US offers India the Aegis Combat System, the world’s most advanced shipboard weapons

[DMLA]

That may be how India deal with Europe and Russia. But with the USA, it might have to do business the traditional way.

Why let this technicality get in the way? The reason that those countries offer TOT and joint development is because their technology is not as good as the US tech. With the US, what you get is what you get. Also, the export version of the US weapons are not as good as the domestic ones(ie, F-35). For example, the P8 Poseidon planned to export to India is a weaker version of the ones for the US military. Can India complain about it? Yes, but the alternative is that India will get nothing. Also, P8i would be bettre than anything that India can get from Europe and Russia with upgrades.

While I agree that US requires a reduction in demands from our side, we should also remember that India can tie up and create a ship based BMD system if required. What stop's india from collaborating with the russians on S-500 system?

Indian navy's mandate is NOT BMD. It requires good area air defence systems which Barak-8 should provide. Not withstanding the doubts about the development of a longer ranged system (130+km) of the Barak series, the navy can easily put up good area air defences at a fraction of the cost of Aegis.

IMO however, India should go for a few Aegis systems for our P15B destroyers and NOT P-17A. The small size of frigates makes it illogical to invest such large amounts where size constraints will limit the number of missiles it can carry thereby reducing the cost effectiveness of Aegis.

 

[faithfulguy]

Is India going to invade US? We are friendly countries, and look how US is offering its prized possession to us which are even not offered to its old allies.

You have not read my reply carefully, I have also mentioned strategic partnership other than ToT and JD.

So just don't stick with ToT & JD part of statement.

Nope, India definitely has no ability to invade or threaten US. However, some export variation of products are inferior to domestically inducted weapon. F-35 is an example. P8 would be another example. All I'm saying is that even if the export variation is not as good as the domestic ones, its still better than anything else in the market. If strategic partnership means India purchase advance weaponry from US, then I'm certain US is very happy with that. India would also be very happy with that arrangement as US weaponry is 2nd to none.

Also, P8 is offered to all close US allies. Such as Australia, Japan and hopefully eventually Taiwan.

 

[faithfulguy]

While I agree that US requires a reduction in demands from our side, we should also remember that India can tie up and create a ship based BMD system if required. What stop's india from collaborating with the russians on S-500 system?

Nothing, but the S-500 has not yet developed and it will be quite a while before India and Russia can work together and develop one. A quicker way is for India to provide Russia with a Aegis system for Russians to reverse engineer. Would India provide Russia an Aegis sytem to study and reverse engineer?

Indian navy's mandate is NOT BMD. It requires good area air defence systems which Barak-8 should provide. Not withstanding the doubts about the development of a longer ranged system (130+km) of the Barak series, the navy can easily put up good area air defences at a fraction of the cost of Aegis..

Is Barak series co develop with Israel? If it is, it might have some Aegis technology as Isreal definitely have some ship based air defensive capability. But as you mentioned, price is also an important consideration.

 

[DMLA]

Nothing, but the S-500 has not yet developed and it will be quite a while before India and Russia can work together and develop one. A quicker way is for India to provide Russia with a Aegis system for Russians to reverse engineer. Would India provide Russia an Aegis sytem to study and reverse engineer?



Is Barak series co develop with Israel? If it is, it might have some Aegis technology as Isreal definitely have some ship based air defensive capability. But as you mentioned, price is also an important consideration.

Your point in the previous post was that Americans are to be worked with despite the fact that they "will give no TOT" and "will give downgraded technology". The truth is every country out their does the same. Those who don't charge huge sums of money (some Euro nations, israel, etc). My point was that India has enough options (other than US) to get the systems it wants (which include co-development if required). There are areas where Russia/ Israel show equivalence to (if not better than) the Americans wrt technology. It makes sense to collaborate with them and get the technology to help develope the defence enterprise in India. Blindly buying from the Americans solves no purpose (other than the option of removing possibility of scandals thanks to the FMS route!!)

I never knew India had Aegis to provide the technology to the Russians . Moreover, India never violates technology transfer protocols atleast openly! India does not face a threat of MRBM's/IRBM's from the seas. Thus I don't see a need for ship based BMD (and afaik neither does the IN). LM has been trying hard to sell the idea to the indians (as has been the case with E-2D). This is a case of the American's trying to dictate indian requirements (not the other way around!!! ). Also, I would like to point that indian defence establishment is such that if IN gets operational BMD before other forces, it will lead to inter-services issues specifically related to capital funds!

Barak NG program was supposed to eventually morph into LRSAM (130+ km range). I am not sure what the status is but the 80km range Barak seems to be ready for integration (after tests later this year as the P-15A ships are now getting ready for the fitment of the same).

Barak at this point does not have ABM capability.

However ignoring the russians is not wise IMHO. AFAIK, SA-N-6 system is deployed on Kirov. Moreover if they could navalize S-300PMU, why can't they have a navalized S-400/500 system?

 

[Bang Galore]

Nope, India definitely has no ability to invade or threaten US. However, some export variation of products are inferior to domestically inducted weapon. F-35 is an example. P8 would be another example. All I'm saying is that even if the export variation is not as good as the domestic ones, its still better than anything else in the market. If strategic partnership means India purchase advance weaponry from US, then I'm certain US is very happy with that. India would also be very happy with that arrangement as US weaponry is 2nd to none.

Also, P8 is offered to all close US allies. Such as Australia, Japan and hopefully eventually Taiwan.

I'm not really sure that the U.S. has it as easy as you seem to imply. India does not place any large order without offset clauses(30 - 50% depending on size). India also does not buy what the U.S. may want to offer. A good example would be the E2C Hawkeye. When it was offered to the Indian navy, it was rejected outright and the U.S. was told that if they really wanted an entry into the Indian defence market that they better bring their latest equipment resulting in the Americans replacing the earlier offer with E2D which by the way is still under consideration.

India's defence procurement budget, now and into the near future is likely to be larger than that of any traditional American ally. India also has a close working relationship with the Russians and the Israelis giving them an alternative that close U.S. allies don't have. India's procurement of the Phalcon is a clear example. U.S. leverage over India in defence matters is limited thus forcing them to offer advanced versions of their equipment even to stay in contention.

The U.S. - India relationship is likely to be markedly different from any relationship that the U.S. has with its traditional allies. A combination of sheer size and growing economic power make sure of that. No other U.S. ally can serve as a valid comparison, especially since India is unlikely to ever be an "ally" in the traditional sense.

 

[faithfulguy]

I'm not really sure that the U.S. has it as easy as you seem to imply. India does not place any large order without offset clauses(30 - 50% depending on size). India also does not buy what the U.S. may want to offer. A good example would be the E2C Hawkeye. When it was offered to the Indian navy, it was rejected outright and the U.S. was told that if they really wanted an entry into the Indian defence market that they better bring their latest equipment resulting in the Americans replacing the earlier offer with E2D which by the way is still under consideration.

India's defence procurement budget, now and into the near future is likely to be larger than that of any traditional American ally. India also has a close working relationship with the Russians and the Israelis giving them an alternative that close U.S. allies don't have. India's procurement of the Phalcon is a clear example. U.S. leverage over India in defence matters is limited thus forcing them to offer advanced versions of their equipment even to stay in contention.

The U.S. - India relationship is likely to be markedly different from any relationship that the U.S. has with its traditional allies. A combination of sheer size and growing economic power make sure of that. No other U.S. ally can serve as a valid comparison, especially since India is unlikely to ever be an "ally" in the traditional sense.

If India is not demonstrating that its a reliable ally, then India will not be able to work with the US with full trust. The relationship between India and the US would be that of convenience instead of friendship. US could still sell weapons to India but only the less advance version as compare to US allies. The truth is that if India cannot prove that it is closer to US over Russia, there is no trust that the same weapon would not go to Russian hands. If that is the case, US should take that into consideration when sell weapons to India.

 

[su-47]

If India is not demonstrating that its a reliable ally, then India will not be able to work with the US with full trust. The relationship between India and the US would be that of convenience instead of friendship. US could still sell weapons to India but only the less advance version as compare to US allies. The truth is that if India cannot prove that it is closer to US over Russia, there is no trust that the same weapon would not go to Russian hands. If that is the case, US should take that into consideration when sell weapons to India.

Faithfulguy, India has never been accused of letting Russia or any other nation reverse engineer goods that India buy. We had access to French and British tech during cold war, some of which were better than systems USSR was using. We never let them reverse engineer stuff.

as for ToT, its coz we want to stop relying on foreign suppliers in the future. India is currently the largest arms importer. And many have ridiculed that, including a lot of indians. Our indegenous defence industry is fledgling. We need ToT to gain knowledge and bring our defence industry to par.

So, in that context it would be better for us to jointly develop a system with Israel or Russia, since it will give us the technical know-how, and will benefit indegenous industry in the future. The system we develop might not be in the same league as the Aegis, but will be able to address our needs. And we would have gained more than just the weapon system. We would have gained knowledge.

As for Aegis, only time I see India acquiring it without ToT requirement is if war is immminenet and we need all the high tech systems we can get. Fortunately, thats not the situation now.

Indo-US relations are going fine, and will go fine even if India rejects Aegis or US aircraft for MMRCA.

 

[faithfulguy]

Faithfulguy, India has never been accused of letting Russia or any other nation reverse engineer goods that India buy. We had access to French and British tech during cold war, some of which were better than systems USSR was using. We never let them reverse engineer stuff.

as for ToT, its coz we want to stop relying on foreign suppliers in the future. India is currently the largest arms importer. And many have ridiculed that, including a lot of indians. Our indegenous defence industry is fledgling. We need ToT to gain knowledge and bring our defence industry to par.

So, in that context it would be better for us to jointly develop a system with Israel or Russia, since it will give us the technical know-how, and will benefit indegenous industry in the future. The system we develop might not be in the same league as the Aegis, but will be able to address our needs. And we would have gained more than just the weapon system. We would have gained knowledge.

As for Aegis, only time I see India acquiring it without ToT requirement is if war is immminenet and we need all the high tech systems we can get. Fortunately, thats not the situation now.

Indo-US relations are going fine, and will go fine even if India rejects Aegis or US aircraft for MMRCA.

How would ToT help enhanced India's indigenous defence research capability? So far, it has shown not affect. If India choose not to reverse engineer the weaponry, there is no need to ToT. Because when the next generation systlem comes around, India would need to perform another round of ToT that is unrelated to the previous generation of ToT.

Also, does ToT include critical components like ToT of the all the component of engine or navigation system? Or just ToT of the system. The critical components are still imported?

 

[EagleEyes]

What are the plans. Is India going to buy this? If not what are the other options?

 

[mrwarrior006]

i think india will buy this

coz u know wat advantage it brings and at present no body is gonna provide this platform

 

[DMLA]

What are the plans. Is India going to buy this? If not what are the other options?

Navy is mute at this point. To be honest, Aegis system (specially BMD) is an overkill for India at this stage. It may become significantly important 10-15 years from now with increasing chinese naval capabilities and operations in IOR.

As I said in an earlier post, it makes no sense to put this on a frigate. It would be economical to put it on the P-15B destroyers being planned (approved) at this stage. I hope the navy makes the right choice!

Added Later: Other options include Russian S-300/400 navalized systems (though this would require some degree of R&D), a "desi" variant (incorporating AAD into the ship in VLS cells and developing navalized LRTR array). If IN wants to limit itself to air defence, options are many including Aster, Barak or russian naval SAM systems.

 

[deckingraj]

How would ToT help enhanced India's indigenous defence research capability? So far, it has shown not affect. If India choose not to reverse engineer the weaponry, there is no need to ToT. Because when the next generation systlem comes around, India would need to perform another round of ToT that is unrelated to the previous generation of ToT.

Also, does ToT include critical components like ToT of the all the component of engine or navigation system? Or just ToT of the system. The critical components are still imported?

Though i totally disagree with you but wanted to understand if i get your post right...It seems you are suggesting there is no way India can achieve indegenous capability in defence...Am i right??? because if TOT or JV cannot help than what else will help....anyways just for the sake of argument if we consider what you are saying is correct(though not correct..brahmos...nuclear submarine...missile technology...ABM etc etc are some fine examples) does that mean that because we failed in past we should simply stop trying????

As far as this particular system is concerned no doubt it is a state of art weapon however its not worth its price as per our current threat perception...so if it is not complying with our long term goal and dream of self reliance in our defence deals complemented with the fact that there is no immediate need of such a system i don't see any reason for the deviation from our path of TOT, JV to achieve self-reliance...Just to give you an example our obsession with T-90 tanks never gave Arjun a fair chance...I know it failed tests in the past but today this tank can give T-90 a run for its money...In the end i would always opt for a system which if even is little low on technology but sufficing our needs and is indegenous over a system which is state of art but imported...

 

[faithfulguy]

Though i totally disagree with you but wanted to understand if i get your post right...It seems you are suggesting there is no way India can achieve indegenous capability in defence...Am i right??? because if TOT or JV cannot help than what else will help....anyways just for the sake of argument if we consider what you are saying is correct(though not correct..brahmos...nuclear submarine...missile technology...ABM etc etc are some fine examples) does that mean that because we failed in past we should simply stop trying????

As far as this particular system is concerned no doubt it is a state of art weapon however its not worth its price as per our current threat perception...so if it is not complying with our long term goal and dream of self reliance in our defence deals complemented with the fact that there is no immediate need of such a system i don't see any reason for the deviation from our path of TOT, JV to achieve self-reliance...Just to give you an example our obsession with T-90 tanks never gave Arjun a fair chance...I know it failed tests in the past but today this tank can give T-90 a run for its money...In the end i would always opt for a system which if even is little low on technology but sufficing our needs and is indegenous over a system which is state of art but imported...

Besides short range AGNI missiles the weapon system that you mentioned above are either join ventures, tested successfully in development but failed tests in deployment, under development or just test platforms. On some systems, India is behind that of Pakistan and Iran as these countries are capable of reverse engineering and improve on foreign supplied weapons. India have not shown such ability as its attempt to reverse engineer a rifle ended in failure. As such is the case, its best for India to work in joint veture proejcts. This method had produce Brahmos, which is the only current success of the systems you listed above.

Its just not fair to the tax payers of India to spend so much to produce so little results. I am not suggesting that India should just give up. But it should concern more about developing research abilities on things it can't procure and not spread out its research ability. For example, the investment in fighter air craft, tanks and nuclear subs should be narrow down to just nuclear subs because India can purchase more advance aircraft and tanks abroad. If the money and talent are concerntrated on things it cannot purchase, it would be a better use of talent, money and resources.

 

[Justin Joseph]

Besides short range AGNI missiles the weapon system that you mentioned above are either join ventures, tested successfully in development but failed tests in deployment, under development or just test platforms. On some systems, India is behind that of Pakistan and Iran as these countries are capable of reverse engineering and improve on foreign supplied weapons. India have not shown such ability as its attempt to reverse engineer a rifle ended in failure. As such is the case, its best for India to work in joint veture proejcts. This method had produce Brahmos, which is the only current success of the systems you listed above.

Its just not fair to the tax payers of India to spend so much to produce so little results. I am not suggesting that India should just give up. But it should concern more about developing research abilities on things it can't procure and not spread out its research ability. For example, the investment in fighter air craft, tanks and nuclear subs should be narrow down to just nuclear subs because India can purchase more advance aircraft and tanks abroad. If the money and talent are concerntrated on things it cannot purchase, it would be a better use of talent, money and resources.

sir why do u want to derail the thread, its India's money and we will deside what to do with it

thanks

 

[macho man randy savage]

sir why do u want to derail the thread, its India's money and we will deside what to do with it

thanks

he is not a typical chinese ranter,people here know him well.