How is asking the US Navy a non-starter to give it the Indian Ocean (an lake dominated by the US Navy even more so than the Atlantic and Pacific) suit China’s interest?

Care to put that it in English? You just mangled that sentence in a million ways and made it incomprehensible.

And only India would think to be bothered? Only nations with little or no geo-political impact and is trying desperately to find some “rival” would be bothered by this, I guess.

The US seems to be bothered, or rather amused enough to mention it to India. The US has “Little or no geo-political impact and is trying desperately to find some “rival””, indeed. LOL.

This “news” wasn’t reported in China or much in the US.

LOL, “much”, sure seems to be have been reported by the US & is being regarded as a matter of note by Admiral Keating.

Take it up with him, given how upset you are about the whole thing. Bad bad Admiral Keating.

FYI: fwiw, there was a bit about the Khbiny by the good dr. kopp iirc.

Btw, any chance of getting empty weight nos on the MKI?

USS.

USS let me see if I can dig up the HAL picture, its there on some comp, somewhere.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20090524/ts_nm/us_india_usa

India likely to move on U.S. military pact
Reuters

Sun May 24, 4:59 am ET

NEW DELHI (Reuters) – India’s new ruling coalition, freed of pressure from its former communist allies, is expected to move forward soon on a military logistics deal with the United States that would help U.S. operations in the region.

The Logistics Support Agreement (LSA), on hold for more than two years, allows refueling, maintenance and servicing of military ships and planes from both countries at each other’s ports and bases.

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s former communist allies opposed the agreement, saying Indian military bases could become permanent ports of call for the U.S. military engaged in unilateral operations in the region.

But Singh’s Congress party defeated the communists in a general election this month, winning a stronger majority and freeing itself from any pressure from its former allies who had walked out of his last coalition government over a civilian nuclear deal with Washington.

The communists have a traditional antipathy toward the United States and oppose any strategic alliance with it.

But a top Indian government official and military analysts said the communists’ fears were overblown because the LSA was a fairly common arrangement that the United States had with more than 50 countries.

“This is one of the first things we’d have to look at,” a senior Indian government official told Reuters as Singh’s coalition was sworn in for a second term on Friday.

U.S. ships were already using Indian facilities on a case-by-case basis, and the agreement will only formalize it, said the official, who asked not to be identified,.

With the deepening U.S. involvement in the war against Islamist militants in Afghanistan and Pakistan, greater access to military facilities in the region would help U.S. forces, military experts said.

“Logistics is at the heart of any military operation,” said B. Raman, former head of India’s external intelligence arm, the Research and Analysis Wing. “This will definitely help them, they have the assurance of safe and reliable facilities,” he said.

Separately, Washington has been seeking new supply routes for its troops fighting the Taliban in Afghanistan after militants stepped up attacks on convoys passing through Pakistan.

It has agreed with most Central Asia states as well as Russia to use their territory as transit points for non-military Afghan cargo such as fuel, water and construction materials.

Raman and other experts said the planned logistics agreement was quite apart from U.S. efforts to maintain the supply lines to its troops and that New Delhi wasn’t getting drawn into Washington’s Afghanistan-Pakistan war strategy.

“The LSA is a mutually useful agreement. It was hyped up by the communists and the government got paralyzed,” said C. Raja Mohan, professor of South Asian studies at Singapore’s Nanyang Technology University.

He said New Delhi stood to gain as much if not more than Washington with access to more U.S. facilities further away.

“The U.S. already has a large network of support structures around the world and the Indian signature on the LSA is not central to its military operations,” he said.

Washington had sought similar arrangements with other countries in South Asia, including Sri Lanka and Bangladesh.

——————-
If that does not work, and the horse/mule is just hell bent on dehydrating (suicidal horse/mule, dont believe me well mr. you just go ask the UN peacekeepers):

Combine 1 teaspoon salt with 2 tablespoons of applesauce. Put it in a syringe or de-worming tube and shoot it in the mouth. The salt should stimulate thirst.

Or

Try getting 1 tablespoon of corn syrup into the mouth. It will coat the tongue and compel the horse/mule to drink.

Oh now you can take over the replies to “savion”. 😀

Its a two stage missile, does the stage seperation present a problem in short range engagements?

Not really, its not like a ballistic missile with one stage falling off & the like AFAIK, its a dual pulse motor. The second motor is to avoid the problem of running on earlier energy & using it up – the target does a few maneuvers and your missile runs out of gas. So DRDL chose this path. Interestingly enough, even the Akash has the same logic in mind, it uses a ramjet & the range quoted is not ballistic/max range per se, but the range at which it can still maneuver under an active propulsion. So they decided to keep that same thing in mind & go for another approach to get the same desired result.

It will have a minimum range of around a km or so. The next layer will be of the SRSAM where DRDL (DRDO) is planning to use jet vanes (as on the AAD) but smaller ones out of new materials given the size of the missile.

There was talk that they will make the missile compatible with the Mk-41 launcher, what modifications are required to do so (make the missile compatible with other launchers)? Will that require consulting from US firms?

TBH, I never bothered to ask about it. What I do know however, is that cross compatability would help Israel as and when it deploys these systems. I would presume they would have to have some amount of OEM license/help in knowing the standard interfaces for the Mk41 & making the Barak compatible. Wonder which particular firm owns the right to the Mk41 or whether it is an industry standard unit or owned by the USG as its IP.

🙂
http://img41.imageshack.us/img41/4756/awacs005734177.jpg;)

Dont know why, perhaps its the habit of seeing commercial airliner based AWACs for so long, that the Il-76 based AWACS just seems …unusual.

Just a bit…unusual.

I wonder which airframe the next tranche of 3 Phalcon AEW&C will use. Israel is hard selling the CAEW Gulfstream solution as being cheap and effective.

Pakistan has subsequently become so adapt at designing nuclear weapons that at one time they were coming up with new ones every few months. This is all public information now.

http://www.nti.org/db/china/npakpos.htm

Nuclear weapon design

* Complete design of 25 kT nuclear bomb; possibly a Chic-4 design
* Supplied to Pakistan by China (1983) [7]

You don’t know what you are talking about.

Indeed.

——-
Anyways, dear “you know what you are talking about while Austin doesnt” , I am sure this is more relevant to the PAF thread, is it not?

Take it there.

Is useful as a deterrence tool? How advanced is comparing with i.e. India and Pakistan?

Coments, please.

Quite frankly, to answer your question, Iran is on the way to getting a proper missile capability, but its not there yet.
Such capability requires constant investment both in the basic subsystems as well as manufacturing facilities & the manpower plus infrastructure to maintain progress.

I’d say another decade, decade and a half before they have a capability sufficient to make Israel “deterred”, but only if they crack nukes along with them. Otherwise Israel will keep Arrow & future variants chugging along to take out limited amounts of conventional missiles.

The other option for Iran is to stockpile massive numbers of ballistic missiles, which have to overload Israels ATBM & counterforce capability, and they’d have to be accurate as well (otherwise they’ll just be a limited terror weapon). I sincerely doubt that they will be able to mass manufacture such accurate missiles in substantial numbers.

Given the overall scenario, I think while Iran has a dedicated core of capable scientists, they wont have the resources or political push to invest the kind of resources North Korea has done for e.g. viz its military programs.

All the political issues apart, Iran does have a national consensus which seems to be thinking of both guns and butter and not just guns.

So the missile program serves as a useful political negotiating tool apart from the long term aim to field a ballistic missile capability etc.

JMT.