Boeing says it has received licence from the US government to market F-15EX to IAF

[Bouncer]

A major consideration for any military hardware manufacturer, especially one like Boeing, is the loss of reputation of its entire platform because of poor training, morale and lack of proper maintenance by IAF. I am sure they have factored this element in the pricing--SU30 suffered the same fate once IAF pilots started falling out of the skies. IAF has a history of running aircraft in to the ground thereby tarnishing the image of an otherwise capable aircraft.

 

[MirageBlue]

A major consideration for any military hardware manufacturer, especially one like Boeing, is the loss of reputation of its entire platform because of poor training, morale and lack of proper maintenance by IAF. I am sure they have factored this element in the pricing--SU30 suffered the same fate once IAF pilots started falling out of the skies. IAF has a history of running aircraft in to the ground thereby tarnishing the image of an otherwise capable aircraft.

PAF has a worse attrition rate per 10,000 hours of flying, than the IAF.

Mull over that fact.

 

[HostileInsurgent]

A major consideration for any military hardware manufacturer, especially one like Boeing, is the loss of reputation of its entire platform because of poor training, morale and lack of proper maintenance by IAF. I am sure they have factored this element in the pricing--SU30 suffered the same fate once IAF pilots started falling out of the skies. IAF has a history of running aircraft in to the ground thereby tarnishing the image of an otherwise capable aircraft.

Pakistan purchased 86 F-16s, crashed and lost 10.
India purchased 272 Su-30MKIs, crashed 11 and lost 10.

IAF and PAF lost equal number of their frontline fighters, difference is:

1 Pakistan destroyed 11.62% of her F-16 fleet in Accidents.
2. India lost 4.04% of her Su-30MKI fleet in Accidents.


So keep this joke that PaKiStAnI PiLoTs aRe sUpErIoR, InDiAnS cRaSh ThEiR jEtS eVeRy dAy with you only.

 

[Paro_Peagus]

Pakistan purchased 86 F-16s, crashed and lost 10.
India purchased 272 Su-30MKIs, crashed 11 and lost 10.

IAF and PAF lost equal number of their frontline fighters, difference is:

1 Pakistan destroyed 11.62% of her F-16 fleet in Accidents.
2. India lost 4.04% of her Su-30MKI fleet in Accidents.


So keep this joke that PaKiStAnI PiLoTs aRe sUpErIoR, InDiAnS cRaSh ThEiR jEtS eVeRy dAy with you only.

If the highest aim of a captain is to preserve his ship, he would keep it in port forever. - Thomas Aquinas

PAF took this way too seriously. Every conflict they managed to get away by avoiding flying.

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

I know that, thats why I feel Indian Navy will lease around 40 F/A-18E Super Hornet Block-III this year as a stop gap to our indigenous fighter.

That would be incredibly stupid since the Super Hornet is too large for India’s carriers.

 

[HostileInsurgent]

That would be incredibly stupid since the Super Hornet is too large for India’s carriers.

Yes I know, thats why F/A-18s might be leased so that they can be deployed on INS Hansa (ground base), and the MiG-29s stationed in INS Hansa will go to INS Vikrant.

 

[Bouncer]

Pakistan purchased 86 F-16s, crashed and lost 10.
India purchased 272 Su-30MKIs, crashed 11 and lost 10.

IAF and PAF lost equal number of their frontline fighters, difference is:

1 Pakistan destroyed 11.62% of her F-16 fleet in Accidents.
2. India lost 4.04% of her Su-30MKI fleet in Accidents.


So keep this joke that PaKiStAnI PiLoTs aRe sUpErIoR, InDiAnS cRaSh ThEiR jEtS eVeRy dAy with you only.

You and other respected posters seem to have taken my post as offensive, which was not my intent. I am merely talking from a marketeer's perspective. As a marketing manager you do not want your product to be associated with some segments of customers--for example Ferrari doesn't want its brand to be associated with newly rich or Mars/Snicker etc do not want to be associated with obesity. I am sure marketing people at Boeing must have taken in to account the image IAF brings with it i.e. they are known to have crashed a few birds without effort. That's all I am saying, though to IAF's advantage F-18 has almost reached end of its lifecycle roadmap as a platform, so Boeing might not be too worried about other customers at this stage. Peace.

 

[akshay gehlot]

Yes I know, thats why F/A-18s might be leased so that they can be deployed on INS Hansa (ground base), and the MiG-29s stationed in INS Hansa will go to INS Vikrant.

Lol and what's the point of that ? ..Why would you lease/buy a carrier fighter to station it a place far from conflict and not even use it for anything .

Mig29's are not stationed at Hansa for security or anything ...Its just the home base for IN aviation so they can train and practice there while the carrier is docked or train new pilots from a shore based ski jump

 

[akshay gehlot]

You and other respected posters seem to have taken my post as offensive, which was not my intent. I am merely talking from a marketeer's perspective. As a marketing manager you do not want your product to be associated with some segments of customers--for example Ferrari doesn't want its brand to be associated with newly rich or Mars/Snicker etc do not want to be associated with obesity. I am sure marketing people at Boeing must have taken in to account the image IAF brings with it i.e. they are known to have crashed a few birds without effort. That's all I am saying, though to IAF's advantage F-18 has almost reached end of its lifecycle roadmap as a platform, so Boeing might not be too worried about other customers at this stage. Peace.

Its funny how every single point here is wrong

1. "fRom a mArKeteRs pErsPectiVe " Countries buying fighter planes is not the same as people watching ads or looking at cars , No country or air force buys a jet without thorough evaluation of the platform and its performance ,Nobody is stupid enough to look at 50 yr old Mig21's crashing and think that would impact the "image " of their new products .

If anything its the buyer(s) who should be vary of the " marketer" Boeing considering the shady practices and culture that has come to light since the MAX crashes

2. Boeing specifically spent a huge amount of money and time lobbying (succesfully ) for India to buy their products ,First the Globemasters then the Poseidons ,Chinooks,Apaches and now the Romeos . They were among the first ones to offer their f-18s way back in early 00's when the first MRCA was launched and are still spending millions on to display SH's capability to launch from ski jumps and fit on Indian carriers .

Does that sound like a company apprehensive of Indian usage of their products ?

3. Boeing also shifted production of airframes for their helos to India and just last week also announced that parts for 737 will be built in Hyderabad ... Does that sound like a company apprehensive of Indian quality control ?

4. F-18 has not reached the end of its lifecycle roadmap , Not even close ...The SuperHornet will continue in the USN for decades to come and still has upgrades left to receive , The f-35C isn't being acquired in enough numbers to replace it ,

USN is spending Billions to upgrade older blocks and legacy jets to the latest standard . https://www.forbes.com/sites/ericte...---here-are-the-key-upgrades/?sh=249ab37c3d38

 

[Ali_Baba]

Boeing's F-15EX with 'digital backbone' completes its first test flight

This week, Boeing’s F-15EX fighter jet successfully completed its first-ever test flight.

www.engadget.com

" The first lot of eight aircraft will cost $1.2 billion, with the entire run of 144 planes expected to cost no more than $23 billion. "

Works out to an average $159M per unit. India can afford that when you consider how much she paid for the Rafales.

 

[Yasser76]

Pakistan purchased 86 F-16s, crashed and lost 10.
India purchased 272 Su-30MKIs, crashed 11 and lost 10.

IAF and PAF lost equal number of their frontline fighters, difference is:

1 Pakistan destroyed 11.62% of her F-16 fleet in Accidents.
2. India lost 4.04% of her Su-30MKI fleet in Accidents.


So keep this joke that PaKiStAnI PiLoTs aRe sUpErIoR, InDiAnS cRaSh ThEiR jEtS eVeRy dAy with you only.

Pakistan first started flying F-16 in 1982. First 10 years involved "hot" situations involving Soviet air forces. First SU-30 entered IAF in 2002, a full 20 years after PAF started flying F-16s.
SU-30 servicability hovers around 55% according to last aviailable stats, so less number of flight hours.

Keep your jokes to yourself.

 

[baqai]

interesting, also Boeing should consider that putting up it's pride against a real airforce (for a change) could seriously hamper it's 104-0 kill streak

 

[HostileInsurgent]

"hot" situations involving Soviet air forces.

You mean shooting down Ground Attack aircraft? And 55%? Ohh come on. 70% was the latest figure as per HAL.

 

[Rank]

US should offer pilots rather than Aircraft lol if you see IAF VS PAF history, IAF is nowhere whenever it comes to face-to-face confrontation, even Raptor can't do jack if the Pilot belongs to Sony-Vio-Cena

 

[HostileInsurgent]

US should offer pilots rather than Aircraft lol if you see IAF VS PAF history, IAF is nowhere whenever it comes to face-to-face confrontation, even Raptor can't do jack if the Pilot belongs to Sony-Vio-Cena

Yes bEcAuSe pAkIsTaNi PiLoTs aRe WoRlD’s bEsT, InDiAnS aRe uSeLeSs, wE aRe SuPeRpOwEr aIr pHoRcE.