Sale of F-35 to India not on the table right now: US
- Thread starter SpArK
- Start date
INDIAISM
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2009
- Messages
- 1,618
- Reaction score
- -3
@SexyGun Su35BM is not a sexy gun which you can put in your pocket....Su35 BM is around 20 Ton beast which can't be operated through our ACC....hell even US don't operate such kind of aircrafts through their super carriers......We don't need F35 .. but we can as well go for Naval-Su35BMs
On Topics--We already have 2 Fifth Gen Aircraft Programes running which will be more then enough for our Airforce......So we don't want this Miss Universe{F35} for our airforce.....
Jiske paida hone se pehle itne nakhre hai to paida hone ke baad to Bhagwan hi bachae iske Kharcho se....
Nice
India should look at buying drones from US.
Yes drones which can fly at High altitudes can be bought to avoid kargil like wars, Kargil Review commitee has also avoided our army to avoid siachenisation, We need to accquire hi tech systems for surveilance from the United States.
Matrixx
BANNED
- Joined
- Mar 4, 2012
- Messages
- 1,177
- Reaction score
- -4
- Country
- Location
Sale of F-35 to India not on the table right now: US
Washington: The sale of F-35 Joint Strike Fighter to India is "not on the table right now", a senior US Administration official has said even as the Pentagon takes steps to enhance defence trade relationship with New Delhi.
"This is not on the table right now. It has not been requested. We have not offered," Andrew Shapiro, Assistant Secretary of State, Bureau of Political-Military Affairs, told a group of reporters in a breakfast meeting with Defence Writers Group.
"At this particular moment, I can't point to something concrete. As the relationship develops, we will see what happens in all short of areas," Shapiro said when asked about the news reports in this regard following a recent Pentagon report on US-India Security Cooperation indicating possible sale of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter.
In April, Shapiro had conducted the first pol-mil dialogue between the two countries in six years, whose theme, he said was to deepen the India US defence trade relationship.
As of now the US is focused on other sales with India including the Apache helicopters, M77 Howitzer, where "we have been encouraged and hopeful that we would be able to complete sales," he said.
"We believe that there is tremendous potential for US arms sales to India. We have billions of dollars of pending sales which we are hoping would be successful. Our goal is to deepen the defence trade relationship," he said.
Shapiro said the State Department is being consulted by the Pentagon on its recent move to remove the bureaucratic hurdles on enhancing defence trade between the two countries.
In June, Defence Secretary Leon Panetta had appointed the Ashton Carter, the Deputy Defense Secretary, as his point man on India charged with cutting through red tape in the two countries and facilitating joint development and production.
"His participation demonstrates priority and emphasis to which the United States places increasing our defence trade with India," Shapiro said adding that this is something the State Department and the Department of Defence are working very closely.
Shapiro, who has been to India twice, said during the recently concluded pol-mil talks in April there was "significant discussion" on increasing defence trade.
India, he said has one of the highest approval rate for licenses. "We are really trying to further develop our defence trade relationship," he said, adding that the number of denial of licenses to India of late has been around the one percentage range.
Most of the time when a license is not approved, it is mainly because of the paperwork issue, he added.
The Obama Administration, he said, has made great advances in America's ability to transfer technology to India.
"We have been relatively forward leaning in our willingness to share some of our sensitive technologies with India," he said.
Sale of F-35 to India not on the table right now: US - World News - IBNLive
Read in red text....
They are saying that please request for it so we can offer you...
Read in red text....
They are saying that please request for it so we can offer you...
Yes you are Right, It is better we can get this stuff for Indian Navy around 60-80 F-35C would be fine, Even if Americans demand that they have to be kept in a separate airbase we can very well accommodate them in an Naval air bases in Tamil Nadu and other parts of South India.
tvsram1992
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2010
- Messages
- 3,808
- Reaction score
- -1
F22 would be expensive and do you think do we really need F22s to counter our dear ? F22 would certainly kill/delay our AMCA . If possible we should get F22 engines for AMCA .Sorry, but we dont need F 35 !! U can offer us F 22, but u will not!!
sexy gun
BANNED
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2012
- Messages
- 835
- Reaction score
- 0
Buddy I know, it is the exact reason RuN have choosen to go for MIG-29Ks rather than Heavy Su-33s. Su-35BMs are way heavier than that.. What I meant was, a touted 5th gen fighter before it's final clearance only, looses out to a 4th gen plane on paper. Why would we need such a plane ?
Fireaxe888
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 18, 2012
- Messages
- 106
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
The F-35 is such a piece of **** you should be glad you aren't buying it.
gambit
PROFESSIONAL
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2009
- Messages
- 28,569
- Reaction score
- 148
- Country
- Location
And you speak from extensive personal experience in aviation...???
Guys,
What do these aircrafts have in common: A-10, SR-71, F-111, F-117, B-52, F-104, F-14 ?
No...It is not that they all have wings and engines. So did the Wright Flyer.
They are highly specialized aircrafts designed and fielded for very specific mission types. To date, no one, not even the once Soviet Union, is able to field such a variety of mission specific aircrafts like the US have and still does.
Am not saying this as a boast but as a point: Money.
These aircrafts cost a lot of money to maintain.
In theory, an avionics technician from the SR-71 should be able to work on the F-111 or the B-52 or the digital F-16C/D. In practice...??? Good luck.
It take a lot of money to keep the logistics going for ALL of these aircrafts. Costs that rises because parts are so rare that you have no choice but to pay whatever the manufacturer want in order the keep your country's enemies and potential adversaries guessing.
It take a lot of money to train pilots and keep them proficient PER aircraft. Take the SR-71, for example. Their pilots are not always rushing off to some top secret missions all the time. Most flights are training and proficiency maintenance. All to prepare the pilots for those rare top secret missions that helps deter the country's enemies and potential adversaries.
And the money laundry list goes on and on...
Now take the US Navy. We went from five or six aircrafts per carrier to two: F-18 and E-2, three if you count the helo, for primary aviation needs. How much money do you think the USN saved per year? For the E-2, its props are no longer counter-rotating because the mechanisms for that are deemed cost ineffective and its pilots can be trained on how to land the aircraft with its unique flight characteristics.
The decision to buy the jack-of-all-trades F-35 is not made lightly by any potential customer. If the ministries of defense of every country in the world have their ways, each one would be a 'United States' in this respect. But that is not how the real world, especially the financial one, works.
sancho
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2009
- Messages
- 13,011
- Reaction score
- 27
- Country
- Location
If cost reduction was the real aim, your country should have done this:
1) increase the orders of F22 and develop the naval version, which the navy initially wanted as well
=> lower costs per unit and to maintain it, a high end air superiority fighter in good numbers for air force and navy
2) develop a 5th gen UCAV in addition for the strike, recon and EW roles of air force and navy (X47)
=> highly specialised, but more cost-effective than the F35
3) upgrade or add some of the teen series fighters to semi stealth (Silent Eagle / Silent Hornet) as secondary fighters
=> available training, logistics and maintenance, low upgrade costs compared to high development cost => big cost reduction
4) add more UAVs and armed drones in reconnaissance, or CAS roles
=> lower unit and operational costs, but higher operational benefits
5) get rid of VTOL fighters for the USMC
=> in most wars the USMC carriers are deployed next to an aircraft carrier anyway and VTOL fighters are expensive to operate, while the F35B is worse in the CAS role than the Harriers today
Hi: 5th gen manned air superiority + 5th gen UCAV + B2 stealth bombers
Mid: modernised 4++ generation fighters and bombers (B1 / B52) as the baseline in higher numbers
Lo: UAVs + armed drones to support and as the most cost-effective alternative
The reduction of types was the way to reduce cost the last decade, but today and in future it will be the replacement of manned aircrafts that adds the most cost efficiency to the forces. Same reason why I am against adding a 5th manned fighter type for IAF (AMCA), but to add UAVs, armed drones and UCAVs instead.
gambit
PROFESSIONAL
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2009
- Messages
- 28,569
- Reaction score
- 148
- Country
- Location
It is called 'institutional inertia'. Look it up. Some of the things you mentioned are in play to some degrees. Some will have to wait for a later time. You cannot deny that what we did with the USN is part of what is needed in terms of cost cutting.
