Team-BHP (https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/)

-   Commercial Vehicles (https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/commercial-vehicles/)

-   -   IAF's shiny new Apache Helicopters - India's $2.5 billion purchase (https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/commercial-vehicles/168522-iafs-shiny-new-apache-helicopters-indias-2-5-billion-purchase-5.html)

Wrong. You assume you are dealing with an elected government who is answerable to their people. Pakistan is a dictator state run by the ISI and the army. The whole objective of ISI and army is occupation of India and building a new Mughal empire. They need a war to stay alive, in case of an actual war they would be the first to sit in Dubai and elsewhere, as is their big personal assets are secure in the middle east.
That apart Pakistan has not got a 'no first use' policy on nuclear assets, they say even if they are about to lose a conventional war they will go nuclear, its written in their policy.
Enough OT already I am out of this talk, lets stick to the Apache from now...

But the fun was just getting started.. OT is alright but why I chose to reply repeatedly is because of the language. 'Wrong', 'Factually Incorrect' is not the language preferred in an online debate.
You don't know if you are right or if I am wrong. It's just opinion. While it's true that I don't know if these purchases affect you directly but they do to me. My professional conduct, confidence among others are directly affected by such procurements.
To conclude, I would request that such strong words are better avoided. You just know my username, you don't know my story.
Apache only from now on.

The Army and the Air Force use weapon platforms to fulfill their required tasks. Hence, the attack hepters are one such platform. Both the services will use it towards their required tasks and eventually, with integration of services being the call of the day, both will support each other in the realisation of the national goal. As far as individual roles/taskes in each service, you can read a bit about Vietnam, the Iraq war, the Yugoslav conflict, the Cechnian conflict as well as the role that IAF attack choppers have played in various UN missions in Africa.

In war, every platform that has ever been designed for offense has led to the development of a defensive platform. When swords came, so did the shield and thus it continued. However, it is tactics as well as technology which has ultimately decided the victor. So, as long as offensive ariel platforms are being designed, air defense systems will also be developed. However, finally, it is tactics as well as the use of technology that will decide the victor. That being said, there will be losses, however, lessons will be learnt from these losses so that subsequently losses din't take place for the same reason.

Well! You certainly belong to the vast majority of the citizens, starting from the citizen on the street to those in the high portals of decision making, of this country, who take their freedom for granted. However, every second for your free existence is guaranteed by soldiers of the three services who are ensuring your freedom, often at the cost of their own lives. Do they require better equipment, in order to better do the duty which they will do regardless, is the question.

While a lot of material is available on the western platforms being mentioned above, very little is available on the Russian platforms. That stems from the very different philosophies that the Russians and the West had as far as propaganda is concerned. But it is just that. Detailed analysis have been carried out by Western agencies about the capabilities of their adversaries and the results are interesting to say the least. In case you are interested in offering a more educated point of view, I would suggest going through www.ausairpower.net/ and specifically the articles on Russian missiles and the comparison between the Su 30 class of aircraft and the F 35.

Do we want to be the envy of the Chinese? Or do we want to be in a position where we are able to ensure the sovereignty and territorial integrity of our nation? Once this point is understood, we will better understand what we require in order to achieve our military goals. A direct comparison is of little value. Interestingly, all White Papers on defense by China have no mention of India at all. They are focused on their territorial integrity starting from the first island chain and moving on to the second island chain and are building their capabilities accordingly.

Really? The carrier Admiral Grashkov was sold to us only if we agreed to buy the MiG 29Ks. Today, when we are looking to lease a second Akula class sub, there are strings attached as well starting from civil nuclear reactors to the use of conventional missiles only in the subs.

At the cost of repetition, platforms serve a definite purpose. While a fixed wing platform has its requirement, so does a rotary platform. So both the Rafale and the Apache have their own distinct roles and both are required to ensure dominance in the battlefield. And while Low Intensity Conflict is a part of modern day conflicts, the armed forces of a nation are primarily entrusted with fighting a conventional war, and in our region, the chances of that is definitely not remote. Hence, we do need to equip ourselves to undertake the entire spectrum of military operations.

Not sure why we Indians are so proud of this purchase. IMO, its a slap in our face for the following reasons:

1) Our much touted ALH could not fill in this need and we had to buy from a foreign country instead.
2) US$ 2.5 billion is a huge amount and should have been used instead to improve our economy/reduce our fiscal deficit
3) We probably wont be using the Apaches in too many conflicts, since we seem to lack a coherent policy for defending our borders or our interests.
4) We overpaid a huge amount, obviously its kickback time for some of the brokers in power. In 2013, South Korea ordered 36 Apache 64E for USD 1.6 Billion.

Its interesting to see how many people feel so patriotic and happy to see India buy arms and ammunition from foreign countries, while actually it should be a matter of disgrace and shame.

Remember the only people benefiting from this deal are the selling nations and the brokers/politicians etc. Definitely not India and definitely not Indians.

Jai Hind !!!

I can't make a comment on the kickbacks (if any), I will however try to reply to your first three points:

1. I presume you mean LCH, not ALH. In any case the LCH is in a different segment. It weighs a whole lot less and has a lesser weapons payload. It was designed primarily to fly and fight in mountainous regions where air pressures are lower. Case in point, LCH can land in Siachen forward bases, Apache cannot.
2. There are offset clauses with every such deal. Of the $2.5bn, Boeing has to source 30% or $750 mn locally. This will lead to development of SMEs which will supply various sub systems.
3. Apache's are critical in today's asymmetric warfare. Battles wont be fought only in open plains but also in urban environments. Highly armoured and maneuverable copters are ideal for both these scenarios.

PS: The ALH or Dhruv is performing remarkably well with our armed forces. Many were deployed for rescue ops during recent floods in Uttarakhand and Chennai. There's a weaponised version named Rudra, that will be inducted soon.

The LCH is also a derivative of the ALH(Dhruv). See link: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/HAL_...bat_Helicopter

Also, the LCH as you call it has undergone multiple trials in 2015, with 3 helicopters. So why this urgency to buy Apache?

Point 2 was about the affordability of the Apaches. Even after the domestic orders of 750 million $, it's still unaffordable and significantly more expensive than the South Korean deal. So, is this a good deal for India? Do the math and let me know.

As I mentioned in my previous post, both these copters are in different segments / categories. They do not necessarily fulfill the same requirements. As far as urgency is concerned, IAF needs attack copters ASAP. Mi-24/35 are increasingly obsolete platforms and need to be replaced.

And it's not a simple plus minus question when it comes to developing defence industry ecosystem. I'm not sure about the Korean deal you keep referring to but with IAF's deal we get to develop a lot in terms of R&D too.

Sorry, but this deal is actually a US$ 3 billion deal for 22 Apache's and 15 Chinook's. So the title is misleading at that.

http://www.thehindu.com/news/nationa...cle7698989.ece


Secondly, I still think that we cannot afford these birds, especially since we have a huge fiscal deficit.

I also believe that we must seek to manufacture critical defence equipment in India rather than just buy from a foreign country with all the strings attached. My mind refuses to buy into the idea that an arms race is beneficial to either India or Pakistan, and we both end up buying overpriced toys from the usual arms exporting countries, US, UK, France, Germany, China, Russia, and yet are counselled by these same countries to sit and resolve our differences peacefully. Ironical, no?

All that gobbledygook just makes me dizzy.

agree: spending this amount on education / healthcare would have been better. Unfortunately we cannot divert these funds elsewhere, but spend it on defence, when we are surrounded by neighbours that want to destroy us.

https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/iafs...ome-topstories

A brand new Apache attack helicopter of the Indian Air Force (IAF) made an emergency landing in a field in Punjab's Hoshiarpur today. The two pilots are safe and the district police are in touch with the IAF's base in Pathankot. Reports said there was no damage to the helicopter.