RimmerMan, i thought i was bad in mathematics.
1- The plane only has 40 orders worth two squadrons.
2- for the 40 planes there is no need of a production line that churns out 40 per year.
This has nothing to do with the open market, or a closed one.
OK, so say HAL wins an international order for 60 LCA MK2?
They dont even have production facilities set up to fufil that order, not evening worrying about teh fact they dont have a flying LCA MK2!!!!!
RimmerRimmer is the obvious reincarnation of poster Dare2 and countless other names before that. Anyone that posts 200 times a month, most of it trash talk, has probably been banned here before. Its a shame he continues with the same preoccupation. Must be OCD.
WOW! The funny thing is Madrat, this thread was back on track till you just posted that blatent flamebat.Mods or anyonce can do checks on my ip or whatever. I dont have to defend myself to you. Although happy to report you for trying to provoke a flame war when the rest of us were having a discussion.
I am on holiday, love planes, love Pakistan and post alot. Please go and pollute some other thread.
RimmerThe delivering 8-12 units is due to the number of orders of the initial lot, HAL could invest multi million dollars and set up a lot of lines producing the plane, however for a total order of 40 mark I version, that makes no sense at all.
HAL has made plenty of statements about the situations.
Yeah, sure they have, but tragically for HAL, there numerous optomistic staements on what they think will happen may not sell fighters in a tough open market.
Rimmer1. You do not have the price of Gripen NG either. Both planes are not ready although the NG has a demo flying. I am comparing the price of the current Gripen C/D with that of MK1 and there is a significant difference.
2. Possibly cheaper than France because everything French is pricey.
3. The MK 2 will have a foreign Engine. The Radar which is foreign in MK 1 will be replaced by an indigenous AESA, the Astra will be ready by then as well. The foreign content bar the engine is likely to decrease.
1) Yes, but I am not the one on a internet forum claiming anything for the Gripen, you are claiming a lower price for LCA, just because you “think it may be the case”
2) “becuase everything French is pricey”!? Is that the sum of your argument? My sisters Renault is much cheaper then my VW. See what an utter meaningless comparison you have just made!?
3) You dont have a a) a working AESA b) Working homegrown engine c) homegrown weapons mix on offer
How can you possibly be sure foreign content will decrease!?
This has to win an award for most pointless thread ever!
RimmerSome sanity prevailing…
Here is the link
‘Currently we can manufacture 8 aircraft per annum, which is extendable up to 12,’ Rao said at a press conference at the INS Hansa, a naval base in Goa 30 km from here’
RimmerYou are right, as there is less transarency in Pakistan, it i smore difficult for miltary developments to get reported vis a vis India. This is a point I was making.
As opposed to derailing and Trolling. I have been asking for us to focus on LCA but other posters keeping harping back to JF-17. Dont want to be accused of not answering your questions.
As opposed to Trolling, I dont do this, and you can always ignore me.I have asked Ankush and Nirav to do this but seems your fellow posters are incapable of doing this.Hope you can though.
RimmerSee, the any Air-chief will ask for newer engines if and only if the current engines lack performance, or if the next version will be bigger and weightier than the present one. There is clearly no Mk.2 version in sight for JF-17, and so the conclusion is for the former.
PAF’s “behind-the-scenes” activities are very well known. You may read further below :-
Did you know about DRDO’s PAD-AAD, before they were tested “one fine day” ?
MiG-21 Bis
ROSE upgrades to PAF Mirages were very well known.
The news about Babur was posted in Pakdef fora by an Indian called Arjun k.1 1 month before the Babur was first tested on Aug 2005.
PN has been operating the Harpoon for a very ong time now. New batches do not pose any unknown threat to IN.
This came after forfeiting millions of dollars already paid to the US in the 1990s for F-16C batches that were withheld due to a Congressional decree.
That advise, you must take.
Arey uncle, here see this :-
Pakistan nears FC-1 avionics decision DATE:18/10/1995
In 1995, PAF was “very close” to deciding on an “uber” European avionics suite for the JF-17. But like all such reported negotiations, it came to naught. I have similarly posted numerous news reports about PAF wanting Selex AESA, this & that and all the “European heavens” for the JF-17. All these came to nothing, and 14 years after the above talks, the JF-17 still flies with Chinese avionics.
As mentioned earlier, PAF has been airing these “negotiations”, “talks” etc. since the past 14 years to bluff only. It may possibly be a psy-op strategy.
Unbelievable! Only you can actually acknowledge I am right yet still try and argue otherwise at the same time!
I dont care what Indian projects are equievelent. My point is and still remains that all the projects listed were not trumpeted in the media. Even you admit people only knew of Baburs existance 1 month before testing. Its development and poetnetial were not discussed by anyone outside the Pakistani military. No, you did not know about Harpoon Block 2 or no one on the internet knew about it till DSCA kindly informed us.
You could not have known about ROSE upgrade before it was in service. No one did.
I can only converse and have a debate if you are happy to accept reality and facts. If not, it reallyis pointless.
I will let you live in your world now, where LCA is Gripen equievelent, where it will be, exported like F-16, where IAF are wrong and you are right.
There, does that make you feel better? Lets all just suspend reality for the sake of this thread then shall we!?
RimmerItis turning into a fiasco!
We only have 2 new delivered planes making 4 aircraft and still awaiting another 6.It has been over 5 years now!
RimmerOne may easily add Selex’s Vixen AESA radar also to the above list. As with the above, nothing came of it, although it had (supposedly) been in the offing since 2006. Those days, there was some “flutter” in Indian fora about the prospect of an AESA radar on JF-17.
But as with Vixen, Grifo, RC-400 etc. nothing came of it, once again demonstrating “hot air” only. All 8 protoypes with PAF as well as the next 40-50 productions units will fly with a derated Chinese radar (the KJL-?) and only Chinese avionics.
The FC-1 is a fully Chinese product (albeit funded by Pakistan). Russia has had significant contributions in it’s development (like it has with many Chinese products), including design consultancy by Mikoyan, the RD-93 engine and the possible sale of the radar. Part of the profits from the sale of FC-1 by China to any export customer must require Russian consent and possibly part of the profits also.
Face it, in the previous posts you said to Insig “no negotiations with Europe for avionics”.
You have been proved wrong,no use changing subject. Have some grace to admit when you are wrong, or you will never learn from any experiance you have in life.
RimmerThe above is inaccurate. It does NOT have a chosen engine for the next batch betond 40 jets, otherwise it’s performance is sub-par should PAF decide to continue with RD-93. Obviously, choosing a new engine is a time-consuming process with modifications required in the fuselage. At least Tejas Mk.2 has it’s new engine set — and even with the current GE F404-IN 20 engine, it has reached IoC specifications already in recent tests at Goa.
“Silence” is a red herring for no action taking place. By being “silent” Pakistan likes to create an impression that a lot of behind-the-scenes activity is taking place, when in fact none at all is taking place. This bluff will be called at some time.
I’ve already posted news reports about how many times PAC Kamra’s JF-17 manufacturing facility has been inaugrated/opened by Musharraf with a lot of “fanfare”, and then by Gilani/Zardari since 2005-06. Production began only in 2009.
You may bring a single instance where FC-1 has flown in Zhuhai airshow (news reports are all public), or it has participated in formations along with the (then) experimental J-10 B and J-11 B.
Because, as I’ve argued earlier, the IAF is totally mistaken. The Tejas Mk.1 is equivalent to Gripen C/D, and the Mk.2 will be equivalent to Gripen NG. There is a firm belief that Tejas Mk.2 should be the MRCA, and the IAF must not entertain the Gripen NG, or ANY other fighter jet.
My signature itself expresses the above.
PAF want a better engine, if not they will continue with RD-93. There is no issue here. Your Russian friends are happy to provide us with plenty of engines but we want better.
Please, PAF is far more secretive then IAF. ALOT of activity goes on behind the scenes. Just becuase we dont have lots of “analysts”, “exclusives” and “tenders” always being reported about in media it does not mean nothing is happening.
By your twisted logic, if no oneknows anything about US Black projects that means no work is being down secretly?
Are you actually starting to finally comprehend how silly you are starting to appear on this forum?
Let me ask you, before you knew about contracts being signed and delivery, what news reports did you hear about PAF aqquirng
1) MAR-1
2) F7-PG
3) Project ROSE
4) Testing of RAAD, BABUR, H-4
5) New Harpoon batches
6) DSCA notification of AMRAAM,JDAM etc.
None.Until we signed contract or showed the world pictures of successful tests no news was reported. When it was reported it was done by the sellers, as in DSCA, not by PAF.
Not every air force has to shout about how much work it is doing everyday from the top of a mountain.
No, by your very own admission. IAF is wrong is going for Gripen over LCA.
You know more about LCA project then IAF themselves?
It really is time to take a hard look at what you post on this forum….
RimmerNew PN P-3C Orion update.
Why will it be taking 7-8 years to get 8 refurbished Orions into PN service!? :confused:
Pakistan’s P-3 Orion Maritime Aircraft – and their Harpoons
04-Jan-2010 12:50 EST
Related Stories: Americas – USA, Asia – Central, Boeing, Contracts – Awards, Contracts – Intent, Electronics – General, Lockheed Martin, Missiles – Anti-Ship, Radars, Specialty Aircraft
Advertisement
Pakistani P-3
(click to view full)In late 2004, Portuguese aircraft refitter OGMA was chosen by Lockheed Martin in Marietta, GA to refit Pakistan’s 2 P-3C Update II.5 Orion maritime patrol and surveillance aircraft for service. In addition, Pakistan was preparing to buy 8 US Navy surplus P-3C aircraft through the Foreign Military Sales program.
Pakistan’s location on the Indian Ocean places it next to the Persian Gulf, and its rivalry with India ensures that its maritime patrol and strike capabilities will remain relevant across a wide expanse of ocean. Subsequent orders have served to detail the modernization work for Pakistan’s fleet, additional aircraft buys and refurbishment orders, and accompanying orders for AGM-84 Harpoon missiles that can attack naval or land targets. The latest contract includes an order for additional mission systems work…
Contracts and Key Events
AGM-84 Harpoon launch
(click to view full)While the P-3 Orion and Harpoon missile orders are separate deals, the Harpoon is the Orion’s critical surface warfare capability. A P-3 without Harpoon missiles is a patrol aircraft and a threat to submarines. One with Harpoon missiles can become a threat to any surface ship within the wide arc of its range – which in Pakistan’s case extends to the Strait of Hormuz, and across a wide swathe of the Indian Ocean.
Dec 23/09: Lockheed Martin Corp. in Eagan, MN receives a $34.2 million modification to a previously awarded indefinite-delivery/ indefinite-quantity contract, adding funding for Pakistani P-3C mission system spares.
Work will be performed in Eagan, MN (75%), Oldsmar, FL (20%), and Manassas, VA (5%), and is expected to be complete in September 2011. The Naval Air Warfare Center Aircraft Division in Lakehurst, NJ manages this contract (N00019-06-D-0012).
Nov 23/09: Lockheed Martin Corp. in Eagan, MN receives a $4.4 million modification to a previously awarded indefinite-delivery/ indefinite-quantity contract (N00019-06-D-0012) to upgrade 7 P-3C aircraft for the government of Pakistan under the Foreign Military Sales program. This modification will replace the airplanes’ obsolete and unsustainable avionics systems with modern equipment.
Work will be performed in Eagan, MN (70%), and Greenville, SC (30%), and is expected to be complete in February 2013. The Naval Air Warfare Center in Lakehurst, NJ manages this contract.
June 5/08: An $8.1 million indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity contract with an estimated value of $8,134,542 for engineering, logistics, and technical services in support of the Harpoon Weapon Systems and SLAM-ER Missile System for the U.S. Navy, and for the Governments of Australia, Canada, Chile, Egypt, Greece, Israel, Japan, Korea, Malaysia, Netherlands, Oman, Pakistan, Portugal, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Spain, Taiwan, Thailand, Turkey, United Kingdom, and United Arab Emirates under the Foreign Military Sales Program.
May 31/07: A $8.1 million modification to a previously awarded firm-fixed-price contract (N00019-06-C-0027) for the procurement of a Harpoon Missile Subsystem Test Set Weapon Station upgrade, interim spares, installation and checkout, and applicable training for the Government of Pakistan under the Foreign Military Sales Program.
Work will be performed in St. Charles, MO (34.02%); Dallas, TX (28.89%); St. Louis, MO (18.46%); Oklahoma City, OK (7.34%); St. Louis, MO (3.43%); Yorba Linda, CA (3.19%); Chatsworth, CA (1.20%); Englewood, CO (0.70%); Austin, TX (0.60%); and various locations across the United States (2.17%) and is expected to be complete in January 2009. The Naval Air Systems Command, Patuxent River, MD.
April 13/07: Small business qualifier Delex Systems, Inc. in, Vienna, VA received a $7.5 million firm-fixed-priced order against a previously issued Basic Ordering Agreement (N00019-03-G-0015) for the development, documentation, testing and delivery of a turnkey Harpoon Tactical Training Program for the Pakistan Navy under the Foreign Military Sales Program.
Work will be performed in Vienna, VA (95%), and Karachi, Pakistan (5%), and is expected to be complete in April 2012. The Naval Air Systems Command in Patuxent River, MD issued the contract.
March 30/07: A $191.4 million firm-fixed-priced contract for Harpoon missiles combines US and foreign military sales.
Included in the purchase is 30 Harpoon Tactical Block II Encapsulated All-Up Rounds for Pakistan, comprising $33.27% of the total order at $63.7 million. This contract was not competitively procured (N00019-07-C-0037).
Feb 13/07: Lockheed Martin announces a $186.5 million Foreign Military Sale contract to continue providing mission system upgrades and support for 7 Pakistani P-3C Orion maritime surveillance aircraft. See also March 3/06 entry.
The Pakistan Navy’s P-3C Upgrade Program began in March 2006. The 1st modified aircraft was delivered in January 2007, and the 2nd refurbished aircraft is reportedly set for induction in March 2007. Lockheed Martin release | Express India.
Jan 19/07: The 1st refurbished Pakistani P-3C is handed over in an induction ceremony. The aircraft will be based at Naval Base Karachi. PPI | IRNA.
May 31/06: The Defense Security Cooperation Agency officially announces [PDF] Pakistan’s request to buy 50 UGM-84L (submarine-launched), 50 RGM-84L (surface-launched), and 30 AGM-84L (air-launched) Block II Harpoon missiles; 5 Encapsulated Harpoon Command Launch Systems; 115 containers; missile modifications; training devices; spare and repair parts; technical support; support equipment; personnel training and training equipment; technical data and publications; U.S. Government and contractor engineering and logistics support services; and other related elements of logistics support. The total value, if all options are exercised, could be as high as $370 million.
Read “Ahoy! Pakistan Requesting 150 Harpoon Missiles” for more information concerning the purchase, and the Block II Harpoon.
March 3/06: Lockheed Martin Corp. Maritime Systems and Sensors in St. Paul, MN receives a $186.5 million ceiling-priced modification to a previously awarded indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract (N00019-06-D-0012) for the fabrication, integration and testing of 7 P-3 aircraft missions systems for the Government of Pakistan under the Foreign Military Sales Program. Work will be performed in Greensville, SC (90%) and Eagan, MN (10%) and is expected to be complete in July 2011.
This modification includes a fully capable Inverse Synthetic-Aperture Radar ISAR/SAR, Electronic Support Measures (ESM), acoustic system, Electro-Optical/Infra-Red system, communication system and Inter-Communication System (ICS). In addition, this modification includes the installation of upgraded P-3 mission systems into the Orion aircraft.
Feb 12/06: A $15.8 million modification to a previously awarded firm-fixed-price contract (N00019-06-C-0027), exercising an option for 10 Harpoon Tactical Block II Grade B All-Up-Round (AUR) missiles and 10 MK631 Canister AUR Containers for the Government of Pakistan under the Foreign Military Sales Program.
Work will be performed in St. Charles, MO (50.46%); McKinney, TX (15.14%); Toledo, OH (5.93%); United Kingdom (5.28%); Huntsville, AL (3.86%); Clearwater, FL (3.79%); Galena, KS (2.33%); Elkton, MD (2.19%); Kirwood, MO (2%); Middletown, CT (1.83%), and other various locations throughout the United States (7.19%), and is expected to be complete in February 2007.
May 6/05: The US Defense Security Cooperation Agency announces [PDF] Pakistan’s official request for 40 AGM-84L (air-launched) and 20 RGM-84L (surface-launched) Grade B Canister HARPOON Block II missiles; containers; missile modifications; training devices; spare and repair parts; technical support; support equipment; personnel training and training equipment; technical data and publications; U.S. Government and contractor engineering and logistics support services; and other related elements of logistics support. The estimated cost is $180 million, and Boeing will be the prime contractor.
“Pakistan intends to use the purchase to upgrade and modernize its existing HARPOON missile capability. The Pakistani Navy currently has AGM-84 Block I air/surface/subsurface launch capability.”
Nov 16/04: The US Defense Security Cooperation Agency announces [PDF] Pakistan’s official request to buy 8 P-3C aircraft with T-56 turboprop engines, communications equipment, training devices, medical services, support and test equipment, engineering technical services, supply support, operation and maintenance training, documentation, spare/repair parts, publications, documentation, personnel training, training equipment, contractor technical and logistics personnel services, and other related support elements. The estimated cost is $970 million. The DSCA adds that:
“The command-and-control capabilities of these aircraft will improve Pakistan’s ability to restrict the littoral movement of terrorists along Pakistan’s southern border and ensure Pakistan’s overall ability to maintain integrity of their borders. Pakistan intends to use the proposed purchase to develop a long needed fleet of maritime and border surveillance aircraft. The addition of these aircraft will provide Pakistan with search surveillance, and control capability in support of maritime interdiction operations and increase their ability to support the U.S. Operation Enduring Freedom Operations; anti-ship and anti-submarine warfare capabilities; and a control capability over land against transnational terrorists and narcotics smugglers. The modernization will enhance the capabilities of the Pakistani Navy and support its regional influence and meet its legitimate self-defense needs. Pakistan is capable of absorbing and maintaining these additional aircraft in its inventory.”
The prime contractor will be Lockheed Martin Company of Greenville, SC.
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/Pakistans-P-3-Orions-05972/
RimmerActually IIRC the SwAF paid $31 mil. per unit for their last batch of Gripen C/Ds, that was something like over 10% cheaper then first estimated. So when it comes to fly-away prices the Gripen does´nt seems to be that much more expensive then the LCA. When it came to operational costs and other things surrounding the system it also proved to be cheaper then they first planned for, but that´s only like 10 years of operational service experience speaking so what do they know? Who knows, if/when LCA gets operational it may turn out to be cheaper then what they are thinking right now, or it could also become more expensive. India will only know after it has become operational for a while.
But fly-away pricetag is´nt important when it comes to export sales. What the customer wants to know is, how much is it gonna cost us to buy, own and operate this aircraft for at least a couple of decades. That is where the Gripen have the edge of most of its competitors at the moment IMO. Time will tell how LCA will be able to tackle those issues. Right now I think it´s pretty pointless to discuss the export chances of an aircraft that is only on paper (Mk2.)
Thanks, ben trying to point this out for 3 pages now….
Rimmer1. No it is not, look at the current price of the LCA and the Gripen.
2. Rafael is a twin engined fighter and in a different category to the Gripen.
3. Even with all that the LCA is much cheaper, It will be cheaper still when more and more indigenous subsystems replace foreign ones in the future.
1) Do you haveacurrent price for the LCA MK2 or is it just your guess (which I suspect)
2) Agreed, point is Sweden can make a medium sized fighter cheaper then France though and possibly cheaper then India.
3) Right now though looks like there will be a hell of alot of foreign content, even in LCA MK2
RimmerInsig, there have been no negotiations for JF-17’s avionics whatsoever with ANY European company. There have been only speculations about JF-17 opting for the Grifo radar or the Vixen AESA radar, since the past few years nothing concete.
In contrast, Tejas’ Mk.1’s avionics have been laid out, with most of them being in common with the Su-30 MKI. Tejas Mk.2 will retain the same avionics as Mk.1 with possibly fewer LRUs.
And the prize for the most incorrect sweeping statemnet goes to…..
Looks like even your Russian “super duper, long-time, best mate, ally thingy” wanted to get in on the radar deal….
South Asia
Oct 10, 2007
French arms deal with Pakistan risks US ire
By Federico Bordonaro
The news last month that Pakistan is likely to get French air-to-air missiles (AAMs) and radar for its JF-17 fighter aircraft has raised some eyebrows in the US.
The reason is that MICA AAMs produced by MBDA and RC-400 multimission radar built by Thales may enrich China’s rapidly growing military capabilities if sold to Pakistan, since Islamabad is developing its fighter plane jointly with Beijing. The JF-17 is a lightweight multi-role fighter co-developed by Pakistan
Aeronautical Complex (PAC) and Chengdu Aircraft Industry Corporation under a joint venture of China and Pakistan.
Thus, some observers say, the widely debated European Union arm systems ban against China may finally be circumvented, in such a way that it could damage US efforts to keep Beijing’s air power at disadvantage vis-a-vis Taiwan. As some Indian and Pakistani sources have pointed out, French-built Mirage fighters owned by Taiwan are actually equipped with such missiles and radar.
Taiwan and India are obviously concerned with China’s military build-up. If China gets the chance to closely look at French advanced technology in possession of Taipei, Beijing could theoretically become capable of countering it effectively.
However, it must be noted that the issue of military technology transfer is fairly complicated, and that Pakistan’s acquisition of French systems is not automatically a dramatic reinforcement of Chinese capabilities, unlike some reports suggest.
In fact, if French companies sell radar and missiles to Pakistan, they don’t sell the know-how necessary to build such systems from scratch. Clearly, bits of the source code needed to integrate the components into the JF-17 will be transferred by the French to the Pakistanis. Missile-radar integration and avionics will be developed by France and Pakistan, with the Chinese contribution focused on hardware.
This means that if Pakistan transfers such code to Beijing, China could actually become capable of integrating the two systems into its fighter jets (like the J-10), although it will not include the JF-17 in its air force. But it does not mean that Beijing will be able to produce such systems.
Therefore, the key variable here is how many MICAs and RC-400s France sells to Pakistan. Of course, if Islamabad buys new series of them after the first acquisition, it is conceivable that China could get its hand on them in the future, independently of the JF-17 development.
Rumors of the deaL
It is certainly no secret that France has eyed Indian and Pakistani defense markets as a great opportunity to expand its strong military-industrial sector. For years, French companies have provided weapons and systems to both Delhi and Islamabad. However, the deal regarding the JF-17 has been a difficult one, mainly for political-diplomatic reasons. This explains the lack of information from France and the extreme cautiousness in all aspects of the current arrangements.
After some leading British and US publications highlighted the danger of sensitive military technology transfer to China via Pakistan, officials from MBDA and Thales refused to comment on the deal. France’s Defense Minister Herve Morin subtly conveyed the Paris position nonetheless, as he replied to Associated Press journalists that “to my knowledge, there is no arms embargo for Pakistan”.
Back in September 2004, Jane’s Defence Weekly’s special correspondent Robert Sae-Liu reported that the choice of a multimode pulse-Doppler radar for the JF-17 fighter was reported in 2003 as “involving a competition between Phazotron of Russia with the Kopyo system, Galileo (FIAR) of Italy with the Grifo S-7, and Thales of France with the RC 400”.
Hence, a short history of the JF-17 project unveils Thales’ interest. The simple fact that two French companies are involved in the issue worries the US. Paris has long lobbied within the EU for lifting of the arms embargo against Beijing imposed by Europe after the 1989 Tienanmen incident.
Most French Gaullists and Socialists have pushed for a lifting of the ban. The reason is twofold. On one hand, the French defense industry is aggressively seeking expansion in Asia’s markets, and China is arguably the most interesting of them. On the other hand, Paris cultivates the geopolitical ambition of creating a multipolar world in which the EU will progressively acquire strategic autonomy from the United States.
However, President Nicolas Sarkozy’s election in May 2007 has started an apparently rapid and powerful rapprochement between Paris and Washington on a number of issues. Interestingly, some French analysts who deal with so-called “economic warfare” dynamics have recently criticized France’s pro-China orientation. They have even lambasted civilian air industry deals with Beijing made by Airbus, reasoning that French companies that only seek market opportunities will eventually jeopardize European technological superiority over China.
Up until this year, though, Washington has successfully counter-lobbied France’s efforts to persuade its EU partners about the anachronism of the embargo, and the ban is still valid despite numerous predictions of its imminent demise. Now, Sino-Pakistani military cooperation, which is likely to remain strong also in light of the growing US-Indian strategic partnership, could complicate the situation even more.
Washington furious?
While on the surface the Franco-American reconciliation is fully underway, the reality is slightly more complicated. Paris’ hard, pro-US stance on Iran’s nuclear issue is one thing; another matter is how France and the US perceive the international system and balance of power.
Sarkozy’s position on the arms ban against Beijing will possibly become clearer after the French president visits Beijing later this year, but it is unlikely that France will completely abandon its dream of a more assertive and autonomous Europe when it comes to security and defense policy.
Quoted by the Pakistani daily Dawn on September 14, British defense analyst and Asia specialist Alexander Neill said that Washington may have a “quite vicious” reaction if France does not reconsider selling such systems to Islamabad.
However, according to various sources, France and Pakistan will likely reach an agreement on the missiles and radar. It is thus possible that China will be able to exploit yet another fault line in French and American diplomacy.
Whether or not the development of the JF-17 will allow China to acquire military systems and technology that will boost its power in relation to Taiwan, as the US fears, such a program will likely cause a dilemma for France: by proceeding with enhanced cooperation with Pakistan, Paris risks not only triggering Washington’s ire, but also upsetting India and Taiwan – thereby complicating its future defense marketing with two important buyers.
Federico Bordonaro is senior analyst with the Power and Interest News Report (http://www.pinr.com). These views are his own.
RimmerSee, you initially brought thie issue of JF-17 on the first page of this thread.
PLAAF has no stated need for JF-17, and has no announced any intention to induct it. It is solely for export only. As per Chinese fora, it is not allowed to even participate in official air-shows, and tests along with other jets like J-10 or J-11.
I’ve been hearing “been offering” since 2006. These countries always have avionics for retail sale, be it for Su-30 MKI, Gripen, Mirage-2000 upgrades for middle-east countries etc.
However, for JF-17 there has been nil progress on any front, except a press statement by ex-PAF chief that European package and European engine will be considered beyond the current batch of 40. He didn’t specify exactly which engine and what avionics package PAF needed.
Arey bhaisahab, where is the engine for the next batch of JF-17s after the current 40 is ready by 2013 ? The PAF chief was silent on which European engine will be adopted for the next batch of 40, to be constructed starting 2013.
Atleast in case of Tejas Mk.2, the choice of engines is clear : 100 units of either Eurojet or GE-F414. Both companies have submitted their RFPs last month to ADA. Bidding winner will be announced in a few month’s time.
Weapons on Tejas have been decided. Delivery timetables too have been decided (IoC certificate by next year, First squadron by 2011).
No, because IAF has committed to inducting 40 Tejas Mk.1 jets also. Depending on a customer’s requirement, even these can be put for export, just like Gripen C/D is. You are aware that Tejas Mk.1 as it flies today, is equivalent to Gripen C/D (same engine thrust, empty weight, weapon-stations, litening target pod, HMDS, internal fuel, RWR etc.)
The Tejas Mk.2 has no selected engine, just as the JF-17 too has no engine “in sight” after the first batch of 40 are inducted into PAF.
Point is it has an engine, even if PAF do notgo for European engine they can get more with current engine. This is not the same as not having an engine selected. I am sure you can get your head round the concept.
PAF are often silent on alot of things. You will not hear media reports in every outlet for years going on about selection and tenders as in India. We do the job quietly and crack on. After its done we announce prject completion. It is a lot less embaressing for us when things are delayed or go wrong. Maybe a few countries can learn form these things.
I am not going to get into a debate about what “you read in Chinece fora” as I could say the same and we can be here all day.
OK, Finally. Lets take a slight holiday from reality and pretend, just for a few minutes, LCA is anything close to what the Gripen is. I will ask you one simple question. Its very simple, but as with your mob, I dont expect a simple answer.
Why is Gripen a contender in MRCA contest and LCA not?
Sign In
