Skip to comments.US may allow India to acquire its fifth generation jets
Posted on 01/27/2011 8:43:35 PM PST by sukhoi-30mki
US may allow India to acquire its fifth generation jets
PTI, Jan 28, 2011, 05.36am IST
WASHINGTON: The US is open to Indian participation in its Joint Strike Fighter programme that would finally lead to its purchase of fifth generation F-35 Lightning II stealth fighter, a top Pentagon official said Thursday.
"There is nothing on our side, no principle which bars that on our side, Indian participation in the Joint Strike Fighter. Right now, they're focused on these aircraft which are top-of-the-line fourth-gen fighters," under secretary of defence for acquisition, technology and logistics Ashton Carter said.
Headed to India in the coming weeks, Carter said the decision to pursue the F-35 is to be taken by India only.
Carter was delivering a key-note address on "US-India Defense Relations" at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, on the occasion of the release of a report on India's Medium Multi-Role Combat Aircraft (MMRCA) program.
At a cost of about USD 10 billion for 126 aircraft, the MMRCA competition is the largest Indian fighter tender in years.
Eight countries and six companies eagerly await the outcome of the selection process, which has garnered high-profile attention for its sheer size, its international political implications, and its impact on the viability of key aircraft manufacturers.
Carter argued that US-built F-16 and F/A-18 as being the most technologically advanced aircraft in the competition.
"I think that, without saying anything disparaging about the other entrants, both F/A-18 and the F-16 offers include the best technology," he said.
Authored by Ashley Tellis, the report says that in choosing an aircraft, the government of India must employ a speedy decision process that is focused on the right metrics, taking both technical and political considerations into account.
Tellis in his over 140 page report notes that the European aircraft are technically superb, but the US entrants prove to be formidable "best buys".
If Washington wants an American aircraft to win the game, however, it will need to offer generous terms on the transfer of technology, assure India access to fifth-generation US combat aircraft, and provide strong support for India's strategic ambitions--to counter the perception that the older US designs in the MMRCA race are less combat effective, the report notes.
That POC F-35 (which can’t even get off the drawing board) still comes up in discussion.
It is the flying version of ManBearPig.
Obama is hell-bent on arming Israel’s enemies and future enemies.
Sucks for him that they won’t win.
I had to read the first ten lines ten times each to make sure jimmy carter had nothing to do with any of this.
The F-35 has been peddled to India informally since 2005.
About India being a future enemy of Israel-who knows. But it is Israel’s largest arms buyer. And the US has been arming potential and real enemies of Israel for decades now.
Since when is India Israel’s enemy?
India is going to be a very valuable ally in the future.
Today. But what about tomorrow? Saddam was once an ally of the U.S...
Indians consider Israel as friend, only Current ruling government (Congress Party) does lip service for Muslims and its Muslim vote bank.
Majority of Indian population is very pro Israel.
Sell em F-22. Nobody REALLY wants F-35s. India is the only nation anywhere between Japan and Israel that truly shares our values.
ALthough, the “harrier” version of the F-35 could be of some use to the Indians. Aren’t they buying some form of flat tops? ANd if not, they might one day be called upon to operate off USN ships.
Weirder things have happened.
If the F-35 actually makes it into production why are we willing to give away our fifth gen secrets?
India wants some, Turkey wants some, I wouldn’t be surprised if we give some to Egypt.
What mental collapse happened to the US group think in the last generation? Are we really this stupid?
Is this all because of the not so almighty dollar?
I dunno... I don’t have any tummy ache over selling some F-35’s to India. India has been a reliable ally. For them to get well ahead of somebody like Pakistan, wouldn’t break my heart at all.
If you want to make your products competitive by exports, you should be open to offering them to markets in Asia and the Middle East. Countries like the UAE,India and South Korea are likely to stay committed to spending plans unlike those in Europe. The Netherlands, UK and Italy have all expressed doubts about their full commitments to the JSF.
I guess they are junking the PAK-FA
Potential IAF Force Structure: 2030:
Air-superiority: i) PakFa ii) SU-30MKI
Air-combat: MMRCA: MMRCA Selectee (either Typhoon, Rafale, Gripen NG, F-16IN, F/A-18E/F, MiG35)
Air-combat: Light: Tejas
Potential IAF Force Structure: 2030 and Beyond:
Air-superiority: i) PakFa ii) SU-30MKI Replacement: Improved PakFa
Air-combat: MMRCA: MMRCA Selectee (either Typhoon, Rafale, Gripen NG, F-16IN, F/A-18E/F, MiG35)
Air-combat: Light: AMCA (a stealthy fighter)
Thus, the F-35 would be incorporated into a primarily stealth strike role. When it comes to the PakFa that is basically a done deal and contracts have been signed.
Well, it looks like they are starting to turn away from Russia in the area or aerospace.This could be the start. Anyways contacts can be broken, if they were non-binding agreements.
Did you see that writeup (Dogfight)?
No. I would like to ask a question. There seeme to be a streak of support you give in your posts in regards to Russian hardware. That Russian hardware is infallable.
What it is not is junk, and that is where I believe you and I may differ. The same applies to French systems, British/German systems, and whatever other systems I am accused of being a 'salesperson' for. I happen to look at things in a logical manner rather than make one-sentence drive-by comments (e.g. the Gripen is useless, or maybe, the Chinese J-20 is the most lethal thing next to a Klingon cruiser). If logic is being a Rafale/Meteor/Topol salesperson, then I guess that I may be.
By the way, ironically I have also been accused of being too pro-F22. Thus I guess you can add being a Raptor salesperson to a European and Russian salesperson.
What is my logic? Simple, many posts on FR in terms of defence issues are quite incorrect (and often myopic). For instance, why was I a Rafale salesperson? Because I corrected a good FReeper who had said that the Rafale has a horrible RCS signature. My reply was to query why that is said for the Rafale, yet the F-15 has a much higher RCS and no one complains (Rafale RCS is between 0.3-0.5m2, while F-15 can be around 20m2)? I then went ahead to put the strengths of the Rafale, as well as its several weaknesses, and ended by saying that even though it may be a pig it was not a toad (actually used those words). That made me a Rafale salesperson because I did not put a single one-sentence blurp saying it is 'useless.'
Well, the fact is that it is not useless.
The same can be said about anything else I am accused of 'promoting.' Take Russian equipment ...a number of FReepers say it is useless because of its bad performance against Us equipment. Well, it is inferior to US equipment (guess my MiG membership just got revoked), but not for the reasons given ...which is US performance against Iraqi systems for example. E.g. a common FR statement on how Russian air-defense systems are useless because of how Iraqi SAM-IADS collapsed, and extrapolating that to 'show' how the S-300/400 is also 'useless' (and in one case where I was saying the Raptor is necessary, using the 'useless' SAM systems to say we do not need the Raptor). When I give facts ...for instance the Iraqi system was the KARI, which was a French/UK/Soviet system aimed at preventing a repeat of the Israeli attack at Osirak (as well as an Iranian attack during the Iraq-Iran war), and that as a limited system that was crewed by less than perfect staff and that incorporated largely obsolete Soviet technology it should not be used as a comparative analogue to a modern advanced IADS network incorporating the latest double-digit SAMs. That is logical, but I guess I should have said it is 'useless.' Or for instance the performance of the Syrian SAM system against the Israeli attack that some FReepers claimed was the S-300, when it was not. Or for instance showing how the MiG-29s destroyed with ease during the Gulf War were not the same as those flown by India, and how Indian MiG-29s (which have more advanced avionics and systems) made Pakistani F-16s flee by simply painting them with radar. Or in another of my French salesmanship, how a Mirage-2000 took out a F-16 during a Greece/Turkish flareup.
Basically, I think it is very silly for someone to say X is 'useless' without looking at why, in the same way it is equally silly to say Y is 'the deadliest thing flying in the sky' (what was happening with the J-20 even when the darn thing just came out). It is about using logic. For instance, if the mostly Russian Indian airforce flew against Pakistani F-16s, it would be total slaughter for the Pakistanis in the air (to the point where if it was not a very limited conflict, maybe one day or two at most, the Pakistanis would resort to nuclear strikes as per their doctrine). However, put the same Indian airforce up against the USAF F-16s and F-15s, and guess what ...the Indians get routed even more easily than the Indians routed the Pakistanis.
Logic, as opposed to a one sentence burp.
Or take what I said to you above ...that Russian tech is not as good as Western, that the Indians are moving away from the Russians and will continue to do that, but in certain areas the Indians will stay with the Russians (e.g. the PakFa, or the nuclear submarine lease). I even said the Raptor is more advanced than the PakFa, and compared the submarine lease to a first generation LA Class submarine (not the second gen, or the Virginia, or the SeaWolf ...but the first LA Class that came out decades back). If that is saying Russian (or French, British, etc) equipment is 'infallable,' then that is simply amazing. :)
Although, it does mean something positive. Since I am accused of being 'too pro' F-22, and I directly praise the Raptor (as opposed to saying French equipment is 'lipstick on a pig but not a toad' or that Russian equipment is 'nowhere as advanced as Western equipment'), then that means that I believe cutting edge US equipment is 'super-duper-expialodocious-infallible-to-the-nth-degree.' Right?
Actually ...that is too long ...thus this should suffice:
'It is useless.'
Logic, not a vitamin. :)
To be fair, a couple countries are also looking to cut back on their Typhoon commitments. The Euros are slashing defense spending, which is affecting everything not just the F-35.
Thanks Talon. :) Have a blessed day.
>>Accused me of being a ... salesperson<<
Can I order 3 F-22s, 1 PakFA, and 2 J-20s? Do I get a free Rafael when I order a half-dozen planes?
Oh, and do you take personal checks?