Why? Russia/China sent a A-50 to Israel for modification in Israel.
The Ka-50 upgrade for offer to Turkey was a cooperation.
Why not more cooperations in upgrading Russian weapon-systems.
Much better than India is looking to buy/built western weapons-systems.
(Mirage-2000 f.e.).
Most of the spare-parts of those systems are still coming from Russia. 😉

That was 1997 now it is 2004. No secondary role for Russia in upgradation of Russian equipment.

4 decades and other crap aside……. 😡

the F-16 procurement by pakistan is a prime candidate for “stupid decisions” thread IF the package DOES NOT include AMRAAMs…….

If the AMRAAM is released to PAF, then obviously it is a great buy….. :dev2:

Stupidity of decision depends Who is going to pay and how much is to cost.
I will take $25M F-16 without BVR rather than $50M with BVR for PAF.
and there is a reason behind this.
AMRRAM or not is irrelevant to this decision now.

oh. Russians have always been to India like this. but now Russians are in very strong position economically and can force down a couple of big contracts.

25 July 1994
Aviation Week & Space Technology
Pg. 40
Vol. 141, No. 4
English

Former IAF officials said the MiG-21 upgrade decision went to the Russian Mikoyan design bureau only after the Russians threatened the Indians’ supply of spare parts for other Russian-designed aircraft if Moscow did not get the contract.

Sameer
It was not a flame attempt….
Any how to be more precise… Q for Star49
>How Euoropean Nations getting MLU codes implies that Paksitan will get it?
>Does Paksitan enjoy same kind of relationship with USA as those*Euoropean* nations?
>Do u have any basis for the statement that Pakistan will get MLU codes?

Thnx

Where i made a statement regarding MLU codes is such thing exists in reality? regarding the statement take it as i stated. It is about the past not about the future.

A-Darter is still in development and thus I would not include it as a leading contender for JF-17. However, we will certainly see AIM-9P/Ls on the JF-17 along with the Magics and anyother short range AAM in Pakistan’s inventory currently. The bigger question is regarding the BVR missile, and I think Pakistan Air Force will end up with two different systems. Possibilities are South African collaborated effort to arm the Mirages and SD-10 for JF-17. If PAF decides to upgrade the existing F-16s to MLU standard, we might have to integrate the non-Chinese BVR missile but it is also highly possible that F-16s might carry on without any long range missiles for the rest of their service life. There is no indication of AMRAAM making into PAF and displaying it at IDEAS is no proof of such. Arms displayed on shows are directed towards all the attending countries as well, not just the hosts.

JF-17 is few years away and A-darter is one of future option and $100M is not big amount for 5 th generation WVR. Remember PAF wants TOT for all JF-17 components so this is one of the better option for weopons. And there is big difference between IDEAS and other exhibition as in this exhibition most countries are not eilligible for AMRAAM any way.

There is big difference at time Russia agreed with IL-76 aircraft and now. Economics change with time. You will soon find out when deal signed one way or the other.

This shed some more light on PAF missile deal. Although Kentron wants to hide as much as possible for fear of losing that Howitzer contract but there patience with India has running out so cooperation is going on full scale without any body knowing it.
thats why there is A-darter as an option for FC-1 as mentioned in AFM JUNE 2004.

Africa News Service, June 20, 2002
SA Arms Fan Conflict.
.

Jun 21, 2002

India and Pakistan both buy local weapons.

South African weapons companies are servicing both sides in the India-Pakistan conflict — and it has been roundly condemned by the chair of Parliament’s defence committee, Thandi Modise.

“I would be very, very upset if South Africa was in any way selling to either India or Pakistan. Both have a bad human rights record. They are virtually at war. They are neighbours. It would not be acceptable to be helping to perpetuate that conflict,” Modise said this week. She is a leading African National Congress MP.

Modise’s tough stance comes ahead of crucial committee deliberations scheduled for next week on controversial government amendments to the National Conventional Arms Control (NCAC) Bill, which would significantly reduce both parliamentary oversight and the transparency of South Africa’s international arms trade.

Already, the details of the transactions with India and Pakistan are being kept secret due to the fact that National Conventional Arms Control Committee (NCACC) has failed to make public its reports for the past two years, despite promises to Parliament to do so.

Modise said her committee had never received any explanation for this failure.

In terms of an arrangement after 1994, the NCACC, which is chaired by Minister of Education Kader Asmal, is supposed to report each year on its decisions regarding South African arms exports, but the committee has failed to report since 1999. In that year South Africa exported Category A equipment worth R205-million to India and R36-million to Pakistan. Category A comprises conventional weapons such as explosives, large calibre arms, missiles, bombs, tanks, fighter aircraft and attack helicopters.

Asmal told the M&G the 2000 and 2001 figures had been delayed because of a lack of clarity over the detail of disclosure required, flowing from the two-year delay in the finalisation of the NCAC Bill. He said the figures would be released once they had been put before Cabinet, probably in about three weeks’ time.

The government has been fairly open about its bid to supply the Indian defence force with state armaments manufacturer Denel’s 155mm howitzer technology — weapons systems which have already been deployed in previous wars between the two countries.

In 2000 Denel delivered an emergency supply of ammunition for India’s 155mm Bofors guns following the Kargil conflict in which tens of thousands of shells were fired at Pakistani positions. Now the company is bidding to set up an ammunition plant in India. South Africa is also bidding against Sweden’s Bofors and an Israeli company to supply a new generation of 155mm towed and self-propelled weapons based on Denel’s G5 and G6 cannons.

As recently as February this year, Minister of Public Enterprises Jeff Radebe, attending a defence exhibition in India, announced that Denel was actively pursuing joint ventures with Indian defence industries for the development and manufacture of artillery systems, both for India’s needs and for export.

South African manufacturer Reutech, now majority-owned by the British company Vickers, has exported hundreds of Casspir armoured personnel carriers to India and is understood to be considering building the vehicle there.

The situation with regard to Pakistan is more murky following a Cabinet decision to suspend new arms sales to Pakistan in the wake of the 1999 coup by General Pervez Musharraf.

However, in May 2000 the government indicated in response to a parliamentary question that South Africa was continuing to honour existing contracts and that exports of category A weapons between October 1999 and May 2000 amounted to R44-million. The contracts are believed to relate to a long-term, R600-million deal to supply missile technology to Pakistan.

The authoritative Aviation Week reported in 1999 that Denel had offered Pakistan a package of air-to-air weapons for the Super 7/FC-1 fighter it is developing with China. Denel’s Kentron division is understood to be still in line to supply the Pakistanis with its Darter/Kukri range of air-to-air missiles that would counter India’s present air superiority.

Industry insiders refused to confirm or deny the supplies to Pakistan, but informal leaks from Kentron suggest that South Africa is “doing a roaring trade” with both India and Pakistan.

Asmal said India was regarded as a “strategic partner” and therefore South Africa had a responsibility to meet its long-term commitments to that country. But he said that arms exports, including those to India, were regularly re-evaluated in response to the security situation.

Asmal also confirmed that the Pakistan contract, which the government had inherited from the apartheid government, was still being implemented, though new contracts would not be entered into until Pakistan made “decisive” moves to return to democratic rule.

The international organisation Campaign Against the Arms Trade said South Africa was not unique in arming both Pakistan and India.

“Britain is selling enthusiastically to both sides,” a spokesperson said.

Local lobby groups have been critical of Asmal’s attempts to water down the strong oversight features proposed by Parliament. Anti-arms trade campaigner Terry Crawford-Browne says Asmal’s latest version of the NCAC Bill “reads like a gun lobby document rather than a statement of principle concerned about the proliferation of armaments and the abuse of human rights”.

“It is a disgraceful feature of this Bill that citizens

the media are threatened by 20 years’ imprisonment should they reveal unlawful conduct by the armaments industry

the NCACC.”

The issue of oversight of South Africa’s arms trade has so far resulted in a stormy stand-off between Parliament and the executive.

The NCAC Bill was withdrawn in 2000 and again in 2001 after objections by a handful of NGOs, mainly because of the lack of parliamentary oversight over arms exports and the blanket secrecy imposed over any information relating to the armaments industry. Modise’s committee played a key role in throwing out these clauses and inserting much tougher provisions for Parliamentary monitoring. These included a requirement that the parliamentary committee be consulted prior to the granting of final export permits.

Both the Ministry of Defence and Speaker Frene Ginwala claimed such a provision would be an unconstitutional interference by Parliament in executive actions, despite the fact that state law advisers had approved the committee’s wording.

This week Modise said that she would be led by her committee: “I believe that there should be this kind of oversight (of the executive). The question is whether South Africa is ready for it, whether Parliament is ready to give itself that role.”

Additional reporting by Stefaans Brummer

by Sam Sole