Trials over, Boeing awaits IAF decision on $5.8 billion C-17 deal

[Ishan]

C17 order is expected to reach 10+10 , so I guess that rules out An124 party .

Sir, is it Confirmed tht India will buy 10 More C-17s ????

 

[KEETARP]

Sir, is it Confirmed tht India will buy 10 More C-17s ????

No , not official now .

But 10 was only initial figure and was expected to increase later . I guess yesterday Boeing press release mentioned it .

And my first post on this forum was also regarding 10+ more C17 five months back .

Btw have you heard , Gov released RFI for C27

 

[CONNAN]

C-17 is worth buying. I have no issues with the cost.
An 124 with Ge engine upgrade will be coming we can see it then.

let's look at a future perspective,where we have an enhanced global role.However,figures for C-17 operators show that the combined forces of NATO and all us allies operating the aircraft are less than 25 in number,the US-220+,while we are buying 10,with latest news that we might buy another 10+too,equal or more than all the others! We are NOT in NATO,neither are we a US ally,not even a "non-NATO ally" like rent-boy Pak.For what purpose then do we need a strategic airlifter (even AN-124 for that matter) so desperately,in such extreme haste when many other more urgent acquisitions are stagnating (LCA MK-2,light helos,artillery,subs,IJTs/AJTs,etc.).Our extended security responsibilities in recent times,officially mentioned are to do with other nations in the IOR,mainly island states like Mauritius,the Maldives,the Seychelles and Sri Lanka,the last mentioned where the IN chief and not the IAF chief made a recent visit to shore up defence cooperation! In actual fact,the greater responsibility upon ensuring the security of these nations is going to fall upon the IN and not the IAF,which will have a secondary role only! It is why we need as planned,three carrier task forces using three indigenous built carriers with part indigenous naval aircraft aboard (naval LCA).

Our greatest threat still comes from the Sino-Pak combine and on land in the high Himalayas and a possible penetration into the IOR of the PLAN's subs and future carriers and the use of Burma (a poss. nuclear Burma too just like Pak) as a springboard to negate and neutralise our advantage of controlling the Malacca Straits chokepoint from the A&N islands.China is trying hard to circumvent this by establishing a naval/sub base at Gwadar with the Pakistan and a visionary rail link to Pak and Gwadar through ***,extending the Tibetan railway just as the Karakorum Highway has done.Here,a large number of transports (100+ AN-32s being upgraded) that can land on small airstrips ,plus even more numbers of medium and heavy helos would be more useful than a superheavyweight airlifter.Light tanks with 125mm guns,MICVs and a massive fast-track approach to our road and rail infrastructure in the N-East and Ladakh would be far more meaningful.If China can think of building a rail link through *** to Pak,why can't we maximise our efforts in our own rail network in J&K,Ladakh and the N-East too?

Two more critical needs must be mentioned,that relating to strategic offence and defence.The absolute requirement for an ABM and holistic air defence system for the entire country,especially the key cities,bases population and industrial zones.More worrisome for our enemies would be our ability to launch hundreds of nuclear MIRV tipped ICBMs.A signiificant number of SSBNs in IN service will take at least 10-15 years.Until that time a large number of land based mobile ICBMs,at least 100+) spread throughout the land,will give serious worry to any would be enemy who might think of launching a sneak first strike attack,as the widespread and mobile character of our landbased ICBMs would give them genuine fear of being attacked in return.Add to this even larger numbers of mobile N-tipped missiles likie B'Mos closer to the battlefield/borders for both strategic and tactical requirements and the machinations of the Sino-Pak axis will be checkmated.

I'm sure others can list out their key priorities too and show how there are many other far more important rquirements of the armed forces and the nation's military infrastructure than buying the C-17 and saving Boeing's ***!

 

[CONNAN]

And if we truly want the biggest and the best,then there is nothing like the AN-225!

 

[CONNAN]

To add to this, C-17s won't be entering into IAF service until after 2015 when factoring the time it takes to negotiate/ink a deal, 3 year production start time, and couple of years it takes to reach FOC. Plus, first batch of MTAs will be coming online sometime after 2017 with its 20ton payload capacity. So MTAs will provide bulk of the airlift post 2020 and they will compliment the C-17s, which will provide the heavy strategic lift.

 

[CONNAN]

In fact the C17 is much worse than even a commercial 747 Cargo with respect to payload vs range. Apparently despite is mediocre money values its short unprepared airfield landing ability and low ramp access make it deserve its additional costs according to Boeing! Even the wealthiest airforce the USAF, stopped further orders after 180 aircraft because the C17 was so expensive. Instead they tried to sell the aircraft to allies just to keep the production line running and prevent Boeing from shutting down the plant.Source Now they want to sell one of the most expensive cargo aircraft to a developing country like India ??

The main backbone of the USAF strategic airlift is NOT the C17 but the rather the C-5 Super Galaxy that they recently upgraded with a glass cockpit, better engines etc to the C-5M standard saving the US taxpayer $20 billion in the long run! Source The C17 in comparison to C-5 is not only much more costlier but carries about 100,000 lbs less payload and uses more fuel for almost equal range.

 

[CONNAN]

here is the image of what American and Russian fleet will look in 2015

 

[jha]

No , not official now .

But 10 was only initial figure and was expected to increase later . I guess yesterday Boeing press release mentioned it .

And my first post on this forum was also regarding 10+ more C17 five months back .

Btw have you heard , Gov released RFI for C27

Sorry mixed up with something else..
BTW IAF has expressed interest in Buying 16 C-27J..

 

[KEETARP]

connanxlrc1000
Go slow buddy .
You do have points about MIRV,AJT,SUBS etc , but not relevant to C17 and its benefit . Your first post is more like of India's role .......

C17 will be an asset , it provides more flexibility than IL-76 and An-132
Enough numbers and it can even airdrop an entire battalion , .
Infact few more hours and we have 4-5 battalion with equipment . That too in rough terrain at night and bad weather . Even in unprepared air-strip .
Perfect for Rapid force deployment ( Cold start doctrine) , we can have rapid movement of Logistics, and troops from other areas into theater of battle rapidly . If T90 are hooked up .....you can imagine quick deployment from say Gwalior to North-East border in quick time .

Its an strategic asset , rapid deployment of Logistics , troops in war time at required pace does have impact .

 

[KEETARP]

Jha Ji

It was in India-Strategic magazine this week .

..:: India Strategic ::.. Indian Air Force: IAF issues RFI for C 27J Spartan

 

[jha]

Jha Ji

It was in India-Strategic magazine this week .

..:: India Strategic ::.. Indian Air Force: IAF issues RFI for C 27J Spartan

Sir jee

Edited the post...

 

[CONNAN]

connanxlrc1000
Go slow buddy .
You do have points about MIRV,AJT,SUBS etc , but not relevant to C17 and its benefit . Your first post is more like of India's role .......

C17 will be an asset , it provides more flexibility than IL-76 and An-132
Enough numbers and it can even airdrop an entire battalion , .
Infact few more hours and we have 4-5 battalion with equipment . That too in rough terrain at night and bad weather . Even in unprepared air-strip .
Perfect for Rapid force deployment ( Cold start doctrine) , we can have rapid movement of Logistics, and troops from other areas into theater of battle rapidly . If T90 are hooked up .....you can imagine quick deployment from say Gwalior to North-East border in quick time .

Its an strategic asset , rapid deployment of Logistics , troops in war time at required pace does have impact .

but i feel we are spending more

 

[KEETARP]

^^^^^

Every paise worth at 300mill a piece including - Training + Spares + Simulators .

Imagine moving troops from Punjab to Kashmir in conflict by roads . Everyone keeping watch can make out

Now we have C17 - Movement in hours whole battalion moved to any terrain .

Il76 can't do that .

 

[Dash]

You know that An-124 is much larger than C-17s, don't you? It would mean more troop-carrying capabilities. If Ukraine had been a bit more prompt in developing latest variants of the An-124, we could have been ordering that instead of Globemasters.

I know that Tshering22.

An 124 is more like galaxy tyoe of plane, however C 17 has more advantages. They are planning reverse gear technology and Prat and whitney engine in future. It was actually made for a cargo plane which also used in military purposes.

C-17 will be more effective in forward bases with its short runway ability in case of a war than An-124. But with MRTA in plan you may not see An-124 in future as well.

 

[jha]

I know that Tshering22.

An 124 is more like galaxy tyoe of plane, however C 17 has more advantages. They are planning reverse gear technology and Prat and whitney engine in future. It was actually made for a cargo plane which also used in military purposes.

C-17 will be more effective in forward bases with its short runway ability in case of a war than An-124. But with MRTA in plan you may not see An-124 in future as well.

It breaks my heart, but i agree with the bold part..

Our kitty will have ::

C-17 - 10 (+10 ?)
C-130 - 6 (+ ?)
C-27 - 16
MRTA -- ??

Very confused figure..