RFIs released by IN for LGBs,airborne laser designators & manportable laser

[Abingdonboy]

RFIs released by IN for laser laser-guided bombs, airborne laser target designators & manportable laser target designators:



http://tenders.gov.in/viewtenddoc.asp?tid=del563398&wno=1&td=TD

 

[Nishan_101]

Really they are become a Navy like USNAF.

 

[Abingdonboy]

Really they are become a Navy like USNAF.

This is the idea mate. The IN naval air arm is building up its capacity to be a self-sustaining airforce in its own right.

 

[Bhai Zakir]

@ Abingdonboy

Thanks for posting bhai.

Today you are on useful thread opening spree.

 

[Sergi]

^^^ couldn't agree more

 

[sancho]

This is the idea mate. The IN naval air arm is building up its capacity to be a self-sustaining airforce in its own right.

But that would not be a good role model, since IN and USN have very different goals!

Kind of surprised though about this RFI, since I thought they would simply take Russian bomb kits until Sudarshan will be available. The Russians won't allow US LGBs on their fighters, which basically leaves Israeli, or possibly S. African / Brazilian bomb kits.

 

[Abingdonboy]

But that would not be a good role model, since IN and USN have very different goals!

In the long-run I don't see why the USN can't be a role model for the IN. And I am talking about the long,LONG run ie 30-50 years+

 

[sancho]

In the long-run I don't see why the USN can't be a role model for the IN. And I am talking about the long,LONG run ie 30-50 years+

Because Indias threats will always be next door, while the US threats will always be 1000s of Km away, that's why they have to project power with their navy big times, while India will use the navy mainly in defensive roles, alongside their costlines.
Just as well as India won't join the US in their world police roles, since Indian foreing policy is not based on military and that's good!

 

[Sergi]

In the long-run I don't see why the USN can't be a role model for the IN. And I am talking about the long,LONG run ie 30-50 years+

@sancho
We if we are supposed to operate or willing to operate 3/4 ACCs in near future 20/25 years we are going to have 80+ fighters on carriers and nearly 40/45 as backup or reserve planes. So that make it to 100/120 4.5 gen fighter jets. Sounds a strong air arms. IAC-2 and follow on ships will be bigger and will arry more fighters

Secondly if costal role is transferred to IN then there will be more addition to fighter numbers

 

[Abingdonboy]

Because Indias threats will always be next door, while the US threats will always be 1000s of Km away, that's why they have to project power with their navy big times, while India will use the navy mainly in defensive roles, alongside their costlines.
Just as well as India won't join the US in their world police roles, since Indian foreing policy is not based on military and that's good!

But we have no way of predicting the future and it is only right the IN is given a free hand to expand so as to meet whatever future challenges may crop up for India. When/if the brown stuff hits the fan, do you want India to be exposed, with its pants down whilst the "big boys" who have prepared fight it out for resources?


I agree Indian diplomacy isn't (today) rooted in military might, but that isn't to say there is no reason not to have it.

 

[sancho]

But we have no way of predicting the future and it is only right the IN is given a free hand to expand so as to meet whatever future challenges may crop up for India. When/if the brown stuff hits the fan, do you want India to be exposed, with its pants down whilst the "big boys" who have prepared fight it out for resources?


I agree Indian diplomacy isn't (today) rooted in military might, but that isn't to say there is no reason not to have it.

Of course not, but we can see the clear differences between Indian and US threats and that are the important points! The fact that IAC 1 initially was called air defence ship and that it and the Gorshkov will be placed on each side of the India, to cover the Bay of Bengal and the Arabian Sea says it all. Only IAC 2 will be aimed on projecting power to greater distances, which is comparable to French or British navy if you want, but by far not with USN and their policies.

 

[Abingdonboy]

Of course not, but we can see the clear differences between Indian and US threats and that are the important points! The fact that IAC 1 initially was called air defence ship and that it and the Gorshkov will be placed on each side of the India, to cover the Bay of Bengal and the Arabian Sea says it all. Only IAC 2 will be aimed on projecting power to greater distances, which is comparable to French or British navy if you want, but by far not with USN and their policies.

True mate. And I think you are 100% right in comparing the IN to the RN and FrN by ~2020-22 the IN will be on that sort of level (with the FrN, the RN is rapidly falling off the world stage). All I was thinking was in the long run like in 2050-55 when India surpasses the US economy, India will have a significantly expanded role and scope. And as such the IN and the other military wings should rise to the occasion and grow into the role. By ~2025-30 (if not much sooner) India will be spending significantly more than France or the UK on defence (but still less then the US obviously) so the capabilties of the Indian military should be that much more than these two European powers.

 

[sancho]

True mate. And I think you are 100% right in comparing the IN to the RN and FrN by ~2020-22 the IN will be on that sort of level (with the FrN, the RN is rapidly falling off the world stage). All I was thinking was in the long run like in 2050-55 when India surpasses the US economy, India will have a significantly expanded role and scope. And as such the IN and the other military wings should rise to the occasion and grow into the role. By ~2025-30 (if not much sooner) India will be spending significantly more than France or the UK on defence (but still less then the US obviously) so the capabilties of the Indian military should be that much more than these two European powers.

But the economy won't decide about our threat perception, or our foreign policy, so that can't be a reason why India would follow the role of the US or the NATO as a whole, beeing a global police force. Look at the BRICS now and their political decisions, which often are contrary to those of the west, therefor our military policies should remain different as well.
And to be honest, it's good as it is, since we have more important things where we have to spend money on, that on playing global police like the US. Let them and China fight about who is the global Superpower, while we remain on the sideline, with enough defence capability, but focused on growth and improvement of the country and foreign relations!

 

[Abingdonboy]

But the economy won't decide about our threat perception, or our foreign policy, so that can't be a reason why India would follow the role of the US or the NATO as a whole, beeing a global police force. Look at the BRICS now and their political decisions, which often are contrary to those of the west, therefor our military policies should remain different as well.
And to be honest, it's good as it is, since we have more important things where we have to spend money on, that on playing global police like the US. Let them and China fight about who is the global Superpower, while we remain on the sideline, with enough defence capability, but focused on growth and improvement of the country and foreign relations!

Sir, I completely agree with the sentiment. However one shouldn't be naive to what power,influence and money brings. There is a reason why the West and specifically the US has taken on the role of "global policeman" with such expeditionary military power. It isn't for the good of the world or for humanitarian missions. Through its military power the US is able to secure certain resources and protect its interests abroad. Now it is only logical that as India's economy grows so does its reach, in fact the two are very much intertwined and there's a case for them causing the other and vice versa. We can see it already, India is expanding its foot print in Africa exponentially. After China, India is the fastest growing contributor to Africa. India is also increasing its foot print to S.America, and closer to home in E.Asia and the IOR. India is even expanding its facilities in Antarctica (as is China).


There is a point when India is going to have to defend its interests beyond the IOR, this much can be certain. And it seems the Indian military knows it, why else is it buying strategic lift transports in such high numbers (with options for more) and raising an expeditionary Marine infantry force and procuring LHD/LPD for them to operate from ( IIRC the IA is also expanding its quick-reaction forces like the 50 (Independent) Parachute Brigade) ?



There is a reason why large economies like France,US and UK have had bases and forces around the world.

 

[SirHatesALot]

Great news