Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Mi-8/17, Μi-38, Mi-26: News

    Share

    Austin
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5680
    Points : 6086
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Age : 40
    Location : India

    Re: Mi-8/17, Μi-38, Mi-26: News

    Post  Austin on Sun Oct 28, 2012 5:36 pm

    True the capbilities offered by Mi-26T2 and CH-47 are quite different and they shouldnt have competed or it should have been single vendor deal

    Mindstorm
    Captain
    Captain

    Posts : 737
    Points : 920
    Join date : 2011-07-20

    Re: Mi-8/17, Μi-38, Mi-26: News

    Post  Mindstorm on Sun Oct 28, 2012 6:18 pm



    I understand that a single vendor deal could have resulted difficult to explain politically to Indian tax-payers , so another option would have been to calculate at least (how should have been included from the beginning in the technical requirements and in the final account for the lower bidder) the higher payload's weight and volume available among the participants for 15 helicopters and compute the number of other competitors ....and the associated fuel, maintenace, manning and spare parts requirements and costs....in need for obtain the same result (and even this method wouldn't have given justice to the military equipments, and therefore the tactical options opened for the operatives on the battlefield, that simply cannot be transported in other helicopters).

    If you instead, limit the tender at requiring,for example, the lift of 14 tons of eqipment and operatives at a particular range ,only to allow both to participate, the obvious result is that both will surpass this technical requirements but the 15 lighter helicopters will result forcibly the less costly to acquire/operate.


    It is truly a bad page in International Arms tenders which,i hope will be in future examined at cold, to avoid to ever repeat similar big mistakes (i repeat ,at the beginning ,even motivated by a good goal : avoid to declare an open tender without effective competitions, effectively offering to a single producer the freedom to dictate the terms of the same).





    Sujoy
    Lieutenant Colonel
    Lieutenant Colonel

    Posts : 914
    Points : 1082
    Join date : 2012-04-02
    Location : India

    Re: Mi-8/17, Μi-38, Mi-26: News

    Post  Sujoy on Sun Oct 28, 2012 6:47 pm

    Bad Choice indeed . But two things need to be stated here . First , commercial negotiations will start now . So if Boeing is unable to ensure ToT as per RFP and offer a competitive price the deal might fall off . Second , it shows the extent to which corruption has seeped into all aspects of Govt in India. The ability of foreign Governments to leverage the Non Resident Indians residing in the West alon gwith the arms lobby present in New Delhi

    Case in point , Augusta Westland's ability to rig the deal to supply VVIP helos to India that came into light last week.

    Boeing flew at least 10 Indian journalists to the US to take a look at their facilities and publicize Boeing's Hardware in India . All this is to a certain extent paying off .


    Apart from that the Admiral Gorshkov saga is being used by a host of defense contractors to state that Russia is not a credible supplier and Russian weapons are sub standard . They spend millions to insert these stories very tactfully into the press.

    Boeing's employees in New Delhi are some of the most nastiest individuals that I have ever come across.But then it is an open secret that whosoever controls the arms lobby in India controls the arms market.





    Last edited by Sujoy on Sun Oct 28, 2012 7:16 pm; edited 2 times in total

    ricky123
    Senior Sergeant
    Senior Sergeant

    Posts : 223
    Points : 327
    Join date : 2012-08-20

    Re: Mi-8/17, Μi-38, Mi-26: News

    Post  ricky123 on Sun Oct 28, 2012 7:09 pm

    cn some1 tell me teh diff between both plz .. i have to say i am happy indian gov choose chinook . and sujoy i dont think india gov would go for 100% tot on chinooks

    ricky123
    Senior Sergeant
    Senior Sergeant

    Posts : 223
    Points : 327
    Join date : 2012-08-20

    Re: Mi-8/17, Μi-38, Mi-26: News

    Post  ricky123 on Sun Oct 28, 2012 7:10 pm

    cn some1 tell me teh diff between both plz .. i have to say i am happy indian gov choose chinook . and sujoy i dont think india gov would go for 100% tot on chinooks

    Sujoy
    Lieutenant Colonel
    Lieutenant Colonel

    Posts : 914
    Points : 1082
    Join date : 2012-04-02
    Location : India

    Re: Mi-8/17, Μi-38, Mi-26: News

    Post  Sujoy on Sun Oct 28, 2012 7:31 pm

    ricky123 wrote: cn some1 tell me teh diff between both plz .. i have to say i am happy indian gov choose chinook .

    Here check these links for the MI 46 and Chinook

    http://www.aviastar.org/helicopters_eng/mi-46.php

    http://www.raf.mod.uk/equipment/chinook.cfm

    I remember the presentation that Boeing had made to the Indian MoD for the Chinook . Comparing it to the Mi 26 and showcasing how advanced the Chinook was compared to the MI 26 . Fact is it was the MI 46 that Oboronprom JSC had offered ( and not the MI 26 ) . Also , I do not understand how Chinooks will operate in HIgh altitudes . There is this issue of poor visibility caused by the downwash from the twin main rotors of the CH-47/HH-47 when operating over mountainous terrain. This problem is being frequently encountered in Afghanistan during bad weather conditions.

    ricky123 wrote:and sujoy i dont think india gov would go for 100% tot on chinooks

    Not 100 % ToT . Only ToT to the extent reflected in the RFP.

    Mindstorm
    Captain
    Captain

    Posts : 737
    Points : 920
    Join date : 2011-07-20

    Re: Mi-8/17, Μi-38, Mi-26: News

    Post  Mindstorm on Sun Oct 28, 2012 8:28 pm

    First , commercial negotiations will start now . So if Boeing is unable to ensure ToT as per RFP and offer a competitive price the deal might fall off .


    Sujoy stop only for a second and try to think analytically at WHAT commercial negotiation open now for Boeing; here mere WORDS risk to mask parametrical disproportion under semantics.


    Now begin the commercial negotiations with Boeing for...... 15 helicopters, with maintenance costs for 15 helicopters, spare parts costs for 15 helicopters,initial logistic implanting and crew training for 15 helicopters.


    Now ,unless this tender has been initiated for cosmetic reasons Laughing ,i image that only thing the Indian Army's warfighters will interested to will be : how much M777 howitzers those 15 helicopters are capable to bring to them in a critical war area for single mission , how much engineers and special troops with theirs equipment those 15 helicopters will deliver in a particular sector for single mission , what equiment and vehicles (if any...) those 15 helicopters will bring to them for single missions, what type of damaged or repaired vehicles those 15 helicopters will be capable to lift quickly from and to battlefield areas for single mission etc..etc...

    You will quickly realize that the same rational foundation for a similar outcome for the Indian heavy trasport Tender is completely corrupted.

    I repeat ,i don't know if exist an universe where 15 CH-47 can offer to any Armed Forces at world the same capabilities of 15 Mi-26T2 and where ,consequently, the related acquisition and operational costs would be comparable; what i know for sure is that .... WE DON'T LIVE IN THAT UNIVERSE !!



    Sujoy
    Lieutenant Colonel
    Lieutenant Colonel

    Posts : 914
    Points : 1082
    Join date : 2012-04-02
    Location : India

    Re: Mi-8/17, Μi-38, Mi-26: News

    Post  Sujoy on Sun Oct 28, 2012 9:11 pm

    Mindstorm , valid points . Just wanted to say that in the corrupt world of (India's) arms trade when you come across terms like "commercial negotiations" , plaster tape them with misnomers Wink

    TR1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5840
    Points : 5892
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: Mi-8/17, Μi-38, Mi-26: News

    Post  TR1 on Sun Oct 28, 2012 9:17 pm

    The two choppers are not even comparable, the tender was stupid from the start.

    Both are good helos, with vastly different niches.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15482
    Points : 16189
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Mi-8/17, Μi-38, Mi-26: News

    Post  GarryB on Mon Oct 29, 2012 10:03 am

    I am not sure of Ka-226 would win the LOH deal it could be Fennec , seems like political decision in India to keep Russians out and share the deal with US since US took the MMRCA loss more personally.

    The real thing that bothers me is that these decisions that India is taking in these military programs is clearly not based on merit, but there are underlying political reasons for the choices they are making.

    If India wants to play by those rules and under those terms I hope they don't expect to get a 10 year lease on a Seawolf any time soon...

    cn some1 tell me teh diff between both plz .. i have to say i am happy indian gov choose chinook . and sujoy i dont think india gov would go for 100% tot on chinooks

    To compare them in transport aircraft terms, the Chinook is a C-130 while the Mi-26 is a C-17, except it is not that expensive.

    You can't really compare them directly, the Chinook is a 12 ton class payload helo, while the Mi-26 is a 20 ton class.

    It would be like comparing an Am-32 with an An-12.




    So ask yourself why the US military would pay to have an Mi-26 come into Afghanistan to pick up a shot down Chinook... unless they had no other choice.

    Perhaps India would like to hire some Mi-26s in case they find they have to recover one of their Chinooks if they go down in rough country...


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15482
    Points : 16189
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Mi-8/17, Μi-38, Mi-26: News

    Post  GarryB on Mon Oct 29, 2012 10:07 am

    Boeing's employees in New Delhi are some of the most nastiest individuals that I have ever come across.But then it is an open secret that whosoever controls the arms lobby in India controls the arms market.

    If you ignore a rat problem it will only get worse till you are forced to take action.

    By then it might be too late.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    Austin
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5680
    Points : 6086
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Age : 40
    Location : India

    Re: Mi-8/17, Μi-38, Mi-26: News

    Post  Austin on Mon Oct 29, 2012 10:18 am

    GarryB wrote:The real thing that bothers me is that these decisions that India is taking in these military programs is clearly not based on merit, but there are underlying political reasons for the choices they are making.

    If India wants to play by those rules and under those terms I hope they don't expect to get a 10 year lease on a Seawolf any time soon...

    Garry , Arms Procurement decision in India have always had political underline or under tone to it.

    Rarely is a decision taken based purely on Armed Forces Need that only happens for follow on requirement or need for similar system.

    So right now Delhi wants to make sure that all the party involved get a fair share of deal , with US we have special economic relations and of late US has great infulence in Delhi the kind of which Soviet had in 70 , 80 etc.

    So expect many decision go that way while Russia would still be a major arms supplier to Delhi but it wont have a preminent position as it had before and that would not necessarily be due to technical shortcoming of its weapons.

    ricky123
    Senior Sergeant
    Senior Sergeant

    Posts : 223
    Points : 327
    Join date : 2012-08-20

    Re: Mi-8/17, Μi-38, Mi-26: News

    Post  ricky123 on Mon Oct 29, 2012 2:20 pm

    i think india made a mistake here .although i like the chinooks .it looks like the mi26 is the better of the 2. the only reason i can think of why indian gov must have choosen chinook is .maybe forr a diff role . like only for troops transport and stuff .
    or they r just currupt but while anthony is the defense minister the least currupt of them all i had great hopes Sad
    sad to see our money wasted

    Sujoy
    Lieutenant Colonel
    Lieutenant Colonel

    Posts : 914
    Points : 1082
    Join date : 2012-04-02
    Location : India

    Re: Mi-8/17, Μi-38, Mi-26: News

    Post  Sujoy on Mon Oct 29, 2012 4:14 pm

    GarryB wrote:The real thing that bothers me is that these decisions that India is taking in these military programs is clearly not based on merit, but there are underlying political reasons for the choices they are making.

    The L1 calculations on the basis of which the Chinook was declared the winner will be made known to both Russia & USA in the de-brief session . So , Russia can definitely appeal if they believe there was some foul play . And if there was they should definitely "advertise" this fact in the Indian media . Why ? Because this is a SERIOUS issue and the only people who will suffer are We The Taxpaying People . Just like the failure of the DRDO in the LCA program made the taxpayer bleed $11 billion for the MMRCAs.

    GarryB wrote:If you ignore a rat problem it will only get worse till you are forced to take action.
    And a pretty BIG rat actually .

    But that aside let’s try to assess as to why the US is winning defense deals in India inspite of the fact that they sell military hardware to Pakistan and their hardware too have had their share of defects like the recent case of the C 130s with sub standard Chinese parts that India had bought .

    The US marketing machine is undoubtedly the most effective marketing machine in History . This is where Russia needs to pull up it’s socks.

    Almost 100% of all senior officials from all three Indian armed services end up being graduates of various US military-educational institutions like air/naval/land warfare colleges, National Defense University, etc. In the 1960s & 1960s such officials used to graduate from UK-based institutions, but since the early 1970s, it has been an almost exclusively a US affair. Such intellectual-level ToTs have been & will continue to be indispensable as India’s armed forces marches ahead to master the art of waging knowledge-based warfare. In sharp contrast, even during the Cold War era, not a single military officer from India ever stepped inside a military-academic institution anywhere within the USSR, & this trend continues till this day. Therefore, in terms of military-industrial business quantum, the US-India pie will grow phenomenally larger within this very decade, since the skilled human resource pool reqd within India already exists in the form of such US-trained Indian military personnel that are specialised in various trades. On the other hand, India-Russia military-technical cooperation is not across-the-board & is isolated to a few select areas only. Sustained people-to-people contact in all spheres of military-industrial businesses between India & Russia is either non-existent or is highly regulated, which prevents Indian companies (as sub-contractors) from becoming part of the global supply chain for Russian OEMs.



    Sujoy
    Lieutenant Colonel
    Lieutenant Colonel

    Posts : 914
    Points : 1082
    Join date : 2012-04-02
    Location : India

    Re: Mi-8/17, Μi-38, Mi-26: News

    Post  Sujoy on Mon Oct 29, 2012 4:38 pm

    Mindstorm wrote:
    You will quickly realize that the same rational foundation for a similar outcome for the Indian heavy trasport Tender is completely corrupted.
    BTW Mindstorm , there is some light at the end of the proverbial tunnel. Last week MoD cleared a deal to purchase $1.5 billion worth of Brahmos and Invar missiles and Today a deal for 10,000 KONKUR M missiles was signed with Russia for $223 million .

    Mindstorm
    Captain
    Captain

    Posts : 737
    Points : 920
    Join date : 2011-07-20

    Re: Mi-8/17, Μi-38, Mi-26: News

    Post  Mindstorm on Mon Oct 29, 2012 7:43 pm

    Garry , Arms Procurement decision in India have always had political underline or under tone to it.

    Rarely is a decision taken based purely on Armed Forces Need that only happens for follow on requirement or need for similar system.


    Not open weapon procurement tender at world is completely devoid of political implications and influence, even more if the country in question is a rising economic and military power with a very big antagonist as neighbour and in need to secure stable relations and links with the greater players in the international scenario.

    What i don't believe is that the selection of CH-47K has been done ,preminently, on the basis of political influence and/or leverage, while instead i believe is that ,in order to allow both Mi-26T2 and CH-47K - transport helicopters clearly in very different class - to participate to the same tender (avoiding so the situation where the unique contractor dictate effectively the final terms of the deal) Indian DoD has been forced to lower significantly the technical requirements for both helicopters.
    Naturally in this way, CH-47K has gained an unfair advantage against Mi-26T2 because, when both helicopters would have surpassed technical trials on the basis of those "staged" requirements, 15 CH-47K would have resulted the lower bidder against 15 Mi26T2.


    I would happily attend to a large scale comparative military training ,simulating a limited conflict scenario against China or Pakistan, where the lifting chain of troops,vehicles and equipment of 15 Ch-47K are pitted against that of 15 Mi-26T2 , with the related incremental effects and achievements on the battlefield after 5 or 6 days accurately computed.

    Only at this point i would like to receive the privilege to observe ,in perfect silence and in theirs eyes, the responsibles for technical requirement's of Indian heavy helicopter tenders ; i am sure that ,in those instants, them wouldn't feel confortable at station under the waving flag of theirs Nation.



    BTW Mindstorm , there is some light at the end of the proverbial tunnel. Last week MoD cleared a deal to purchase $1.5 billion worth of Brahmos and Invar missiles and Today a deal for 10,000 KONKUR M missiles was signed with Russia for $223 million .



    Sujoy i don't desire absolutely to "lobby" for Russian weapons deals with India, neither i think that this "profit sharing mindset" is the right one to deal with International relations, it don't comply with intellectual honesty neither, ultimately, with India’s greater Good.

    India for Russia is infinitely more than a weapon buyer ,it represent its greater and most reliable strategic ALLY and a FRIEND Nation.

    Russia has contributed in the past and continue today to aid India in developing STRATEGIC technological segments several of which ,under a strict scientific point of view, without peer worldwide, USA included - from nuclear processing to new generation ICBM components, from top-end/perspective cruise missiles propulsions and layouts to ABM design and guidance, from nuclear submarines operations to satellite's constealltion design etc..etc..-.

    The goal since URSS times was obviously to have as neighbour nation a growing ,friendly, stable and technologically independent Ally (so to avoid that any "lure" to India by part of NATO, motivated by the principle of "divide et impera", would take root) with which establish a strong economic-military axis in the Asian theatre.

    So i don't desire India to select Russian weapons, but the best weapons available for each operational "niche"; when India selectedv French Rafale in the MMRCA i suported theirs decisions because it was the best compromise, more mature and, overall the best product for India available among the six ,when India selected American P-8 "Poseidon" as its future ASW aircraft i shared completely theirs decision because it represented the best product available around the world for the role, i agree even with the decision to order AH-64D (because delivery of Mi-28NE would have been slow and plagued by the kind of problems associated with new introduced products).

    Here India has instead selected ,without any doubt, by a long margin the WORSE heavy transport helicopter available and the WORSE product for the role between the two.

    I repeat ,i don't even think it has been generated by interests in cultivating ties with US neither by corruption but by completely irrationally lowered technical requirements to allow Ch-47K to participate in the tender.

    A very sad story for India , not Russia.


    TR1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5840
    Points : 5892
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: Mi-8/17, Μi-38, Mi-26: News

    Post  TR1 on Mon Oct 29, 2012 10:34 pm

    The reasons are strange as well.
    Chinook won because of costs + operational costs?

    WHAT DID THEY EXPECT?!?!

    The Mi-26 weighs far more, can carry far more inside and on a sling, and has MASSIVE installed power compared to Chinook. There is no way save dark magic that it could have lower costs than Chinook.

    So the question is, did they ever need the Mi-26s capabilities if they chose Chinook? Or are they going cheap, but at the same time utterly abandoning the premise of a heavy lift helo?

    Because as far as heavy lift goes, the Chinook simply does not compare.

    Werewolf
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5391
    Points : 5640
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: Mi-8/17, Μi-38, Mi-26: News

    Post  Werewolf on Mon Oct 29, 2012 11:06 pm

    I personally doubt that this is even a question about money.

    When they just can double the budget for the MMRCA treaty than they can easily raise the budget that is only slightly more expensive than the CH-47 Chinook.

    Also there are much more "plusses" for the Mi-26 than for the CH-47, and when you can get about 30-40% more performance for only little bit more money than you will pay it.

    To me it's obviously a political influenced act.

    And i don't think that Mil will just ignore this behavior for longer term of time,because they lose money for such political influenced competitions,so they will increase their costs to compensate the lost money they could easily earn from that competition.

    Mindstorm
    Captain
    Captain

    Posts : 737
    Points : 920
    Join date : 2011-07-20

    Re: Mi-8/17, Μi-38, Mi-26: News

    Post  Mindstorm on Tue Oct 30, 2012 12:00 am


    Also there are much more "plusses" for the Mi-26 than for the CH-47, and when you can get about 30-40% more performance for only little bit more money than you will pay it.


    Exactly Werewolf ,this is just the heart of the question.



    To me it's obviously a political influenced act.


    Instead ,very likely, political influence has played here a very marginal role; try to reason in this way : you want an open tender with at least two contenders ,in order to avoid a situation of monopoly , ok?
    You have as two unique potential "competitors" for the deal only Mi-26T2 and CH-47K ,now : at what threshold level you set the parametric requirements in order to allow both of them to participate without being force to declare a winner at day one ?


    Clear what has been the amateurish problem leading to this mess ?


    Werewolf
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5391
    Points : 5640
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: Mi-8/17, Μi-38, Mi-26: News

    Post  Werewolf on Tue Oct 30, 2012 8:48 am

    Mindstorm wrote:Instead ,very likely, political influence has played here a very marginal role; try to reason in this way : you want an open tender with at least two contenders ,in order to avoid a situation of monopoly , ok?
    You have as two unique potential "competitors" for the deal only Mi-26T2 and CH-47K ,now : at what threshold level you set the parametric requirements in order to allow both of them to participate without being force to declare a winner at day one ?


    Clear what has been the amateurish problem leading to this mess ?

    Of course, here you have a good point.
    Monopoly situations are always bad for customers.
    To prevent low quality and high costs, also with a competition situation both trying to increase their performance and an open market situation is created.

    But the essential point you have remarked is how will they set the requirements, to prevent the obviously winner before the competition even starts.

    My personal guess is, they will set the requirements that are little bit contrary, to have a justifying not declare a winner just from the requirements of static parameters only.

    For example, a required weight of the helicopter that is lower than Mi-26 and little bit higher than CH-47,but at same time it should capable to lift more than CH-47 can and less than Mi-26 could.
    And this could be done with lot of parameters even with electronical onboard systemes,communication systemes, the amount of time/money wich is required for training pilots and mechanics.

    This would lead to an overall situation wich would and up in "impasse", so at that point the tender requirements can be new defined or "compromisses" can be set.

    My personal guess is still the same, that political influence has still a played a role,even when it was just the "wind puff" that has decided the side of the "toss".

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15482
    Points : 16189
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Mi-8/17, Μi-38, Mi-26: News

    Post  GarryB on Tue Oct 30, 2012 11:10 am

    The US marketing machine is undoubtedly the most effective marketing machine in History . This is where Russia needs to pull up it’s socks.

    The problem there is that the US uses a combination of techniques including bullying that would really not suit Russias relationship with India to use, which pretty much gives the US an unfair advantage.

    If India wants to choose to not buy Russian products for political reasons that is fine, I would like to see the version of the Mi-26 they put forward for France and Germany to look at as a new heavy lifter, and even if they reject it it will still serve the Russian Air Force very well.

    The Russian military are buying lots of Mil helos and exports of Mils is pretty good for the foreseeable future, so the only party that suffers with this decision is the Indian military.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    Sujoy
    Lieutenant Colonel
    Lieutenant Colonel

    Posts : 914
    Points : 1082
    Join date : 2012-04-02
    Location : India

    Re: Mi-8/17, Μi-38, Mi-26: News

    Post  Sujoy on Tue Oct 30, 2012 1:10 pm

    Mindstorm wrote:Clear what has been the amateurish problem leading to this mess ?
    Mindstorm , one of the technical reasons that the IAF has given for selecting the Chinook is the ability of the Chinook to address the problem of "white out" ( in high altitudes) - which is addressed by the ability of the Chinook to fly in IFR conditions, with sensors to probe the clearance and distance from high obstacles.

    Sujoy
    Lieutenant Colonel
    Lieutenant Colonel

    Posts : 914
    Points : 1082
    Join date : 2012-04-02
    Location : India

    Re: Mi-8/17, Μi-38, Mi-26: News

    Post  Sujoy on Tue Oct 30, 2012 1:25 pm

    GarryB wrote:The problem there is that the US uses a combination of techniques including bullying that would really not suit Russia as relationship with India to use, which pretty much gives the US an unfair advantage.

    US bullying against India has failed repeatedly . Infact they have even failed to get India into there "pivot in asia" ( basically a policy to contain China) axis. They use other means ,like the ones I have outlined in my previous post. Encourage Indian military officers to pass out from US military academies , constantly bombard them with training exercises which is a perfect platform to showcase their latest military hardware , and most importantly enter into JVs with the Indian Pvt. sector to sell there wares in India . I find absolutely no reason why Russia cannot adopt similar strategies . I did speak with a Russian military official on this and the response was Russia is happy with it's performance in India .

    GarryB wrote:If India wants to choose to not buy Russian products for political reasons that is fine

    Nothing could be further from the truth or to quote a popular UK proverb - " One swallow does not make a summer ."

    This month itself deals worth $1.7 billion has been signed with Russia plus there is the $3.5 billion deal to purchase the 42 Super Sukhois . How much would the Chinook deal be ? Even if I assume that India decides to double it's requirement from the current 15 to 30 the deal would at best be for $1 billion.

    Infact the converse is true here . US cannot win but Russia will have to loose the Indian market.


    The quantum of weapons of Russian origin (both in terms of numbers & financial figures in India's arsenal ) still continues to be quite large & will remain so for the next 50 years. Procuring weapons of US-origin in future like AH-64Ds & CH-47Fs will NOT change this Reality.

    Mindstorm
    Captain
    Captain

    Posts : 737
    Points : 920
    Join date : 2011-07-20

    Re: Mi-8/17, Μi-38, Mi-26: News

    Post  Mindstorm on Tue Oct 30, 2012 4:45 pm


    IAF has given for selecting the Chinook is the ability of the Chinook to address the problem of "white out" ( in high altitudes) - which is addressed by the ability of the Chinook to fly in IFR conditions, with sensors to probe the clearance and distance from high obstacles.


    Oh my.....,here we are.
    Now will begin the long series of metropolitan legends to find the most coloured excuse for this....equally coloured mistake Rolling Eyes Rolling Eyes


    Mi-26T2 not capable of IFR operations ? Problems with obstacle clearance discrimination in situation of scarce crew visibility ? Laughing Laughing Laughing

    Simply grotesque.

    НПК90-2 integrate one of (if not THE... ) best EGPWS now available on ANY lifter helicopter at world, NONE excluded.

    The reality is that the very ,very limited instances where a CH-47K could offer some sort of better results than a Mi-26T2 literally disappear in front of the mountain of other ones (some of which of critical importance and even deciding, in a conflict against a very strong opponent) where Mi-26T2 offer crushing superior performances.


    Mi-26T2 has not been found not compliant on the technical basis in the first phase of the trials (....if that would have happened, the tender's Committee would have became instantly the laughing stock of any military industry's operator around the world for the next 20 years Razz Razz), but because it was obviously the higher bidder among the two.

    15 Mi-26T2 ,with theirs 82 troops + equipments and some field surveillance and communication systems each, can bring at greater speed and greater range 1230 fully equipped troops , 15 CH-47K with its 37 equipped troops and without space for any field equipment or ammunition, can bring at inferior range only 555 troops.

    Now THAT is a capability capable to decide or totally overtrow the outcome of a local battle obtain quickly local FORCE CONCENTRATION and overcome enemy, limiting losses and maximizing those of the opponent.

    The same can be said for equipment lifting, vehicle lifting and fuel lifting with cumulative impacts of the fluid events on the fronts simply enormous.


    I repeat: this decision, if true, represent an enormous damage to Indian Army warfighting capabilities (unless someone believe that is possible to design an Armed Force's structure on the bet that a large scale conflict against a strong opponent will no happen Rolling Eyes ) and this mess is the result of the inept formulation of Tender technical requirements.


    Sujoy
    Lieutenant Colonel
    Lieutenant Colonel

    Posts : 914
    Points : 1082
    Join date : 2012-04-02
    Location : India

    Re: Mi-8/17, Μi-38, Mi-26: News

    Post  Sujoy on Tue Oct 30, 2012 5:07 pm

    Mindstorm wrote:I repeat: this decision, if true, represent an enormous damage to Indian Army warfighting capabilities (unless someone believe that is possible to design an Armed Force's structure on the bet that a large scale conflict against a strong opponent will no happen Rolling Eyes ) and this mess is the result of the inept formulation of Tender technical requirements.

    I do not think that the MI 26 was not selected on technical grounds or else it would not have been entering the second round of L1 discussion . These speculations are common within the IAF after every deal . Once the dust settles we will get to know.

    The probable reason that the Indian MoD will give in favor of selecting the Chinook is the obvious benefits of lower life-cycle costs, reduced MRO liabilities, faster delivery schedule . The Mi-26 supposedly requires 100 man-hours of maintenance per flying hour, whereas the CH-47F about 40 man-hours of maintenance per flying hour.

    I do take some solace from the fact that India is purchasing another 71 Mi-17 V5 helicopters after the initial induction of 80 of these armed helicopters for $1.34 billion.

    Sponsored content

    Re: Mi-8/17, Μi-38, Mi-26: News

    Post  Sponsored content Today at 4:03 am


      Current date/time is Sat Dec 10, 2016 4:03 am