Archived material Access restricted Article
Rantburg

Today's Front Page   View All of Wed 03/31/2004 View Tue 03/30/2004 View Mon 03/29/2004 View Sun 03/28/2004 View Sat 03/27/2004 View Fri 03/26/2004 View Thu 03/25/2004
1
2004-03-31 Afghanistan/South Asia
Indian air force chief will visit France 'to buy warplanes'
Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.
Posted by Seafarious 2004-03-31 04:59|| || Front Page|| [11131 views since 2007-05-07]  Top

#1 This purchase will be guided by polotics, not what is best for India. If it wasn't for the WOT which is requiring us to cozy up to Pakland we'd be smart if we started trying to get along with the Indians. Besides the only nation to have done well with Mirages was Israel, its the pilot not the plane
Posted by Cheddarhead 2004-03-31 6:10:30 AM||   2004-03-31 6:10:30 AM|| Front Page Top

#2 Well, we (US/Israel) did sell the Phalcon-radar system to India around the time that the US sold the paki's updates for their decrepit fleet of F-16s, I would describe that as a friendly gesture, as for the chosing of french war-birds I fully agree,that would be a prime example of politics over practicality (and a stupid move)
Posted by Evert Visser in NL  2004-03-31 6:34:03 AM|| [http://chinditz.buzznet.com/user/]  2004-03-31 6:34:03 AM|| Front Page Top

#3 [Troll droppings deleted]
Posted by JJ TROLL 2004-03-31 6:39:37 AM||   2004-03-31 6:39:37 AM|| Front Page Top

#4 Fred, Troll clean up on Aisle 3!
Posted by Jen  2004-03-31 6:52:22 AM|| [http://www.greatestjeneration.com]  2004-03-31 6:52:22 AM|| Front Page Top

#5 ..The M2K isn't even that new of an aircraft - IIRC it's the better part of 30 years old, and it's quite serviceable, but it's abilities are far exceeded by the upcoming F-35 - which, if the politics weren't so important, they would have ordered instead.

Mike
Posted by Mike Kozlowski 2004-03-31 9:35:10 AM||   2004-03-31 9:35:10 AM|| Front Page Top

#6 Every time I hear of people speaking of India as an ally, I feel the urge to burst into laughter. The Indians are *not* our friends. They are more critical of the US than France. Unlike the French, the Indians have not contributed troops for Afghanistan. The Indians don't even contribute in any material way to the War on Terror, except fight pro-Pakistan Kashmiri terrorists, which they've been doing for many decades just to hang on to the territory. The US made a mistake by permitting the Israeli sale of the Phalcon to India. I hope we won't be doing this too often. India is like China - except it does the passive-aggressive thing instead of the flat-out belligerent act like China.
Posted by Zhang Fei  2004-03-31 12:18:36 PM||   2004-03-31 12:18:36 PM|| Front Page Top

#7 ZF - Amen. They manage to stay just below the radar with their gut-wrenching jealousy and, consequent, hatred for America. 'Course most of them would gleefully kill their grandmother for a Green Card...
Posted by .com 2004-03-31 12:21:22 PM||   2004-03-31 12:21:22 PM|| Front Page Top

#8 Indian air force chief will visit France 'to buy warplanes'

I hope you boys have fun with your second-rate equipment.. :)
Posted by Bomb-a-rama 2004-03-31 12:27:07 PM||   2004-03-31 12:27:07 PM|| Front Page Top

#9 Oh I agree that India = hypocrites. On the other hand I take a more cynical view towards India's usefulness. Anything that keeps making China look over their shoulder towards India and wondering what they're gonna do means less chance that we need to deploy more troops or ships to handle China.
Posted by Valentine 2004-03-31 1:52:24 PM||   2004-03-31 1:52:24 PM|| Front Page Top

#10 Even second-hand French cast-offs are better than front-line indigenous Chinese aircraft, so India still comes out with a win. As Zheng-fei so elequently stated, India is not our friend. They are, however, a counter-weight to China: nearly as prosperous, nearly as industrialized, nearly as militarily advanced (with foreign equipment, anyway), and death-before-dishonor enemies to the Chinese until hell freezes over and penguins take up permanent residence. I see no reason not to help India in that role, nor to goad them any further. I just wonder when they're going to wake up and discover their insolence and arrogance is totally wasted on the United States, and they pack it in. Never, I sadly suspect...
Posted by Old Patriot  2004-03-31 2:59:51 PM|| [http://users.codenet.net/mweather/default.htm]  2004-03-31 2:59:51 PM|| Front Page Top

#11 you want indian troops in AFGHANISTAN!!! Like the Pakis arent paranoid enough about Indian influence there, on their border, "encircling" them? There are no Indian troops in Afghanistan as a concession to the Pakis. India has a long relationship with the Northern Alliance, and has helped with aid and trade.

Yeah, India retains its skepticism of the US, as does France. As Rumsfeld said, the WOT will be charecterized by shifting alliances, those who are with us on one thing wont be with us on other things. We need the maturity to accept that, wrt India, and China, and Russia, and France.


Posted by Liberalhawk 2004-03-31 3:31:37 PM||   2004-03-31 3:31:37 PM|| Front Page Top

#12  ANTI F-35 rant
Iam sorry but the F-35 project is looking more and more lemony w/each passing day.Anyone remember McNamara's TFX?Became F-111.WAs going to be Navy air-defence fighter as well as all-weather strikefighter for USAF.Eventually became expensive light bomber.THe F-35 is supposed to replace USMC Harrier,USAF F-16s and F-117s and USN A-6s(remember them?).What do these a/c have in common-nothing.The F-35 was orig. designed to replace F-117,but AF knew they could never get such small batch of a/c approved,so wallah!it's an F-16 replacement-so what if it's far more expensive,doesn't manuever as well and has less range-it will be stealthy!Then to get unit price down the AF conned the Marines into believing there would be a Vtol version to replace Harrier.Once the Marines agreed,suprise,Vtol is too costly and you can make do w/S(hort)tol,and last year AF suggested that Marines usually fly from Airbases anyway,so did they really need the Stol capability.USAF Managers announced it was gonna be revolutionary concept in procurement-the price of plane was fixed,so if you wanted one thing on plane you had to give up something else.Well,suprise,suprise,last month USAF discovered they might be selling plane to other countries,so USAF announced whole new electronics system w/code that couldn't be copied was needed,so the F-35 is gonna be alot more expensive than promised,and was gonna be delayed a wee bit longer.When new price tag was let slip,the USMC(having busted their budget w/V-22 turkey-who's killed more Marines,the Iraqis or V-22s)evidently expressed doubt about buying F-35s,because couple weeks ago,the USAF announced that having Stol capability sure might come in handy and that USAF was looking into possibility of buying some Stol versions themselves that would be compatible w/Marine version.Meanwhile,the Navy is ignoring their version,is trying to build RPVs to fill F-35's stealth strike role,and is completely ignoring any thoughts that one day enemy a/c might engage Navy a/c or ships.
India doesn't want F-35 because it doesn't exist yet,and the anti-copy codes means no home build,or accepting less capable electronics suite.A better choice would have been Japan version of F-16 w/big wings for Mig-21 replacement.Combining those w/Su-35s would make a nice AF until F-22s became available for export.
Posted by Stephen 2004-03-31 3:52:31 PM||   2004-03-31 3:52:31 PM|| Front Page Top

#13 Now Stephen is hardcore hardware. I bet he's right about 88.4 percentum.
Posted by Shipman 2004-03-31 4:52:25 PM||   2004-03-31 4:52:25 PM|| Front Page Top

#14 Liberalhawk: As Rumsfeld said, the WOT will be charecterized by shifting alliances, those who are with us on one thing wont be with us on other things. We need the maturity to accept that, wrt India, and China, and Russia, and France.

Maturity means maintaining diplomatic relations with them, not selling them top-of-the-line weaponry. The Phalcon was just a disaster, from that viewpoint.
Posted by Zhang Fei  2004-03-31 6:16:42 PM||   2004-03-31 6:16:42 PM|| Front Page Top

#15  The Indian AF is in a major bind,having to immediately replace couple hundred Mig-21s,as they are worried Kashmir could explode and China is reequiping its AF.Russian Mig-29s would have been prob.choice,but Russian a/c have bad rep in India now,so that's politically out.India may well have wanted F-16 or F-18s,but US was/is prob.reluctant to p.o. Pakistan right now.That leaves French,the untried Eurofighter and Sweden short-range Grippen.If the US was smart we would offer to lease-not sell!(wink,wink)F-16s until India builds her own next generation fighter,however long that might take.
Posted by Stephen 2004-03-31 6:43:50 PM||   2004-03-31 6:43:50 PM|| Front Page Top

#16 Stephen - Re: Leasing US aircraft to India, would that be the models with the "special" chips?
Posted by .com 2004-03-31 6:46:07 PM||   2004-03-31 6:46:07 PM|| Front Page Top

#17 Stephen - interesting post - thx
Posted by Frank G  2004-03-31 6:49:21 PM||   2004-03-31 6:49:21 PM|| Front Page Top

#18 1).com,since Bush is Pres. we could include some Lays "Ranch" chips ;).Seriously,the USAF stated they needed to develope anti-copy software.It will raise price and delay delivery of F-35s.
2)Thanx for kind words,FRANK G. and Shipman.
Posted by Stephen 2004-03-31 8:25:23 PM||   2004-03-31 8:25:23 PM|| Front Page Top

#19 Stephen, I always thought that the harrier was an interesting airframe but have not seen them used as much as the warthogs. Do you recommend continuing the harrier program?

I also have never liked anything to replace the A-6 without having as much payload. What is your opinion on a replacement or continuing to buy A-6's?

Thanx
Posted by Super Hose  2004-03-31 9:52:54 PM||   2004-03-31 9:52:54 PM|| Front Page Top

#20  Super Hose,the A-6s and the company that made them are gone.The electonic warfare version will hang on for a while.With the advances in bomb guidance tech,Navy seems to feel that smaller payload is acceptable as fewer bombs are needed to destroy a target-and a/c carrying large numbers of bombs are mainly needed for ground support,which is not Navy priority.Future "bomb truck" for USN might be hi-endurance big wing RPV that has 12+ 250/500lb.bombs that could bore circles in air for hours while waiting call.Such an RPV could be A-10 replacement.
The Harrier is rarely used as Vtol a/c and has small payload.BUT,like spare batterries in a drawer,having Vtol capability strikes me as being smart.Again,IMHO I think builing a Harrier follow on a/c would be great.But the Air Force will never buy it,and the Marines can't afford to pay developement costs on a limited run a/c.Marines will probably end up w/truck-launchable RPV that carries 2-4 bombs.

Posted by Stephen 2004-03-31 11:33:49 PM||   2004-03-31 11:33:49 PM|| Front Page Top

#21 Stephen, I am sorry for the late reply, but thank you. I had not thought of either the effect of precision bombs or RPV options on ground support.
Posted by Super Hose  2004-04-01 9:24:31 PM||   2004-04-01 9:24:31 PM|| Front Page Top

#22 Off-topic or abusive comments deleted]
Posted by JJ TROLL 2004-03-31 6:39:37 AM||   2004-03-31 6:39:37 AM|| Front Page Top

#23 Off-topic or abusive comments deleted]
Posted by Steve 2004-03-31 8:51:27 PM||   2004-03-31 8:51:27 PM|| Front Page Top

#24 Off-topic or abusive comments deleted]
Posted by Steve 2004-03-31 8:51:27 PM||   2004-03-31 8:51:27 PM|| Front Page Top

#25 Off-topic or abusive comments deleted]
Posted by Steve 2004-03-31 8:52:18 PM||   2004-03-31 8:52:18 PM|| Front Page Top

#26 Off-topic or abusive comments deleted]
Posted by Steve 2004-03-31 8:52:18 PM||   2004-03-31 8:52:18 PM|| Front Page Top

#27 Off-topic or abusive comments deleted]
Posted by Steve TROLL 2004-03-31 8:53:21 PM||   2004-03-31 8:53:21 PM|| Front Page Top

22:18 Jughead
22:18 Jughead
22:06 Free Speech TROLL
21:49 Steve TROLL
21:09 JD TROLL
21:06 Free Speech Enforcer TROLL
21:04 Luger TROLL
20:57 James TROLL
20:55 Larry TROLL
20:53 Steve TROLL
20:44 Free Speech Enforcer TROLL
20:39 Steve TROLL
20:34 Fred TROLL
20:33 Reporter TROLL
20:31 Sean TROLL
20:28 Jones TROLL
20:27 Jack TROLL
21:13 GK
21:13 GK
21:12 GK
21:12 GK
20:52 Steve
20:52 Steve
20:51 Steve









Paypal:
Google
Search WWW Search rantburg.com