Russia in Indian Armed Forces Tenders:

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 ,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 !!

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

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

Both are good helos, with vastly different niches.

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...

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.

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.

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 to see our money wasted

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.

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 .

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.

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.

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.

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 ?

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".

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.

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.

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.

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


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

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 ), 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 ) and this mess is the result of the inept formulation of Tender technical requirements.

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 ) 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.

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.

The mi-28N has full all weather terrain avoidance capacity... I rather suspect the Mi-26 could be fitted with terrain avoidance radar equipment if it hasn't got it already.

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 .

It seems to me you don't understand the problem. The US is not taking business away from Russia, it appears to be taking business away from France.

India has never bought all Russian stuff. When they have been buying some American stuff it has been on merit like the Apache, or the C-130 (because the An-70 is not in service) and the P-8 (because there is no Russian in production equivalent) and the C-17 (because the Il-476 is not in production yet either).

The issue I have is with the MRCA program where the reason for not selecting the Mig-35 was because they already had too many Russian aircraft in service. The Mig-35 met all the requirements of the tender and was a fraction of the cost of the aircraft that was finally selected. The whole thing was a huge waste of money for Mig that it will never get back. India basically damaged Mig because it wanted its competition to look fair and balanced even though it clearly never was.

Now they are pretty much doing the same to Mil.

It would be like putting out a tender for a super carrier and choosing a Charles De Gaul carrier instead of a Nimitz class because the French carrier was cheaper to buy. Perhaps if there was clarity at the start of the competition Mil would not have wasted time and effort bidding for a competition it was clearly never going to win.

Of course having said all that, if the Indian military is true to its word that those that have lost have lost to prevent a Russian monopoly in fighters and helicopters then these decisions against Russian aircraft should make remaining tenders more likely to succeed.

Not that that will help Mil or Mig.

GarryB wrote:The issue I have is with the MRCA program where the reason for not selecting the Mig-35 was because they already had too many Russian aircraft in service.

Just because you say so it does not make it the truth . The foremost criteria for selecting the MMRCA when the RFI was released in 2001 was that the aircraft should already be flying for the Air Force of the host / other countries and should have logged a certain number of hours . The Mig 35 did not meet this criteria. SO it was a cop out. They also had British and French aircrafts in service. If they wanted to prevent a Russian monopoly as you suggest then the T 50 deal would not have been signed.

GarryB wrote:The Mig-35 met all the requirements of the tender and was a fraction of the cost of the aircraft that was finally selected.

Not a question of what chance the MiG-35 has in the MMRCA sweepstakes but whether the MiG-35 ever had a chance in the first place. The Mig 35 was NEVER even shown in India before MAKS 2007 . What was shown was a MiG-29OVT as a proof of concept. It was an old aircraft with a few MFDs.

GarryB wrote:The whole thing was a huge waste of money for Mig that it will never get back.

And the other competitors send you a note saying we got back our money ? Right ?

GarryB wrote:India basically damaged Mig because it wanted its competition to look fair and balanced even though it clearly never was.

The Russian Ambassador & air attache were both informed in 2007 by the MoD not to participate but their explanation was that the UAC bosses will not accept this. By your argument India has also damaged the reputation of EADS, Lockheed and Boeing since their aircrafts were also rejected .

Just because you say so it does not make it the truth . The foremost criteria for selecting the MMRCA when the RFI was released in 2001 was that the aircraft should already be flying for the Air Force of the host / other countries and should have logged a certain number of hours .

Then how did Mig even get to enter the competition?

Or, more importantly, why didn't they just call it a Mig-29F or something.

The Mig 35 did not meet this criteria. SO it was a cop out.

So why did they ask for the Mig-35 to come to AeroIndia? Why did they allow it to enter the competition when they kew it did not qualify?

They also had British and French aircrafts in service. If they wanted to prevent a Russian monopoly as you suggest then the T 50 deal would not have been signed.

By buying incredibly expensive French aircraft the requirement to not have an all Russian fleet is achieved.

The problem is that Mig spent lots of money on this competition, money it wont get back.

The most ridiculous thing is that in 10-15 years if they still have Mig-29s in service they will likely have components that Mig will likely develop for the Russian AF if they choose the Mig-35 configuration.

They will likely get some satisfaction from the higher parts charges they will be able to apply... parts are generally more expensive when you buy them separately than if you buy them as part of a package with a new aircraft.

Not a question of what chance the MiG-35 has in the MMRCA sweepstakes but whether the MiG-35 ever had a chance in the first place. The Mig 35 was NEVER even shown in India before MAKS 2007 . What was shown was a MiG-29OVT as a proof of concept. It was an old aircraft with a few MFDs.

Yet they still wanted to flight test it... and the OVT could fly rings around any other aircraft entered in the competition...

And the other competitors send you a note saying we got back our money ? Right ?

It is one thing to buy a ticket to a lottery, it is another thing to find you are buying a ticket from last weeks draw and the numbers were not drawn, yet it costs the same as the tickets that will be drawn this week.

By your argument India has also damaged the reputation of EADS, Lockheed and Boeing since their aircrafts were also rejected .

Who is talking about reputation? I am talking about economics. Mig does not have bottomless pockets supported by local governments and agencies like the NSA and CIA.

The Russian Ambassador & air attache were both informed in 2007 by the MoD not to participate but their explanation was that the UAC bosses will not accept this.

Can you post these warnings to the Russians that their products were not eligible and should not be entered?

Sounds rather unlikely to me as the entire process was supposed to be geared towards getting France to lower its price for Rafales, and competing with the Eurofighter and the Gripen and US fighters is hardly going to push the French as they know the Gripen uses US weapons and a US engine and would not be much use without those, a US aircraft was equally unlikely because of the US's relationship with Pakistan, which leaves the Eurofighter, which is an incomplete aircraft.

India needed the Mig to keep the French on their toes.

Most of the claims I have read for the Mig not meeting the criteria, including as you suggest comments before the program even got underway, should have been very straight forward and Mig should have been told not to enter, and indeed not been accepted into the competition. That doesn't seem to have happened.

The mi-28N has full all weather terrain avoidance capacity... I rather suspect the Mi-26 could be fitted with terrain avoidance radar equipment if it hasn't got it already.

GarryB i have already pointed out that Mi-26T2's НПК90-2 not only integrate an all weather EGPWS, but very likely the most modern and advanced one mounted on any lifting helicopter worldwide !!

It has been just one of the most stressed selling point among avionic suit by part of Роствертол Company together with BTU-26 TV system capable also to control ,at 360 degrees and in any weather, the position and state of external oversize cargo.

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.

Sujoy is necessary to exit from the logic of "compensations" , above all when in play is National Security ; this is valid for Russia (even in spite of the very strong and historically tested Friendship and Alliance with India) like any other nation involved in an open tender to provide Indian Armed Forces the best equipment for the role at the lower technical risk ,in the shorter time and at lowest procurement and operating cost ( naturally AT EQUAL PARAMETERICAL PERFORMANCES taken into consideration ) and taking also into account the best ToT offer to allow ,in the shortest time, India to become technologically independent in the most critical military sectors.

You will never hear by me a single word ,if not of congratulations, for the selection of any not-Russian product representing the best product available for Indian Armed Forces in order to the factors mentioned above ,be it the American Boeing P-8I or C-130 or French Dassault Rafale (even when the tender ,like for the choice of AH-64D over the Mi-28NE, select a the less risky, close time, option capable surely to assure a prompt delivery adn flow of spare part); but here we talk of the selection ,without any kind of doubt, of the VASTLY INFERIOR MACHINE between the two , product of the ABSURD ,LINEAR COMPARISON of the procurement and life costs of 15 CH-47K with ...15 Mi-26T2 !!!


I repeat ,if true, it is a very sad story for India.

GarryB wrote:Then how did Mig even get to enter the competition?

Because they asked an RFP to be issued to them , that's how .

GarryB wrote:Or, more importantly, why didn't they just call it a Mig-29F or something.

Because MIG calls it so , not the buyer

GarryB wrote:So why did they ask for the Mig-35 to come to AeroIndia?

Which means any aircraft that comes to AeroIndia will have to be purchased by the IAF ? FYI participation in AeroIndia is voluntary .

GarryB wrote:By buying incredibly expensive French aircraft the requirement to not have an all Russian fleet is achieved.

Second guessing at it's best .

GarryB wrote:The problem is that Mig spent lots of money on this competition, money it wont get back.

SO why did they enter this competition knowing fully well they can't afford it ?

GarryB wrote:The most ridiculous thing is that in 10-15 years if they still have Mig-29s in service they will likely have components that Mig will likely develop for the Russian AF if they choose the Mig-35 configuration.

The only thing ridiculous is this assessment that MIG 35 components will fit into all the MIg 29s of the IAF which are already 2 decades old.

GarryB wrote:Yet they still wanted to flight test it...

Of course , why not that's why it entered the competition .

GarryB wrote:and the OVT could fly rings around any other aircraft entered in the competition...

Not sure if it did .

GarryB wrote:It is one thing to buy a ticket to a lottery, it is another thing to find you are buying a ticket from last weeks draw and the numbers were not drawn, yet it costs the same as the tickets that will be drawn this week.

" A fool and his money are soon parted " . If someone decided to buy last week's lottery ticket to enter this weeks lottery it can safely be concluded that this person has lost his mental composure.

GarryB wrote:Who is talking about reputation? I am talking about economics.

EADS, Lockheed , SAAB , Boeing have not filed for bankruptcy yet .

GarryB wrote:Mig does not have bottomless pockets supported by local governments and agencies like the NSA and CIA.

Correct . That's why it no longer exists as it is now a part of UAC.

GarryB wrote:Can you post these warnings to the Russians that their products were not eligible and should not be entered?

Yes. Also , I never said the MIG was not eligible , though during the course of the competition the other aircrafts fared better.

GarryB wrote:Sounds rather unlikely to me as the entire process was supposed to be geared towards getting France to lower its price for Rafales,

Absolute rubbish . There were 650 parameters that were laid out . The winner had to satisfy 90% of these criterias , which only the Typhoon and the Rafale did ..Period.

GarryB wrote:and competing with the Eurofighter and the Gripen and US fighters is hardly going to push the French as they know the Gripen uses US weapons and a US engine and would not be much use without those, a US aircraft was equally unlikely because of the US's relationship with Pakistan, which leaves the Eurofighter, which is an incomplete aircraft.

SAAB had promised full ToT if selected , US is not trusted by many and the Eurofighter is not incomplete albeit a "False Prophet".

GarryB wrote:India needed the Mig to keep the French on their toes.

I am assuming you had insider information on this .

GarryB wrote:Most of the claims I have read for the Mig not meeting the criteria, including as you suggest comments before the program even got underway, should have been very straight forward and Mig should have been told not to enter, and indeed not been accepted into the competition. That doesn't seem to have happened.

You are not listening . MIG was told this at the very onset not to compete .

Mindstorm wrote:
Sujoy is necessary to exit from the logic of "compensations" ,

No , no , not about compensation . The point that I was highlighting is that this is an example of a good decision in my view .