian Express endorsed this very line, that PAK-FA is a 50% Joint Development between India and Russia in which India will do 50% R&D.
Today, no Indian newspaper mentions the once-standard line of “50% JV”.
I dont actually respond to your non stop comedy, but this time I will make a rare exception.
First things first, unfortunately, you have no clue about what the Indian defence industry is or is not capable of.
If you were, then you would know how and why the PAK-FA development would proceed. And where India’s strengths, and more importantly, the weaknesses are.
I can also make out you have not even met or spoken to anyone involved in India’s aerospace sector.
You can selectively quote all the news reports that you wish, but it wont change the reality, which is that the FGFA agreement will definitely attempt to use the amount of capabilities India can offer right now.
First educate yourself about those capabilities.
Second. I would also suggest that you also educate yourself about the amount and quantum of work it takes from moving a design prototype airframe into an actual operational fighter.
Try reading about the T-10 & the actual operational Su-27 and how the transition went & what had to be changed and why, and the quantum of work involved.
It is this quantum of effort that will be shared between HAL (as the Indian project lead) and Sukhoi, as the overall program lead.
You clearly have no idea about the FBL system either – you were more dismayed about your assumptions being shot down in flames, rather than ask about what kind of FBL, why a FBL, and what else is on the table, in terms of discussion. And who said this and where.
Typical.
Even about the Brahmos, you make me laugh with your conspiracy theories.
India has done NO espionage about the ramjet propulsion, unlike the fevered rubbish written on the internet.
FYI- India never ASKED for the Ramjet propulsion in the original agreement.
It was recognised that this was core Russian IP which would ONLY be transferred at a cost which would make the overall program cost balloon up & make the entire program quixotic.
India preferred to invest its money and engineering resources in the NEXT generation hypersonics propulsion, including infrastructure, which it has done.
Finally, about Baweja & your silly remarks – a random chap on the net, versus a technologist who joined HAL as an engineer & worked his way upto be the CEO & left HAL with the satisfaction of having delivered on multiple challenging programs to the satisfaction of the Indian Air Force (including meeting the ALH induction), moving HAL into R&D and aircraft upgrades & landing HAL’s first overseas exports of complete airframes won in an open bid.
I guess your record speaks better than his.
If you are done with your conspiracy theories, FYI, the IAF was interested in the FGFA project. In what marks a considerable departure from the norm & not dictated by commercial reasons alone, the Russian Govt. also put its hand out & indicated that Sukhoi was allowed to cooperate.
From the Indian side, with the MCA firmly on ADA’s future charter, it was decided that HAL, not ADA would lead the Indian contribution to the FGFA.
And HAL will also draw upon the technologies available with ADA & ADA’s parent organization, the DRDO.
This is a pragmatic, sensible approach to meeting the Indian Air Force’s future needs. And it has already been decided upon.
Now, if you can post & talk sensibly – we could actually talk about this. But continue your quixotic behaviour, whereupon I have better things to do with my time.
TeerIt works like this:
MMRCA to the US and FGFA/PAK-FA-MKI to Russia means everybody’s happy (except Scooter) and the winner is…………………..India -YAAAAAAY!! Jai Hind!!
😀
TeerNot precisely. The FGFA will sit in between the Su-27 and MiG-29 in terms of size. It will also be fully multi-role capable as per multiple reports from the Russian press, though supercruise et cetera (and what should be a fairly extraordinary thrust-to-weight ratio once fifth-generation powerplants are installed) would probably make it at its best in air-to-air.
As for this whole thread, I think Satorian did indeed nail it nicely. The entire point of the MCA is that it is an indigenous combat aircraft, and they will use ToT sourced from the FGFA program to assist the production of what looks at the moment to be most likely to end up as a moderately stealthy strike-oriented fighter.
Once again I would also like to point out that this idea of India joining the PAK FA programme after the design has been ‘frozen’ is total nonsense. I would like to reiterate that this is almost exactly the same as saying that a theoretical country joining the F-22 program before the YF-22 even flew could have no input into the finished design. Of course it hasn’t been conceptualised from day one with India’s requirements in mind, but so long as it fits the IAF’s requirements – which they seem to think it does – this is a marginal drawback at best compared to the advantages of drawing on the experience of a combat aircraft industry with vastly more experience in all areas of the basic design, a vastly wider range of contributing development firms, vastly better-established production and testing facilities and which has a guaranteed large order by at least one other customer, and probably many more given time, to offset the risk.
There are still six years by optimistic estimates until we’ll see PAK FA IOC, and two or so years longer until FGFA IOC, and India will get to offer significant input into at the absolute least the avionics, construction, and subsystems of the FGFA during this absolutely crucial evolutionary period. These are likely the areas that it has most experience in and can best contribute to in any case. The reason it has not got much of a say so far is because of the absolutely intense political pressure on Sukhoi and KnAAPO to get the T-50 flying as fast as possible for Russian pride and of course military capability. Once it has done so, I would thoroughly expect this pressure to relent to a very significant degree, with India coming the full way into the fold.
Banking on two fifth-generation types should be a winner for India, whose economic growth should allow it to maintain them, especially if the MCA is something of a budget contender.
Excellent posts from you & Satorian if i may add.
I can confirm that ADA has noted that the FGFA will have FBL – and so will the MCA, clearly, ADA & other local developers are being tapped to chart out commonalities & use what is available in India.
And it can and has been done. A look at the Brahmos project for instance is illustrative to what extent technologies developed for India’s ballistic & tactical missiles systems were reused for the Brahmos, while all new systems were developed on time, on budget as well. Even the MKI uses LCA derived tech & even when, India’s capabilities in avionics & structures were behind what it has today.
In this case, as you exhaustively detail – there’s a huge amount of work which will need to be done, from avionics design, to structural work as the PAK-FA moves from prototype to actual production variant. A substantive amount of the work can end up in India, including India’s private software houses and other aerospace vendors, while the HAL & DRDO program manage or lead overall Indian work package requirements.
Most importantly, they get valuable insight into a lot of stuff that goes into a 5G program which will help with the MCA program.
Sign In
