TeerCome on Teer…why give out timelines if you can’t hold them?
Because
a) They thought they could
b) Would you living in a democracy, preferred they didnt give out a timeline?
Foot in the mouth disease is common in the DRDO they always keep claiming things they can’t deliver.
Really?
What of Boeing?
http://news.theage.com.au/national/raafs-wedgetail-project-delayed-further-20081121-6d9t.html
What of Lockheed Martin?
What of EADS?
http://www.eads.com/1024/en/investor/News_and_Events/news_ir/2006/20061003_airbus_a380_delay.html
What of Sukhoi/UAC?
http://airlineworld.wordpress.com/2008/03/25/sukhoi-superjet-also-delayed/
Get that chip off your shoulder sometime?
As we stand now..there is no radar on the LCA.
Have you been to HAL, do you know this for sure?
Correct me if I am wrong,how can the LCA get IOC without a radar and will it get inducted in March 2011 without it?
Is the radar primarily required for IOC? Or for FOC? For which is BVR required to be included?
TeerThis section of the above news is the real kick in the teeth, “We love the gripen we may buy it but the only bad thing about it is that it has parts from the US”
What are these guys on? So the US content didn’t matter when they were looking to buy the C-17s or silly expensive C-130J or P-8i .. good thing these systems aren’t expensive or critical! :S
Oh i know what it is, maybe they are cribbing about not having enough US content? hmm maybe they wanted more US content than the US aircraft in the Race.
Not surprising I guess
Could be simpler. That the people this journalist spoke to are concerned about US content. But their views do not reflect those of the AF HQ. The IAF is not really monolithic in terms of opinion and the final call is made by the HQ.
TeerIf he was scared about it maybe he would have burned the midnight oil.
Burning it far more than you know..
Speaking of the LCA..where is LSP3,they grandly announced that it would fly in 2008. It is now 2010 and still missing.
Look at what goes into LSP3 and you’ll have your answer. Besides which, since it’s so easy, why dont you join ADA and get it done ASAP?
TeerCould it be that Pakistan required a full ToT and the price which the French asked for it is way too high? The Indian Mirage upgrade price even now looks scary.
But consider though, that the Mirage upgrade will come with a 30% offset commitment, which can be fulfilled in a variety of ways. The Russians for instance, met it by offering spares stocks and setting up support infrastructure in India.
TeerI need to see a poject that is on time and a real happy and satisfied customer. There are probably many reasons that stopped the deal with the French avionics. We are talking about 50-100 birds. It is not about 5-10 engines but the whole deal. Do not forget that besides these systems the Pakistani have tp produce the entire jet in Pakistan. I think it will ahve some more troubles before we see finally a block 2.
It is unlikely that entire TOT would anyways be granted as the US has in the past expressed concerns about even limited transfer of French tech. Even otherwise, with spares and support would have been very expensive.
With reference to the last line, absolutely. AFM mentioned that by 2012, the first 40 JF-17s would be delivered, ready. My estimate is that follow on production will both depend on the state of the Pakistani economy at that point of time, plus a trade off between the capabilities China is willing to offer Pakistan and what the PAF has to accept. Given current data, the FC-20 is likely to be on ice as well. The PAF will rather look towards the United States, to transfer more Vipers or stay with what it currently has on order.
TeerTeer, nobody can deny the constraints that shortage of funding would cause. I for one have never done so. But one cant & must not ignore the alternatives. It could be funding, indian pressure, pak’s demands for some tot & risk of prolif, French decision to wait 4 the outcome of MMRCA technical report, something else, or any of these in any combo. Point is unless we have something crystal clear-in this a named person with authority saying blah blah-there is nothing to prove or disprove for anyone.
Those alternatives you mention are not really a clincher, as similar conditions in the past have not stopped huge deals prior, such as the Agosta-90 sale. Of course, they could have been contributing factors, but the state of Pak’s finances is well known.
You wont get anything crystal clear here in terms of any citations either, as theres nothing in it for the Pak side to come out with details that they could’nt afford it, or for the French side to reveal more and cause a rift in relations. For instance, has any Pakistani source come out stating that the FC-20/J-10 project is in limbo?
The writing was pretty much on the wall given the parlous state of Pak. finances, all I did was mention it.
TeerVikas,
Re: our debate on the JF-17 & my position that Pakistan’s financial position would create severe constraints viz such an ambitious plan.
“Newspaper Le Monde had reported earlier that France decided to suspend the sale of electronics and missiles — the first section of a 6 billion euro contract — under pressure from India and uncertainty over Pakistan’s finances.
“It’s a deal that’s not ready from the Pakistani side,” the source said, without giving further details. “For now, the state of the dossier doesn’t allow us to carry on with it.”
Quite ironic that we’d see this just after our debate on the matter.
TeerFired, feh! People have lost their careers for something as silly as pushing a file and p*ssing off the powers that be. We can see the results now in the amazing procurement saga that is the post Bofors procurement.
Wonderful idea, lets just replicate it everywhere.
TeerWith MMS in power, the SH remains a strong contender IMHO.
TeerI think you nailed it on the F/A-18 E/F but I still want the Typhoon or the Rafale. 🙁
TeerTeer, i might have misunderstood you but some of the things you have said about J-10, funding & linking it to JF-17 are slightly confusing. I mean resources are definitely an issue at the moment, but some of us never took the initial dates (2009/10) v seriously even when economic situation wasnt this dire. Our logic was based on other factors such as PAF having its hands full etc. The emphasis PAF put on J-10’s MATURITY was abs evident from AVM S Aslam’s interview by AFM even back in 2004. On another note, sure J-10 is more potent than JF-17, and of course PL-12 compatible. PAF surely knows how to & has to prioritise its requirements. Dont you think they could have delayed JF-17 by couple of years and instead gone for couple of squadrons of J-10, if funding was the main issue? Why didnt that happen?
Let me explain..
My point is that on the one hand if anyone says that the J-10 isnt mature, but then the JF-17, is? After all, wasnt it mentioned somewhere in this thread, that the systems on the latter are derived from the former? So if maturity was an issue, it was with viz Chinese systems available to Pak per se. And given that, investment in that as the std avionics fit is unlikely unless the PAF has no other option. Hence the RC-400/Mica stuff.
China wouldn’t cave in easily or it was simply too time consuming to integrate new kit or perhaps both, so hence a suitable compromise was worked out wherein the first 40-50 planes MK1, were with Chinese fit, whereas the rest 100 odd planned for would come with French and clearly this would involve some heavy integration work. This would also meet Paks operational needs. 40-50 planes even with basic WVR are still F-7 level with a better airframe, with BVR perhaps integrated in a limited manner later funds permitting.
However, with the current economic issues, I seriously dont think the PAF will find it easy to go French, and as such they may again have to re-evaluate the JF-17 program. Again approach China and try to see what is available and settle for it. This may also mean that the production run of the JF-17 is curtailed, till things improve.
Now the question is why not go in for the J-10 and delay the JF-17, question is does Pakistan even have a choice. They have paid up for the JF-17 and for better or worse, have to go with it. Adding a third type will just worsen the situation.
What I have always actually liked about the PAF is how they have extracted maximum bang for their buck e.g. picking up cheap Mirage 3/5 airframes, either using them for spares or upgrading them for flight service. Point is they tried to make sure every system was worth the investment. Now, they tried the same with the JF-17. Inexpensive Chinese airframe, expensive western avionics, ok job done.
Personally, even with the RC-400 etc, the JF-17 would have been outmatched by most rivals sensor wise, but the Mica offered a range of possibilities (especially if the IR version was purchased) and added with the Erieye was a good backup to the Viper.
Now with that too expensive, PAF will have to wait till China comes up with something that meets the PAF bang/buck criteria, and this is where the PAF might actually prefer to focus on building up its Viper fleet (eg via partial US aid) or the like while delaying JF-17 production et al or keeping induction at a slow rate.
PAF has to balance the need for high end operational capabilities versus the “desire” for a locally manufactured/assembled fighter, and the tradeoff at a time of limited financing may have to be harsh. Especially when the other two services will ask for their share of funds.
Thats what I was getting at.
Teer20% of 3000 is not 300.
Edit: I see you corrected that later..
He. The number of TI equipped tanks in the Army as of 2010 end will end up easily greater than 600. 250 T-72s, 310 T-90s, 124 Arjuns – almost all delivered as things stand.
http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/arjun-tank-outruns-outguns-russian-t-90/389650/
Thats 684 right there. Add the additional T-90s inducted from the 347 ordered in 2007 as well…and the numbers keep adding up. And this is just the tip of the iceberg as more upgrades/acquisitions gather steam. The T-72 Upgrade is part of the 2008-10 APP, and more Arjuns are now likely after its strong showing.
Note the Army tank inventory cited as 4000 units above. 20% of that is 800 tanks, if further “calculations” are required.
Almost every other claim made otherwise was also wrong, hilarious actually when seeing the bold font and hysterical language, including the claim of IFV superiority.
Wherein the reality is that by 2002, India already had 1200 BMP-2s and neutral sources eg CDI indicate an additional 700 BMP-1. BMP-2 production did not cease either & India is currently in the market for a BMP2K upgrade having upgraded some 200 odd BMPs with TISAS already. Furthermore, India’s BMPs are far more combat capable than most M113 variants touted, equipped as they are with an autocannon and Konkurs ATGM. Konkurs-M production (tandem warhead) has also commenced, so much for that.
Not all are in denial though.
http://www.pakintel.com/2009/11/29/geopolitical-reality-bites/
November 29th, 2009 · Shaan Akbar
The disconnect with reality appears to stem from two core flaws in the Pakistani perspective:
1. Failure to understand the limitation of national resources/capabilities.
………….
* Pakistan cannot seek parity with India – military or otherwise. Since its inception, Pakistan has viewed itself as a strategic equal of India – and to disastrous ends. India is far too large and developing at far too quick a pace for Pakistan to be its peer. Though it has far to go, India is on the road to becoming a global power. Pakistan is a regional power at best. Militarily, Pakistan has achieved a minimum deterrence through its nuclear capability. It should reduce the size of its standing military and focus on becoming smaller, more mobile, and technologically advanced. Rely on force multipliers and redirect funds towards development.
* Pakistan cannot win Kashmir from India. Three wars over the disputed state (Kargil included) have demonstrated that Pakistan cannot wrest Kashmir from India’s control – India’s military is far too superior in terms of quality and quantity. The best Pakistan can hope for is recognition of the status quo or a Musharrafian solution (joint governance of Kashmir). Again, focus on effectively governing existing Pakistani territory and create a model that demonstrates why Kashmir is better in Pakistani hands.
There, I even used bold font.
Now if more Pakistanis turn out to be astute as Mr Shaan Akbar, that would be a net plus for the country.
TeerScorps posted this on another forum:-
To my mind pleasing doesn’t mean it went without a hitch!!!:)
Usual caveats apply – i.e. its only a rumour at present.
So contenders for the top 2 positions for the leh phase tests are Gripen (and maybe Typhoon) based on the limited info coming out of India
Cheers
I dop hope its the Typhoon..
TeerNo, PAF never ordered FC-20, it has still not done so.Permission to start negotiations was given.
Oh I see. So thats what happened!
The report mentions 300 SD-10 as well, clearly given what you have said and since these are mentioned along with the FC-20 which they were apparently intended for… Pakistan must not have ordered those either, but permissions to start negotiations must have been given.
TeerXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Indian Army has approx 3000 tanks.Army said only 20% night capable, so I make that 600 off night capable tanks.
India is a loooongway to fielding 2000+ upgraded T-72s and 1657 T-90s
So, now you note that India has 600 night capable tanks already? What an improvement, theres hope yet..
Let me give you a glimpse of reality here
..Catherine issue
…ammo issue
Report from “Dated 13/6/2006”
Let me give you a glimpse of reality here “2 April 2010”.
How time flies!
FYI, the Army just went and purchased more Catherines – waste of money, but hey thats what a bigger budget does.
The Refleks issue was addressed via procurement from OEM, http://www.mod.nic.in (Annual Report 2008-09), procurement of Refleks missiles.
The defective FSAPDS rounds were withdrawn & new Israeli ones started at HAPP, so even that issues being addressed..
The T-72’s galloping obsolescence is magnified by the MoD’s failure to overhaul tanks on schedule: Some 800 T-72s are years overdue for overhaul. Originally, each T-72 was to be overhauled twice during its service life of 32 years. But as the overhaul agencies — the Heavy Vehicles Factory, Avadi; and 505 Army Base Workshop, Delhi — failed to meet their overhaul targets of 70 and 50 tanks, respectively, the army decided that one overhaul was good enough. And, with even that schedule not implemented, a desperate MoD has approached Indian industry to play a role in overhauling the T-72 fleet.
http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/army-to-spend-billionsoutdated-t-72-tanks/23/20/384449/[/QUOTE]
800 out of a fleet of 2000+ mentioned as an issue. Okie dokie. 😉
Now, the RFI for overhauls is already out.
http://indianarmy.nic.in/writereaddata/RFI/43/rfi-vi-180110.pdf
And key firms are already moving into place:
http://www.defense-aerospace.com/article-view/release/112456/india%E2%80%99s-beml-aims-at-billion-dollar-turnover.html
But its interesting to see you didnt put the rest of the article up here, I wonder why?
Instead, the DGMF — longstanding advocates of Russian equipment — plans to spend Rs 5 crore per T-72, hoping to add another 15-20 years to that tank’s service life by replacing crucial systems, such as its fire control system, main engine and night vision devices.
The military’s Annual Acquisition Plan for 2008-2010 (AAP 2008-10) lists out the cost of modernising the T-72 fleet as follows:
# New 1000-horsepower engines (identical to the T-90 tank) to replace the T-72’s old 780-horsepower engines. The cost of each engine: Rs 3 crore.
# Thermal Imaging Fire Control Systems (TIFCS) that will allow the T-72 gunners to observe and fight at night. Each TIFCS will cost Rs 1.4 crore.
# Thermal Imaging (TI) sights to provide T-72 tank commanders with night vision. Each TI sight costs Rs 0.4 crore.
# An auxillary power unit (APU) to generate power for the tank’s electrical systems. Each APU will cost Rs 0.16 crore.
Certainly addresses the “night capable aspect”. Most interesting should be the presence of a Commanders Thermal Imaging Sight – iirc even the Al Khalid doesnt have one but a ‘cost effective’ passive Image Intensifying Tube unit..looks like its all about money…
Good to see you “seeing a glimpse of reality”.
Meanwhile, werent Pakistan’s so called night capable tanks stalled due to corruption a few years back? Did it ever get solved?
http://antisystemic.org/satribune/www.satribune.com/archives/200507/P1_tank2.htm
Sign In
