RiiWho benefits? I invite you to look at the behaviour of those guarding the site, & ask yourself if they care. In front of international TV cameras, they dump bodies by the side of the road, some of them uncovered, try to humiliate OSCE observers, block them from large parts of the site, fire shots in the air, etc. They take pictures of each other with possessions of the dead, & openly swig booze & it’s all recorded for the world to see.
And here I thought there were no separatists, only Russian special forces.
RiiSpeak for yourself Batman… I have no wish to disabuse you of your belief in the existence of ‘western standards’ (give us a clue of the geographical location of this place called the ‘West’ and what these ‘standards’ might actually be). – but I wonder where such a discussion might a have place in a thread about a Malaysian airliner flying from Europe to Asia being shot down by a missile over Ukraine by Russian speaking seperatists – how many nationalities were the victims native to originally?
Actually you’ve made a good point. The ‘western’ standards and illusions that I have been referring to are not intrinsically western — that is merely their manifestation both in this specific circumstance, and in global-historical terms. The root phenomenon, however, is power. All centres of power-consciousness will attempt to disseminate values and standards that favour themselves and turn accidental or contingent qualities into virtues, or eternal truths. The shared delusion known as ‘Russia’, for instance, is certainly no stranger to the discourse that elevates state-based interests above those of e.g. Chechen separatists. This is why Edward Snowden had such difficulty finding a safe haven: his actions struck not just at the US government but at the perogatives that all states have assumed and wish to extend in perpetuity. Despite the great service Edward Snowden rendered to the world’s citiziens, it took a very particular and rare kind of nation — one with both an interest in poking the United States in the eye, and the strength to endure the consequences of doing so, to take him in. And even then, Putin made Snowden’s stay conditional on not doing anything further to destabilise the system in which Russia, too, has so much invested. Germany, in contrast, despite owing so much to Mr. Snowden, wouldn’t lift a finger for him — because Snowden, being possessed of ideals transcending the fiction of the nation-state, is a threat to Germany as well.
RiiReally? To me, your arguments are patronising. You expect us to forgive those poor, ignorant eastern Ukrainians & Russians, because they know not what they do. We can’t judge them by our standards. They’re not as good as us, not as clever, not as sophisticated, so we shouldn’t tell them off when they’re naughty. They can’t help it, poor dears. Rubbish!
On the contrary, I’m pointing out that western standards for what constitutes a legitimate conflict between legitimate actors are rubbish, convenient fictions that are, of course, deliberately designed to favour western interests. The real world is much messier, and the vast majority of conflicts in it do not conform to western standards of highly trained, well equipped, and uniformed individuals doing battle with one another in some kind of carefully choreographed ballet. Of course, in the real world western conduct has rarely adhered to these ideals either, but convenient excuses are always found in such instances (“but they’re terrorists!” being a favoured one of late) or preferably never come to light in the first place, non-white people so rarely having cameras, telephones, etc. on hand to document their suffering.
vleugolmoer‘s chainsaw analogy is a perfect illustration of the total disconnect between western illusions and the real world, where desperate people will do desperate things with whatever means are at their disposal. Can you imagine this guy lost in the woods, freezing to death rather than attempting to operate the gas-lit stove because he hasn’t read the manual? There is a war going on; the enemy is employing airpower to its advantage; you have a a Buk surface-to-air missile system on hand, but no trained operators to go with it; what on Earth do you do? The answer is obvious; unless, of course, you live in some western fantasy bubble where war is a convenience, to be fought (or not) entirely on one’s own terms, without the slightest inconvenience to broader consumer society.
RiiThe belief that rich, pampered, westerners should be able to overfly conflict zones with impunity, entirely disconnected from and indeed oblivious to the suffering on the ground, is truly surreal and almost pathological. If only Fritz Lang could’ve included such imagery in Metropolis. What the arguments from folks like swerve reveal, even as they are compelling in and of themselves, is outrage at the fact that the world is too complex for western rules, concepts, and assumptions to handle: how dare these rebels exist; how dare they obtain such equipment; how dare they use it as best they can with their limited expertise. It’s basically western arrogance and middle-class privilege combined and run amok. The truth is that this was (most probably) a terrible accident, and no talk of who is to blame will change the reality of the suffering experienced today, and in many other places on many other days to people and in ways the media and politicians are much less interested in. Describing this as ‘terrorism’, or seeking to charge the Buk crew with murder, makes about as much sense as charging the USAF B-1 crew involved in the Granai wedding bombing with murder, i.e. none whatsoever.
RiiIf NATO was looking for a pretext to start a war, it could serve as one. If they aren’t, it wouldn’t. And given the laughable state of the west, NATO would hardly be looking to provoke a conflict. Russia, on the other hand, probably wouldn’t mind another Great Patriotic War without that pesky Stalin guy around to complicate the heroic narrative.
RiiOf course, they didn’t factor in the possibility of half-trained nutters with no C&C to speak of getting their hands on high-performance SAMs.
Buk M1: user friendly; battle tested.
RiiThe British government has called for an emergency meeting of the UN Security Council to discuss the crisis in Ukraine as a result of the crash.
So when rich westerners die it’s EMERGENCY MEETING OF THE UN SECURITY COUNCIL, but when poor brown people die in similar numbers it’s a footnote on Pg. 12 if it makes the news at all.
Some things never change.
RiiThe airliner was being escorted by Ukrainian fighters? I can’t imagine why the Buk crew thought it was a military target…
RiiSu-35 uses 117S which, I believe, embodies the same technologies as the 117A engines currently fitted to the T-50 prototypes, although the latter is run somewhat hotter. But India will not in any case be inducting FGFA with 117A engines, they are waiting on the final ‘Stage 2’ engine which is due to wrap EMD next year. 117S would thus not offer any commonality with the future FGFA, nor could it be fitted to existing MKIs. It would be foolish to induct yet another engine type — offering marginal benefits over the AL-31FM1 which can be fitted to the entire MKI fleet — for less than a hundred aircraft.
Neither the original MKI program nor Super 30 were ever intended to deliver India the type of engine ToT you seem to be thinking of. As for the capability and technology embodied in AL-31FM1, it is certainly more than a match for the WS-10 engines fitted to only some of China’s Flankers, and which are in any case inferior to the Russian-supplied AL-31Fs fitted to others and to India’s MKIs. Undoubtedly when later batches of MKIs come up for MLU around 2030, it will be possible to fit AL-31FM2 or whatever the latest drop-fit variant of the engine is at the time. Needlessly complicating one of the most successful programs in IAF history to dubious benefit would be folly.
As for ‘keeping ahead of the Chinese’, China is going to remain or pull ahead of India in almost all military aspects. That’s just the way it is. India would be doing well to maintain a 10yr capability deficit in military matters considering the generation-sized gap that prevails elsewhere. India must use its more limited resources to invest in cost-effective development of capabilities to minimise those gaps that exist. In part this will involve taking advantage of India’s greater access to western markets, and favourable negotiating position as, going forward, Russia’s largest potential export customer. And, like China, it will also involve both ongoing commitment to indigenous development, and judicious use of espionage to accelerate national industrial capabilities.
RiiIf they could manufacture the engines rather than just assemble it would lend itself to independence. Have they completed the process to get all the tooling, yet? Last I read they were still working on it.
I’m not familiar with the specifics of current arrangements, but I expect Russia will be more accommodating of Indian domestic workshare and maintenance/overhaul requirements going forward if only because the relevant Russian companies are no longer desperate for work as they were in the early 2000s.
Too bad Super 30 didn’t wedge in 117S to advance deploy it ahead of its PAKFA introduction. It would delay Super 30 a little, but extend them long term. Also gives the Russians more experience for their Su-35 line.
117S isn’t a drop-fit and would split engine types across the MKI fleet. AL-31FM1 is a drop fit, although I don’t know if India is going for it. The Super 30 program seems to be an informational black hole.
Regarding FGFA, India is planning to induct the aircraft only with the final Stage 2 engine, not the 117A currently fitted to the T-50 prototypes.
RiiGet the Indian AESA scheduled for Tejas Mk. 2 (or just buy Tejas Mk. 2) and have Brazil manufacture everything else.
RiiCould be just the terrible 1366×768 display I’ve got here, but I’m really struggling to tell the difference between that 3.3MB JPEG and the 74.5KB version I have here already.
It’s a great shot though. Proof that even an ugly duckling can shine occasionally.
RiiMKI contract conditions were limited by the demands India could make at the time against Russian interests… same way the fighter variant of Korea’s T-50 was limited by Korea’s limited negotiating position vs. the US/LM interest in limiting potential F-16 competition. India’s negotiating position has improved over time, which is why each successive Su-30MKI batch has involved greater levels of workshare and indigenisation than the last, a trend that will undoubtedly continue with Super-30.
RiiIf we really want to bring India into this thread, can we please focus on how India and Japan can co-operate on developing a new stealth fighter plane.
Now that would be interesting.
RiiJF-17
T-50
Gripen
Tejas
… how many more do you want?
Sign In
