"India decided to buy AH-64D Apache helicopters instead of Russian Mi-28 Havoc helicopters as part of a planned 2.5-billion-dollar programme to upgrade India's military helicopter fleet, the Interfax report said.
India's military will acquire at least 22 of the American attack helicopters, and an order increase to 44 aircraft is possible, the report added."
comorin From United States of America, joined May 2005, 4670 posts, RR: 17 Reply 2, posted (1 year 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 9573 times:
AirRyan From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 2529 posts, RR: 6 Reply 3, posted (1 year 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 9558 times:
Quoting mffoda (Thread starter): India decided to buy AH-64D Apache helicopters instead of Russian Mi-28 Havoc helicopters as part of a planned 2.5-billion-dollar programme to upgrade India's military helicopter fleet, the Interfax report said.
Not that the Mi-28 isn't a worthy attack helicopter, let's just be honest - the Apache block III is the gold standard every other attack helicopter in the world is measured by. India is the Western world's greatest ally in all the continent of Asia.
I think this is another low key sign that relations may be thawing between India and the US.
I think when the US realises that there is a war against terror which needs to be supported rather than My war & your war against terror,things will improve better.
All countries that support terror should be equally punished if they do not toe the line of the world.India had hoped for similiar support from the USA against terror sponsoring states.....
JoeCanuck From Canada, joined Dec 2005, 4993 posts, RR: 29 Reply 6, posted (1 year 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 9321 times:
Quoting HAWK21M (Reply 5): All countries that support terror should be equally punished if they do not toe the line of the world.India had hoped for similiar support from the USA against terror sponsoring states.....
I believe it's slowly dawning on the US that regime change won't do a damned thing to stem the tide of terrorism, nor will coddling states like Pakistan which barely bothers to disguise it's involvement in terrorist activities. The last straw, (hopefully), was bin Laden.
They will need a friendly power in the area strong and stable enough to balance China and they won't get that kind of help from Pakistan or Saudi Arabia, countries from which, they really would do themselves a good long term turn in distancing themselves.
Unfortunately, on one hand they claim to be anti terrorism, and with the other they do give billions of dollars to countries who claim to be friendly yet seem to do everything they can to stab the US in the back.
It stuns me, (even understanding the vagaries of international relations), that the US can decry human rights violations in any country yet continue to prop up the house of Saud...probably the most backward and despotic regime on the planet.
On one hand, they decry 'dirty' oil from the Canadian tarsands yet have no problems filling their tanks with blood bought oil from tyrants.
The problem with India/US relations is....India hasn't been a problem. The US knows that even if they ignore them, the Indians won't back terrorists, or invade anybody or otherwise cause problems. As a result, India gets ignored.
In this case, the squeaky wheel really does get the grease...in the form of trillions of dollars of support.
I may be a wide eyed optimist, but I really hope they are beginning to see the error of their ways and look around to see who their real friends are...India among them.
LAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 22023 posts, RR: 51 Reply 7, posted (1 year 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 9256 times:
22 is nice, however need a force more like 220 to make a proper presence in such a large and spread out nation.
Btw - also who will operate these? The India Army, or AF?
As I recall the AF operates the current Indian fleet of Mi-35 Hind's.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
Eagleboy From Niue, joined Dec 2009, 1612 posts, RR: 2 Reply 8, posted (1 year 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 9140 times:
Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 4): I think this is another low key sign that relations may be thawing between India and the US
And the blind eye towards (if not candid approval of) their Nuclear weapons wasn't?
India put military pressure on Pakistan in late 2001/early 2002, who then asked the US to get them to ease off, the US did in return for more assistance against the Taliban in Afghanistan, several years later India suddenly has an Nuclear capability!!1
HAWK21M From India, joined Jan 2001, 31201 posts, RR: 58 Reply 9, posted (1 year 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 9079 times:
Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 6): The problem with India/US relations is....India hasn't been a problem. The US knows that even if they ignore them, the Indians won't back terrorists, or invade anybody or otherwise cause problems. As a result, India gets ignored.
India being a proven Democracy where Freedom is enjoyed.The people of India are disapointed with certain countries not being fair to tackle cross border terror.
What would you do if your neighbour sent Insects in to your home,you would kill the Insects if it continued you would warn the neighbour & if there is no improvement you would teach the neighbour a lesson.
Those are Insects,now replace insects with terrorists & tell me the reaction sought by the countrymen.
Quoting Eagleboy (Reply 8): India put military pressure on Pakistan in late 2001/early 2002, who then asked the US to get them to ease off, the US did in return for more assistance against the Taliban in Afghanistan, several years later India suddenly has an Nuclear capability!!
bikerthai From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1588 posts, RR: 4 Reply 12, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 8240 times:
wvsuperhornet From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 516 posts, RR: 0 Reply 13, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 7694 times:
While I agree I think relations are thawing between the 2 countries I think it boils down to the Apache being proven and over all a much better attack helicopter.
bikerthai From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1588 posts, RR: 4 Reply 14, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 7683 times:
Quoting wvsuperhornet (Reply 13): While I agree I think relations are thawing between the 2 countries I think it boils down to the Apache being proven and over all a much better attack helicopter.
Having seen the type of manufacturing technology that the Indian had to use to fabricate their Russian Fighters, I wouldn't be surprised if India won't buy a high tech vehicle from Russia again.
Along with the 30% dollar offset requirement in the contract, are the enormous amount of manufacturing know how that gets transferred to the local Indian Companies. The knowledge alone may worth more than the contract itself.
BarfBag From India, joined Mar 2001, 2050 posts, RR: 6 Reply 15, posted (1 year 6 months 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 6940 times:
Quoting LAXintl (Reply 7): 22 is nice, however need a force more like 220 to make a proper presence in such a large and spread out nation.
The AH64Ds deal is for the heavy attack helo requirement. There's a separate domestic light combat helicopter program that's been progressing well, with almost 200 ordered between IAF and IA: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HAL_Light_Combat_Helicopter
There are some pics of this here on a.net.
HAWK21M From India, joined Jan 2001, 31201 posts, RR: 58 Reply 16, posted (1 year 6 months 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 6834 times:
Quoting wvsuperhornet (Reply 13): While I agree I think relations are thawing between the 2 countries I think it boils down to the Apache being proven and over all a much better attack helicopter.
Was in some paper somewhere.....
USA & Pakistan are Allies but not Friends.
USA & India are Friends but not Allies....
YTZ From Canada, joined Jun 2009, 1444 posts, RR: 23 Reply 19, posted (1 year 5 months 2 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 6010 times:
The problem for the Indians is this...the Russians were unreliable when they had a lock on the Indian market. And of late, they've also been selling some of their best stuff to the Chinese, who inevitably reverse engineer a lot of it and then sell cheap knock-offs to the Pakistanis.
Buying from the US will keep the Russians on their toes. The Indians will also then get some great kit and lots of pro-India lobbying for the US defence industry.
Quoting Eagleboy (Reply 8): And the blind eye towards (if not candid approval of) their Nuclear weapons wasn't?
What blind eye? India was quite public in their efforts towards both nuclear tech and weaponization. They exploded their first device in 1974. That was 7 years after the NPT's cut-off date. Since then, the US has prohibited dual-use tech to India. They also slapped on sanctions after the Pokhran-II tests.
The US did turn a blind eye towards Pakistan's covert efforts at securing nuclear weapons though right until the tit-for-tat nuclear testing made their capability public though. You can bet that there's now probably several analysts at several US intelligence outfits cursing their predecessors who let the Pakistanis get the bomb. It is for that single reason that the US is committed to regularly bribing an army and country that routinely trains forces that kill allied soldiers and civilians around the world (with particular emphasis on the citizens of its neighbours).
I've long maintained that sooner or later the Yanks would figure it out. They are in a battered spouse relationship with Pakistan. But that's slowly coming to an end. And relations with India are really picking up. As little as 5 years ago, the thought of India fielding Apaches, C-17s and P-8Is would have seemed preposterous.
JoeCanuck From Canada, joined Dec 2005, 4993 posts, RR: 29 Reply 20, posted (1 year 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 5938 times:
The US has almost no influence over Pakistan, and will continue to be burned by that relationship. Ironically, the same can be said for their relationship with Israel.
Both these countries have nukes, both are aggressive towards their neighbors and both ignore the wishes of the US, regardless of how much money is funneled their way.
I think the battered wife syndrome comparison is quite appropriate.
YTZ From Canada, joined Jun 2009, 1444 posts, RR: 23 Reply 21, posted (1 year 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 5920 times:
Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 20): I think the battered wife syndrome comparison is quite appropriate.
Just to give credit where credit is due. That comparison comes from my discussions with US intelligence officials. Nobody should think they don't have a clue what's going on. Whether the political willpower is there to actually tackle the problem is a different discussion.
LMP737 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 22, posted (1 year 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 5903 times:
Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 6): On one hand, they decry 'dirty' oil from the Canadian tarsands yet have no problems filling their tanks with blood bought oil from tyrants.
The USA gets the majority of it's imported oil from Canda and Mexico.
bikerthai From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1588 posts, RR: 4 Reply 23, posted (1 year 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 5828 times:
Quoting YTZ (Reply 19): As little as 5 years ago, the thought of India fielding Apaches, C-17s and P-8Is would have seemed preposterous.
Technically not preposterous, considering that in order to have the P-8I ready for delivery to India next year, they would have had already started preliminary talks 5 years ago.
But we get your point on the Apaches.
I for one am glad that there are people on both side of the planet who can see 5 years in to the future (and I definitely don't mean the politicians).
BarfBag From India, joined Mar 2001, 2050 posts, RR: 6 Reply 24, posted (1 year 5 months 2 weeks 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 5697 times:
Quoting YTZ (Reply 19): What blind eye? India was quite public in their efforts towards both nuclear tech and weaponization. They exploded their first device in 1974. That was 7 years after the NPT's cut-off date. Since then, the US has prohibited dual-use tech to India. They also slapped on sanctions after the Pokhran-II tests.
Indeed. For anyone to expect India would not have tested after the Chinese did in 1964 was a bad miscalculation. India for years sought to pursue nuclear disarmament, but we also hedged our bets and developed strategic weapons capabilities.
When it was clear that a nuclear free world would never happen, we went overt. Both the NPT in 1968, and the actions by China and the US in 1971 during the Bangladesh Liberation War, were the final nails in the coffin, ensuring we would develop nukes.
While it's commonly suggested that the nuclear rivalry is subcontinental, it is not. The Pakis clearly have their nukes pointed at us, but our primary strategic deterrent imperative was and has always been the People's Republic of China; the nature of our deterrent development makes that clear.
India, cricket junior and senior world champions
25 JoeCanuck: ...a point that is usually lost. India and China are hugely competitive economically, politically and militarily. They were settling conflicts long b
26 BarfBag: It would not be fair to say that China and India share millennias of conflict. That is because until the 1950s, the two nations did not share a border
27 mffoda: Looks like India is really liking their C-130J's as well... This would bring their total to 21. "Government has not inked any follow-on deal for acqui
28 HAWK21M: So hypothetically speaking if Tibet declares Independence & china does not object....The military senario in Asia would change altogether.....
29 bikerthai: Maybe so, but I would put my money on the reason for the lack of historical conflict between China and India is the difficulty of moving an army acro
30 BarfBag: Logistics certainly present an issue, but my point is that there wasn't even a meaningful land border between the two countries until 60 years ago fo
31 bikerthai: Also, would there have been anything worth while to fight over in those two regions? Until now? Is there lots of minerals in Tibet? Will they find lo
32 Devilfish: The latest confirmation..... http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...n-contract-for-india-c-17s-367749/ Quote: "Boeing has finalised a contract to sell
33 HAWK21M: Where are these C-17s going to be based?.....
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 908 posts, 
From India, joined Jan 2001, 31201 posts, 
From Canada, joined Dec 2005, 4993 posts, 
From Niue, joined Dec 2009, 1612 posts, 
But, it's So 2005... don't you think? 
Sponsor Message: 
Printer friendly format
