ante_climaxIt makes little or no sense for Sri Lanka to worry about being someone’s little brother. It’s a sovereign nation. And from what we saw, one with a pretty competent military that should have every item its needs to defend the integrity of the country.
If SL don’t play its cards right and as long as there is a Tamil population there, then India can always find an excuse to intervene and despite having a good military it stands little chance standing up to an Indian intervention.
All big countries have their buffer zones and spheres of influence and would not like others to violate them. How would China like a Pro West Myanmar or North korea ? Same with Georgia and Russia. I am sorry may not be fair but that is how it is.
ante_climaxThat’s a load of crock. India and the US were smuggling weapons into Tibet well before the Dalai Lama had to flee. Plus it can be argued that India is a agent of Western colonialism. India certainly helped in British ventures throughout Far East and Southeast Asia. India did grow and profit from the opium trade used by the British in trying to destroy countries they wanted to take over.
Do you have any proof for Indian involvement in this weapons trade ?
India was a colony of the British and we had no choice but to march where they lead us.
The British drained Indian wealth and to say that India profited from the Opium trade is :). Btw that India of the old included present day Pakistan and Bangladesh.
A lot of the animosity comes from China not giving India the proper respect and considering her as a strong regional player? Well boo-hoo. Does that meaningless gesture really affect India that much? And you don’t hear India vilifying China like you pretty much do? I remember reading something that came from an Indian leader vilifying China and labelling her a threat back when the West was occupying and carving up China. So China at the worst and low point of her history under control of the West was a threat?
When was the West occupying China ? Way before the revolution and possibly before the start of the Second World War and you have read an Indian leader labelling China a threat then. Awesome.
ante_climaxWell the price of $75 miillion quoted for Mig-29K as quoted by Defence News was denied by the Mig boss the next day link
It was a deliberate and mischievous news spread by Defence News
As per BR the cost quoted by WNC for Mig-29K is $32 million , even with spares support , training the cost comes to $ $46.25 million per aircraft link
Not true my friend it have been posted by me with the relevant threads in the fourth IAF thread.
It is true that the MIG chief denied about the Hike that was in september or so last year the news about the hike was published early this year !
I am talking about the follow on MIG orders not the 16 initially ordered. There is a specefic thread made for that, please check that and see the date with the date of your link where the Mig Chief says there is no price rise.
🙂
ante_climax“best there is”? You do know that the 35 can actually take on the raptor don’t you? I can even show you vids where they say it can be done thanks to its latest sensor suite.
You believe everything the Russians say don’t you. The Mig 35 demonstrator pilot who flew it in AI says in a youtube video that the Mig 35 is actually more fifth gen than fourth gen. I am sorry but tell me how it will take on the raptor ?
Austin the latest prices quoted for the Mig 29 K is far beyond your 50 million mark. I think the F 16, SH and Gripen will be cheaper or on par with the MIG costwise.
ante_climaxMoreover I think that is the price offered to Partner nations and may be Israel. Countries like India and UAE will have to pay more.
ante_climaxActually India gives many things like Radars for free while Sri Lanka has to pay China for the same. It may well be between the JF 17 and LCA the next fighter order from Sri Lanka.
ante_climaxIf its latter, then better believe the report than your assumption, As Defence Minister clearly pointed out LCA will achieve FOC by end of 2010.
It is quite possible than ministers can be further from the truth than those in service. 2011 looks more like it.
ante_climaxLet the Russians have that and return the money we paid. We are not responsible for them underestimating the cost, nor are we responsible for them employing unskilled welders. The Maximum we should agree is calculate the price difference because of dollar value changes and pay them that. Or esle they can have it for themselves.
Full Speed IAC 1 & 2 😉
ante_climaxNot really because there is a fundamental difference , China and US do not have deep ideological difference that US had with Soviets , infact they are their biggest trading partners, its more like China and US are competing for the same strategic space in certain region.
There is a deep ideological difference. Especially with regards to democracy freedom of speech/expression etc. The yearly China damning human rights report is an example for this. China is not high up the threat priorities of America because of the mess that is the Global War on Terror. It is safe to say that had 9/11 not happend the US relationship with Russia and China would have been much worse. Economics takes back seat when it comes to really strategic issues, It is more like China needing the U.S as its market than the otherway around ( despite the recent injection of Chinese cash in US Economy).
China is not exactly a enemy nation ( like Pakistan ) but neither are they friendly , but both India and China realises that economy co-operation is the key to build this friendship.
Recently there has been some defence co-operation.
Actually it depends on who you talk to, some people like Bhadrakumar has almost a defeatist mentality with regards to china (ie if you follow his write ups in the Hindu). It will be strategic mistake if we are not pro active against the Chinese threat. We must learn from lessons in the past. I am not against closer strategic ties with China, but that is more improbable than Iran having a good relationship with America. Mainly because.
1. China has outstanding border issues with India. Her hawkish new thinktanks believe she is in a position of strength and because of that her former give and take approach is no more valid in border talks.
2. China aides Pakistan and will do so in a longer term than the U.S will. Now Pakistan falling into chaos with the Taliban taking over migh change that. But that would pose more threats to India than a Pakistan friendly China.
American relationship with Western countries were based on certain ideology and their alliance were military in nature as a block against Soviets , India and US dont share such relationship , nor will India opt for any military relationship or alliance with any nation.
IF you follow the American speeches about India you will really see Ideological ‘feelers’ like a relationship between worlds biggest democracies etc. I think India shares basic ideology with America and West than with other countries, as we mature as a democracy and pay more adherence to human rights, that relationship will be strengthend. As for military alliances, India may not want to pick and choose sides at the moment, but any change in the regional balence will certainly force her into the American bloc.
ante_climaxUS does what is best for her interest and not because it sees India interest in it , it a freindship of convinience not of real strategic value.
Every nation acts in her interest. It is something India is yet to learn. But the current relationship between India and U.S is of a strategic nature. It can be seen in similar light to Americas friendship with Western Europe during the time of the Soviets, because such will be the threat of China when she realizes her potential.
ante_climaxSri Lanka to be the LCAs launch exprot customer 🙂
ante_climaxis India the next target?
Wbat would a few Mig 27s and 29s do against India. They are probably meant for patroling.
ante_climaxThe only reason India should by any US aircraft is if the US promises to back out of afghanistan stop funding the pakistani state military and the ISI and leave Indias back yard!
You are not realistic.
1. America pulling out of Afghanistan would be very bad for India especially if the Taliban takes over. India have been taking part in the active reconstruction of Afghanistan. With Obama softening up to Iran India is likely to play a major role in Iran Afghan relations.
2. Amercia will not stop funding Iran. According to them a fragile government that may be corrupted is better than an pro taliban government which has access to nukes. And if you think hard you will also realise that the last thing India would need is a Pakistani collapse.
ante_climaxI was wondering why LM offered the ACES instead of the Falcon Edge to India. After reading the ACES brochure I believe it is partly because of the cost factor, it says that.
Low Risk, Low Cost
Enhancements in modern
digital technology, rel ected in
the all-digital ALR-69A and
the ALQ-187(V)2 DRFM-
based jammer coupled with the
ALE-47, of er high reliability
and low cost and allow ACES to
be of ered at a more viable price
than many legacy EW suites.
In fact, the entire ACES suite
costs less than some jammers
currently deployed on existing
aircrat or still in development
for future aircrat .
May be the F 16 IN will have a price and an offer which one cannot refuse.
IOWs, to match the newer versions of the fulcrum or NG in range, the f-16 needs EFTs or CFTs, which results in drag, poor twr, wingloading, payload capacity.
The original fulcrum was notorious for its short legs and was lagging behind the Viper when it comes to range. Now tell me how do the Range of Mig 29M/35 compare to that of a Viper without CFTs ?
They try to compensate with CFTs but that ruins the one advantage it gained during this period – TWR.
What is the TWR of the Block 60 ?
Pratt & Whitney and General Electric have added to the evolution with impressive improvements in engine performance. The original Pratt & Whitney engine on the YF-16 developed about 23,000 pounds of thrust. The engines on the Block 50/52 aircraft develop nearly 30,000 pounds of thrust. The GE F110-GE-132 engine on the Block 60 F-16 is rated at 32,500 pounds of thrust. The next round of engine improvements could boost this figure to more than 50,000 pounds. So, even though the F-16’s overall weight has increased, its thrust-to-weight ratio has improved as well.
So much for your claims of F 16 losing its TWR advantage.
http://www.codeonemagazine.com/archives/2008/articles/jul_08/f16-evolution/index.html
Again for the nth time if it pleases you, you can remove the CFT and get normal tanks.
ante_climaxThe problem is that , the f-16 is a 9 tons machine with 3 tons of fuel, and the mig-29m (which probably the 35 will be based on) is a 11-12 tons machine with 5-6 tons of fuel, the F-18 is better than the F-16 on that, since is a 13-14 tons machine with -5-6 tons of internal fuel
CFT’s are not a “plus”, are a need for the new F-16, people when see CFT get impressed by all the marketing crap, but actually CFTs are patch solutions , and reveal shortcomings rather than real advantages
No they are actually a plus because.
1. They give more range with less aerodynamic penalty compared to external tanks.
2. Frees up external stations for additional weapons.
3. Increases ferry range in External tank + Cft configuration
4. Can be removed/ may not be used in missions which would not need them.
Sign In
